Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29471821›Full record

ArticleBMC pediatrics2018

Decision-making at the limit of viability: differing perceptions and opinions between neonatal physicians and nurses.

Hans Ulrich Bucher, Sabine D Klein, Manya J Hendriks, Ruth Baumann-Hölzle, Thomas M Berger, Jürg C Streuli, Jean-Claude Fauchère, Swiss Neonatal End-of-Life Study Group

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pediatrics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Development of a checklist for evaluation of shared decision-making in consultation for extremely preterm delivery.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Context factors in clinical decision-making: a scoping review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Hans Ulrich BucherDepartment of Neonatology, University Hospital Zurich, Frauenklinikstrasse 10, 8091, Zürich, Switzerland. buh@usz.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4458-1161
Sabine D KleinDepartment of Neonatology, University Hospital Zurich, Frauenklinikstrasse 10, 8091, Zürich, Switzerland.
Manya J HendriksDepartment of Neonatology, University Hospital Zurich, Frauenklinikstrasse 10, 8091, Zürich, Switzerland.
Ruth Baumann-HölzleDialogue Ethics Foundation, Interdisciplinary Institute for Ethics in Health Care, Zurich, Switzerland.
Thomas M BergerNeonatal and Paediatric Intensive Care Unit, Children's Hospital of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland.
Jürg C StreuliInstitute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Jean-Claude FauchèreDepartment of Neonatology, University Hospital Zurich, Frauenklinikstrasse 10, 8091, Zürich, Switzerland.
Swiss Neonatal End-of-Life Study Group
University of Zurich · CHUniversity Hospital of Zurich · CHUniversity of Teacher Education Lucerne · CH

Funding

Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung 406740_139350
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the last 20 years, the chances for intact survival for extremely preterm infants have increased in high income countries. Decisions about withholding or withdrawing intensive care remain a major challenge in infants born at the limits of viability. Shared decision-making regarding these fragile infants between health care professionals and parents has become the preferred model today. However, there is an ongoing ethical debate on how decisions regarding life-sustaining treatment should be reached and who should have the final word when health care professionals and parents do not agree. We designed a survey among neonatologists and neonatal nurses to analyze practices, difficulties and parental involvement in end-of-life decisions for extremely preterm infants.

methodsAll 552 physicians and nurses with at least 12 months work experience in level III neonatal intensive care units (NICU) in Switzerland were invited to participate in an online survey with 50 questions. Differences between neonatologists and NICU nurses and between language regions were explored.

resultsNinety six of 121 (79%) physicians and 302 of 431(70%) nurses completed the online questionnaire. The following difficulties with end-of-life decision-making were reported more frequently by nurses than physicians: insufficient time for decision-making, legal constraints and lack of consistent unit policies. Nurses also mentioned a lack of solidarity in our society and shortage of services for disabled more often than physicians. In the context of limiting intensive care in selected circumstances, nurses considered withholding tube feedings and respiratory support less acceptable than physicians. Nurses were more reluctant to give parents full authority to decide on the course of action for their infant. In contrast to professional category (nurse or physician), language region, professional experience and religion had little influence if any on the answers given.

conclusionsPhysicians and nurses differ in many aspects of how and by whom end-of-life decisions should be made in extremely preterm infants. The divergencies between nurses and physicians may be due to differences in ethics education, varying focus in patient care and direct exposure to the patients. Acknowledging these differences is important to avoid potential conflicts within the neonatal team but also with parents in the process of end-of-life decision-making in preterm infants born at the limits of viability.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelFetal ViabilityAdultClinical Decision-MakingDecision MakingDissent and DisputesFemaleHumansIntensive Care, NeonatalMaleMiddle AgedNeonatologistsNurses, NeonatalProfessional-Family RelationsQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesEnd-of-life decisionsExtremely preterm infantsHealth care professionalsNeonatal intensive carePreviable periodShared decision-making

Identifiers

PMID29471821
PMCPMC5822553
OpenAlexW2800499103

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.