Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35023248›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical nursing2023

Life-Sustaining Treatment Decision in Palliative Care Based on Electronic Health Records Analysis.

Sanghee Kim, Arum Lim, Hyoeun Jang, Misun Jeon

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical nursing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Healthcare utilization and end-of-life care based on life-sustaining treatment decisions in patients with cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sanghee KimCollege of Nursing and Mo-Im Kim Nursing Research Institute, Yonsei University, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9806-2757
Arum LimCollege of Nursing and Mo-Im Kim Nursing Research Institute, Yonsei University, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5220-5249
Hyoeun JangCollege of Nursing and Brain Korea 21 FOUR Project, Yonsei University, Republic of Korea.
Misun JeonCollege of Nursing and Brain Korea 21 FOUR Project, Yonsei University, Republic of Korea.
Yonsei University · KR

Funding

National Research Foundation of Korea 2020R1I1A2069183
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AIMS AND

objectivesThis study sought to explore the present status of life-sustaining treatment decisions in a tertiary hospital to improve the life-sustaining treatment decision-making process.

backgroundLife-sustaining treatment decisions are crucial for palliative care because they encompass decisions to withdraw treatments when patients cannot articulate their values and preferences. However, surrogate decisions have settled many life-sustaining treatment cases in South Korea, and this trend is prevalent.

designWe conducted a retrospective, descriptive study employing a review of electronic health records.

methodsWe extracted and analysed electronic health records of a tertiary hospital. Our inclusion criteria included adult patients who completed life-sustaining treatment forms in 2019. A total of 2,721 patients were included in the analysis. We analysed the decision-maker, the timing of the decision, and patients' health status a week before the decision. We followed the STROBE checklist.

resultsAmong 1,429 deceased patients, those whose families had made life-sustaining treatment decisions totalled 1,028 (70.6%). The median interval between life-sustaining treatment documentation completion to death was three days, more specifically, two days in the family decision group and 5.5 days in the patient decision group. As the decision day neared, there were marked changes in patients' vital signs and laboratory test results, and the need for nursing care increased.

conclusionsLife-sustaining treatment decisions were made when death was imminent, suggesting that the time required to discuss end-of-life care was generally insufficient among patients, family, and healthcare professionals in Korea. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Monitoring changes in laboratory test results and symptoms could help screen the patients who need the life-sustaining treatment discussion. As improving the quality of death is imperative in palliative care, institutional efforts, such as clinical ethics support services, are necessary to improve the life-sustaining treatment decision-making process for patients, families, and healthcare providers.

Indexed as

Hospice and Palliative Care NursingTerminal CareAdultDecision MakingElectronic Health RecordsHumansPalliative CareRetrospective Studiesdecision-makingelectronic health recordslife-sustaining treatmentpalliative careterminal care

Identifiers

PMID35023248
PMCPMC10078701
OpenAlexW4206744271

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.