ArticleCanadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie2026
Management of potentially inappropriate life-sustaining therapies: a survey of Quebec intensivists.
Article in Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePotentially inappropriate treatments (PITs) are a common issue in the intensive care unit (ICU) with substantial economic and human impacts. Previous studies about PITs in Canada lacked representation of physicians practicing in the province of Quebec and were conducted before the 2023 updated reference document on consent to care from the Collège des Médecins du Québec and the Barreau du Québec. We sought to evaluate the approaches and perspectives of adult ICU physicians in Quebec regarding demands for potentially inappropriate life-sustaining therapies (LSTs) and cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
methodsWe conducted an electronic survey of academic and regional ICU physicians in Quebec. It assessed decision-making in fictional scenarios and opinions through Likert-like scales and free-text statements. Our main analysis was the level of agreement for each question. We also evaluated subjective appropriateness of care, conducted subgroup analyses according to demographic factors, and performed a qualitative thematic analysis.
resultsWe received 124/319 responses (response rate, 39%). There was no consensus among respondents in the four scenarios about withholding LSTs. The only consensus was to avoid withdrawing an active LST. In the scenarios, 78% (314/405) of the provided LSTs were deemed inappropriate by the provider. Most respondents identified PITs as a frequent problem (71%; 84/118) and thought that guidelines (69%; 82/118) and institutional support (59%; 70/118) were inadequate. Medico-legal risk was highlighted as the most significant issue.
conclusionsDemands for PITs present a significant challenge for ICU physicians in Quebec, contributing to heterogeneous approaches and high levels of self-assessed inappropriate treatments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42014625What 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.