Journal
CURRENT OPINION IN ANESTHESIOLOGY
Volume 24, Issue 2, Pages 160-165Publisher
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/ACO.0b013e328343c5af
Keywords
intensive care; medical futility; terminal care; treatment refusal; withholding treatment
Categories
Funding
- Wellcome Trust [086041/Z/08/Z]
- Wellcome Trust [086041/Z/08/Z] Funding Source: Wellcome Trust
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Purpose of review Decisions to withdraw or withhold potentially life-sustaining treatment are common in intensive care and precede the majority of deaths. When families resist or oppose doctors' suggestions that it is time to stop treatment, it is often unclear what should be done. This review will summarize recent literature around futility judgements in intensive care emphasising ethical and practical questions. Recent findings There has been a shift in the language of futility. Patients' families often do not believe medical assessments that further treatment would be unsuccessful. Attempts to determine through data collection which patients have a low or zero chance of survival have been largely unsuccessful, and are hampered by varying definitions of futility. A due-process model for adjudicating futility disputes has been developed, and may provide a better solution to futility disputes than previous futility statutes. Summary Specific criteria for unilateral withdrawal of treatment have proved hard to define or defend. However, it is ethical for doctors to decline to provide treatment that is medically inappropriate or futile. Understanding the justification for a futility judgement may be relevant to deciding the most appropriate way to resolve futility disputes.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available