[Very old Patients in the Intensive Care Unit - Balancing Benefits and Risks].

IF 0.7
Mareike Otto, Hendrik Bracht, Christof Breitsameter, Thorsten Brenner, Jens Dowideit, Patrick Meybohm, Sigrid Wittmann, Rainer Kiefmann
{"title":"[Very old Patients in the Intensive Care Unit - Balancing Benefits and Risks].","authors":"Mareike Otto, Hendrik Bracht, Christof Breitsameter, Thorsten Brenner, Jens Dowideit, Patrick Meybohm, Sigrid Wittmann, Rainer Kiefmann","doi":"10.1055/a-2060-8786","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The decision to initiate extended intensive care in older patients is often challenging. The ethical principles of beneficence and non-maleficence, together with the patient's autonomous will, form the foundation of decision-making. Important prognostic factors include frailty, functional status, and comorbidities. If intensive care treatment is initiated, it should be started promptly, but with a clearly defined treatment goal and predefined limitations regarding interventions that should not be undertaken. If, during the course, the decision is made against curative intensive care, palliative care should be provided. In situations where the patient's wishes or prognosis are unclear and the likelihood of meaningful benefit is low, a time-limited trial of therapy with predefined evaluation criteria may be appropriate. In any case, interdisciplinary and interprofessional team discussions help to improve prognostic assessment. Based on this, patients and their relatives can engage in shared decision-making to weigh benefits against burdens and to reach an informed choice.</p>","PeriodicalId":520554,"journal":{"name":"Anasthesiologie, Intensivmedizin, Notfallmedizin, Schmerztherapie : AINS","volume":"60 10","pages":"574-590"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anasthesiologie, Intensivmedizin, Notfallmedizin, Schmerztherapie : AINS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2060-8786","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/10/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The decision to initiate extended intensive care in older patients is often challenging. The ethical principles of beneficence and non-maleficence, together with the patient's autonomous will, form the foundation of decision-making. Important prognostic factors include frailty, functional status, and comorbidities. If intensive care treatment is initiated, it should be started promptly, but with a clearly defined treatment goal and predefined limitations regarding interventions that should not be undertaken. If, during the course, the decision is made against curative intensive care, palliative care should be provided. In situations where the patient's wishes or prognosis are unclear and the likelihood of meaningful benefit is low, a time-limited trial of therapy with predefined evaluation criteria may be appropriate. In any case, interdisciplinary and interprofessional team discussions help to improve prognostic assessment. Based on this, patients and their relatives can engage in shared decision-making to weigh benefits against burdens and to reach an informed choice.

[重症监护病房的高龄病人-利益与风险的平衡]。
对老年患者进行延长重症监护的决定往往具有挑战性。善意和非恶意的伦理原则,加上病人的自主意志,构成了决策的基础。重要的预后因素包括虚弱、功能状态和合并症。如果开始重症监护治疗,应立即开始,但应明确定义治疗目标,并预先确定不应采取的干预措施的限制。如果在治疗过程中决定不进行治疗性重症监护,则应提供姑息治疗。在患者的愿望或预后不明确且有意义的获益可能性较低的情况下,采用预先确定的评估标准进行有时间限制的治疗试验可能是合适的。在任何情况下,跨学科和跨专业的团队讨论有助于改善预后评估。在此基础上,患者及其亲属可以参与共同决策,以权衡利益与负担,并达成知情选择。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书