[Decision-Making by Hospital Teams Regarding Access and Use of Life-Support Technology and End-of-Life Processes in Critically Ill Adult Patients: A Narrative Review].

María Cristina Paredes Escobar, Karen A Domínguez-Cancino
{"title":"[Decision-Making by Hospital Teams Regarding Access and Use of Life-Support Technology and End-of-Life Processes in Critically Ill Adult Patients: A Narrative Review].","authors":"María Cristina Paredes Escobar, Karen A Domínguez-Cancino","doi":"10.4067/s0034-98872024000400483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Death processes have been progressively transferred to hospital spaces due to biomedicalization and the use of technologies, generating important challenges for healthcare systems. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the lack of unified criteria and principles for a dignified death in the hospital. This study corresponds to a narrative review using Higgins & Green's methodological framework as a reference. A systematized search was carried out with the question: What are the elements considered in the decision-making of hospital teams regarding access and use of life support technology and dying processes in adult critically ill patients? The searches conducted during October 2022 in MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, CINAHL, Biblioteca Virtual en Salud (BVS), Cochrane Library, and Scielo identified 1499 records for screening, and 148 were retrieved for full-text review. Eighty-four articles were included in the review, identifying seven categories. The evidence shows variability in decision-making associated with the clinical status of the patient, the criteria of the medical professional, added to structural elements of the health system and political-legal aspects. The literature recommends reflexive, dynamic, flexible, and individualized decision-making processes that consider the patient's preferences, clinical judgment, prognosis, and available resources. Communication, advance care planning, interdisciplinary discussions, external consultations, and the involvement of ethical committees are crucial throughout the process.</p>","PeriodicalId":101370,"journal":{"name":"Revista medica de Chile","volume":"152 4","pages":"483-497"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista medica de Chile","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4067/s0034-98872024000400483","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Death processes have been progressively transferred to hospital spaces due to biomedicalization and the use of technologies, generating important challenges for healthcare systems. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the lack of unified criteria and principles for a dignified death in the hospital. This study corresponds to a narrative review using Higgins & Green's methodological framework as a reference. A systematized search was carried out with the question: What are the elements considered in the decision-making of hospital teams regarding access and use of life support technology and dying processes in adult critically ill patients? The searches conducted during October 2022 in MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, CINAHL, Biblioteca Virtual en Salud (BVS), Cochrane Library, and Scielo identified 1499 records for screening, and 148 were retrieved for full-text review. Eighty-four articles were included in the review, identifying seven categories. The evidence shows variability in decision-making associated with the clinical status of the patient, the criteria of the medical professional, added to structural elements of the health system and political-legal aspects. The literature recommends reflexive, dynamic, flexible, and individualized decision-making processes that consider the patient's preferences, clinical judgment, prognosis, and available resources. Communication, advance care planning, interdisciplinary discussions, external consultations, and the involvement of ethical committees are crucial throughout the process.

[医院团队对重症成人患者获取和使用生命支持技术及生命终结程序的决策:叙述性综述]。
由于生物医学化和技术的使用,死亡过程逐渐转移到医院空间,给医疗保健系统带来了重大挑战。COVID-19 大流行暴露了医院中尊严死亡缺乏统一的标准和原则。本研究以希金斯和格林的方法论框架为参考,进行了叙述性综述。本研究以希金斯和格林的方法论框架为参考,进行了系统化的搜索,问题如下医院团队在对成年危重病人获取和使用生命支持技术以及死亡过程进行决策时考虑了哪些因素?2022 年 10 月期间,在 MEDLINE/PubMed、Scopus、Science Direct、CINAHL、Biblioteca Virtual en Salud (BVS)、Cochrane Library 和 Scielo 中进行了检索,共筛选出 1499 条记录,并检索出 148 条记录进行全文检索。84 篇文章被纳入综述,确定了七个类别。证据显示,决策的可变性与患者的临床状况、医疗专业人员的标准以及卫生系统的结构要素和政治法律方面有关。文献建议采用反思性、动态、灵活和个性化的决策过程,考虑患者的偏好、临床判断、预后和可用资源。在整个过程中,沟通、预先护理规划、跨学科讨论、外部咨询以及伦理委员会的参与都至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信