Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35172834›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2022

Experiences and attitudes of medical professionals on treatment of end-of-life patients in intensive care units in the Republic of Croatia: a cross-sectional study.

Diana Špoljar, Marinko Vučić, Jasminka Peršec, Vlasta Merc, Tatjana Kereš, Radovan Radonić, Zdravka Poljaković, Višnja Nesek Adam, Nenad Karanović, Krešimir Čaljkušić and 12 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

22 authors.

Diana ŠpoljarUniversity Hospital Dubrava, Av. Gojka Šuška 6, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia. dianaspoljar@gmail.com.
Marinko VučićSestre Milosrdnice University Hospital Centre, Vinogradska cesta 29, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Jasminka PeršecUniversity Hospital Dubrava, Av. Gojka Šuška 6, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Vlasta MercUniversity Hospital Dubrava, Av. Gojka Šuška 6, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Tatjana KerešUniversity Hospital Dubrava, Av. Gojka Šuška 6, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Radovan RadonićUniversity Hospital Centre Zagreb, Kišpatićeva ul. 12, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Zdravka PoljakovićUniversity Hospital Centre Zagreb, Kišpatićeva ul. 12, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Višnja Nesek AdamClinical Hospital Sveti Duh, Ul. Sveti Duh 64, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Nenad KaranovićUniversity Hospital Centre Split, Spinčićeva 1, 21000, Split, Croatia.
Krešimir ČaljkušićUniversity Hospital Centre Split, Spinčićeva 1, 21000, Split, Croatia.
Željko ŽupanClinical Hospital Centre Rijeka, Krešimirova ul. 42, 51000, Rijeka, Croatia.
Igor GrubješićClinical Hospital Centre Rijeka, Krešimirova ul. 42, 51000, Rijeka, Croatia.
Jasminka KopićGeneral Hospital 'Dr. Josip Benčević' Slavonski Brod, Ul. Andrije Štampara, 35000, Slavonski Brod, Croatia.
Srđan VrankovićGeneral Hospital Šibenik, Ul. Stjepana Radića 83, 22000, Šibenik, Croatia.
Renata KrobotGeneral Hospital Varaždin, Ul. Ivana Meštrovića 1, 42000, Varaždin, Croatia.
Bojana NevajdićMarien Hospital Dusseldorf, Rochusstraße 2, 40479, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Mia GolubićUniversity Hospital Dubrava, Av. Gojka Šuška 6, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Štefan GrosekUniversity Medical Centre Ljubljana, Bohoričeva 20, 1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Mirjana Kujundžić TiljakAndrija Štampar School of Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Zagreb, Johna Davidsona Rockfellera 4, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Andrija ŠtajduharAndrija Štampar School of Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Zagreb, Johna Davidsona Rockfellera 4, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Dinko TonkovićUniversity Hospital Centre Zagreb, Kišpatićeva ul. 12, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Ana BorovečkiAndrija Štampar School of Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Zagreb, Johna Davidsona Rockfellera 4, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDecisions about limitations of life sustaining treatments (LST) are made for end-of-life patients in intensive care units (ICUs). The aim of this research was to explore the professional and ethical attitudes and experiences of medical professionals on treatment of end-of-life patients in ICUs in the Republic of Croatia.

methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among physicians and nurses working in surgical, medical, neurological, and multidisciplinary ICUs in the total of 9 hospitals throughout Croatia using a questionnaire with closed and open type questions. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to reduce data to a smaller set of summary variables. Mann-Whitney U test was used to analyse the differences between two groups and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to analyse the differences between more than two groups.

resultsLess than third of participants (29.2%) stated they were included in the decision-making process, and physicians are much more included than nurses (p < 0.001). Sixty two percent of participants stated that the decision-making process took place between physicians. Eighteen percent of participants stated that 'do-not-attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitations' orders were frequently made in their ICUs. A decision to withdraw inotropes and antibiotics was frequently made as stated by 22.4% and 19.9% of participants, respectively. Withholding/withdrawing of LST were ethically acceptable to 64.2% of participants. Thirty seven percent of participants thought there was a significant difference between withholding and withdrawing LST from an ethical standpoint. Seventy-nine percent of participants stated that a verbal or written decision made by a capable patient should be respected. Physicians were more inclined to respect patient's wishes then nurses with high school education (p = 0.038). Nurses were more included in the decision-making process in neurological than in surgical, medical, or multidisciplinary ICUs (p < 0.001, p = 0.005, p = 0.023 respectively). Male participants in comparison to female (p = 0.002), and physicians in comparison to nurses with high school and college education (p < 0.001) displayed more liberal attitudes about LST limitation.

conclusionsDNACPR orders are not commonly made in Croatian ICUs, even though limitations of LST were found ethically acceptable by most of the participants. Attitudes of paternalistic and conservative nature were expected considering Croatia's geographical location in Southern Europe.

Indexed as

Decision MakingIntensive Care UnitsAttitude of Health PersonnelCroatiaCross-Sectional StudiesDeathFemaleHumansMaleEnd-of-life careEnd-of-life decision-makingEthicsIntensive care units

Identifiers

PMID35172834
PMCPMC8851755

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.