A challenge in end-of-life care is requests by patients or their substitute decision-makers for treatment that doctors consider is "futile" or "non-beneficial". Concerns that these concepts are uncertain and subjective have led to calls for medical policies to clarify terminology and to provide procedural solutions to prevent and address disputes. This article provides a comprehensive analysis of how Australian medical guidelines and policies on withholding or withdrawing potentially life-sustaining treatment address futility. It demonstrates that while the concept is found throughout medical policies and guidelines, the terminology employed is inconsistent. There is also variability in the extent of guidance given about unilateral decision-making and mechanisms for dispute resolution. This is problematic, given that the question of further treatment can often only be determined in relation to the individual patient's goals and values. We conclude by advocating for the development of a unified policy approach to futile or non-beneficial treatment in Australia.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|
Background: This paper aimed to describe the legal worries of Australian general practitioners (GPs) and nurses regarding end-of-life care provided in the aged care setting.
Methods: An analysis of responses to the final, open-ended question of a cross-sectional online survey of GPs and nurses practising in aged care settings in Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria was undertaken.
Results: Of the 162 GPs and 61 nurses who gave valid responses to the survey, 92% (151 GPs and 55 nurses) responded to the open-ended question.
World population is not only aging but suffering from serious chronic illnesses, requiring an increasing need for end-of-life care. However, studies show that many healthcare providers involved in the care of dying patients sometimes express challenges in knowing when to stop non-beneficial investigations and futile treatments that tend to prolong undue suffering for the dying person. To evaluate the clinical signs and symptoms that show end-of-life is imminent in individuals with advanced illness.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFResusc Plus
June 2021
Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, Singapore.
Background: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrests with negligible chance of survival are routinely transported to hospital and many are pronounced dead thereafter. This leads to some potentially avoidable costs. The 'Termination of Resuscitation' protocol allows paramedics to terminate resuscitation efforts onsite for medically futile cases.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFInt J Qual Health Care
December 2020
University Hospital Wishaw, NHS Lanarkshire, Wishaw, Scotland, UK.
Objective: A recent study found that the use of a treatment escalation/limitation plan (TELP) was associated with a significant reduction in non-beneficial interventions (NBIs) and harms in patients admitted acutely who subsequently died. We quantify the economic benefit of the use of a TELP.
Design: NBIs were micro-costed.
J Law Med
December 2019
Associate Professor, School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry, The University of Queensland.
A challenge in end-of-life care is requests by patients or their substitute decision-makers for treatment that doctors consider is "futile" or "non-beneficial". Concerns that these concepts are uncertain and subjective have led to calls for medical policies to clarify terminology and to provide procedural solutions to prevent and address disputes. This article provides a comprehensive analysis of how Australian medical guidelines and policies on withholding or withdrawing potentially life-sustaining treatment address futility.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!