Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37233790›Full record

ReviewDie Anaesthesiologie2023

[German "Triage Act"-Regulation with fatal consequences].

A R Heller, C Bartenschlager, J O Brunner, G Marckmann

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
In one paragraph

Review in Die Anaesthesiologie, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors.

A R HellerKlinik für Anästhesiologie und Operative Intensivmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Augsburg, Stenglinstr. 2, 86156, Augsburg, Deutschland. axel.heller@uni-a.de.ORCID 0000-0001-6144-3874
C BartenschlagerHealth Care Operations/Health Information Management, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche und Medizinische Fakultät, Universität Augsburg, Augsburg, Deutschland.
J O BrunnerZentrum für Interdisziplinäre Gesundheitsforschung, Universität Augsburg, Augsburg, Deutschland.
G MarckmannInstitut für Ethik, Geschichte und Theorie der Medizin, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the coming into force of § 5c of the Infection Protection Act (IfSG), the so-called Triage Act, on 14 December 2022, a protracted discussion has come to a provisional conclusion, the result of which physicians and social associations but also lawyers and ethicists are equally dissatisfied. The explicit exclusion of the discontinuation of treatment that has already begun in favor of new patients with better chances of success (so-called tertiary or ex-post triage) prevents allocation decisions with the aim of enabling as many patients as possible to beneficially participate in medical care under crisis conditions. The result of the new regulation is de facto a first come first served allocation, which is associated with the highest mortality even among individuals with limitations or disabilities and was rejected by a large margin as unfair in a population survey. Mandating allocation decisions based on the likelihood of success but which are not permitted to be consistently implemented and prohibiting, for example the use of age and frailty as prioritization criteria, although both factors most strongly determine the short-term probability of survival according to evident data, shows the contradictory and dogmatic nature of the regulation. The only remaining possibility is the consistent termination of treatment that is no longer indicated or desired by the patient, regardless of the current resource situation; however, if a different decision is made in a crisis situation than in a situation without a lack of resources, this practice would not be justified and would be punishable. Accordingly, the highest efforts must be set on legally compliant documentation, especially in the stage of decompensated crisis care in a region. The goal of enabling as many patients as possible to beneficially participate in medical care under crisis conditions is in any case thwarted by the new German Triage Act.

Indexed as

TriageGermanyHumansCriminal lawDisaster medicineEthicsIntensive careResource scarcity

Identifiers

PMID37233790
PMCPMC10215064

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.