ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Therapeutic Obstinacy in End-of-Life Care-A Perspective of Healthcare Professionals from Romania.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- When Doing Nothing Feels Safer: A Multilevel Framework for Therapeutic Inertia in Psychiatry.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Healthcare Providers' Perspectives on the Communication Challenges When Discussing Palliative Sedation: A Qualitative Study Across Eight European Countries.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The "gray zone" in pediatric end-of-life care: bioethical and medico-legal reflections.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- Futility in healthcare among Mexican female patients with breast cancer in advanced stage: The patient perspective.PloS one · 2025Article
- Threats to the Dignity of People with Advanced Illness Who Are Treated in Emergency Departments: A Qualitative Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEnd-of-life care raises ethical, moral, legal and economic dilemmas, especially when physicians have to decide whether to initiate or to stop treatments that may be considered disproportionate and futile.
aimTo explore the opinion of health care professionals involved in end-of-life patient care on interventions considered disproportionate and futile at this stage of care, the causes and factors of pressure leading to such situations, and possible solutions to reduce the phenomenon. MATERIAL AND
methodThe study used an adapted, designed questionnaire intended for health professionals caring for patients at the end of life. The 128 respondents were physicians, nurses, psychologists and social workers who expressed their opinions about therapeutic obstinacy in end-of-life care.
resultsThe results of the research highlight the role of the family as a pressure factor, the causes related to the non-acceptance of the prognosis and diagnosis of a terminal condition, fear of death and ignorance of the patient's wishes. Interventions considered disproportionate at the end of life were cardiopulmonary resuscitation, mechanical ventilation, transfusion of blood derivatives, complex diagnostic investigations and the establishment of gastrostomy/jejunostomy in the last days of life.
conclusionsEnd-of-life therapeutic obstinacy is a reality in end-of-life care, and healthcare professionals face many ethical challenges in this process. Care decisions must be made together with the patient and their family, respecting the rights, dignity and respect of all parties involved in the process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.