无效治疗:波兰麻醉师调查。

IF 1.6 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Anna Paprocka-Lipińska, Maria Damps, Sylwia Barsow, Beata Kosiba
{"title":"无效治疗:波兰麻醉师调查。","authors":"Anna Paprocka-Lipińska, Maria Damps, Sylwia Barsow, Beata Kosiba","doi":"10.5114/ait/200232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The purpose of this survey was to investigate the opinions on futile therapy among anaesthesiologists and residents in anaesthesiology and intensive therapy as well as to determine the frequency of the futile therapy protocol being used. Additionally, the survey aimed to determine the factors responsible for futile therapy being still practised in intensive care units (ICUs).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The authors developed a questionnaire for the purpose of the study. In addition to questions about professional status, gender, age, seniority, and place of work, questions regarding aspects of futile therapy in the context of medical decision-making were included in the study tool. A question was also asked about whether the COVID-19 pandemic might have influenced the perception of futile therapy. The survey was conducted using the computer-assisted web interview (CAWI) technique. The questionnaires were completed in an online form between May and October 2023.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study group consisted of 488 respondents including anaesthesiologists and residents in anaesthesiology and intensive therapy. About 80% of the respondents were anaesthesiologists, with an average ICU experience of about 15 years. The vast majority of anaesthesiologists (<i>n</i> = 458) were of the opinion that the decisions on intensive care limits should be subject to legal regulations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Polish anaesthesiologists recognise the need to regulate the decision-making process as part of the legal system while not perceiving a need for their decisions to be subject to authorization by hospital ethics committees. Respondents also note the need to educate the public on the subject of end-of-life care.</p>","PeriodicalId":7750,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesiology intensive therapy","volume":"57 1","pages":"50-58"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Futile therapy: a survey of Polish anaesthesiologists.\",\"authors\":\"Anna Paprocka-Lipińska, Maria Damps, Sylwia Barsow, Beata Kosiba\",\"doi\":\"10.5114/ait/200232\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The purpose of this survey was to investigate the opinions on futile therapy among anaesthesiologists and residents in anaesthesiology and intensive therapy as well as to determine the frequency of the futile therapy protocol being used. Additionally, the survey aimed to determine the factors responsible for futile therapy being still practised in intensive care units (ICUs).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The authors developed a questionnaire for the purpose of the study. In addition to questions about professional status, gender, age, seniority, and place of work, questions regarding aspects of futile therapy in the context of medical decision-making were included in the study tool. A question was also asked about whether the COVID-19 pandemic might have influenced the perception of futile therapy. The survey was conducted using the computer-assisted web interview (CAWI) technique. The questionnaires were completed in an online form between May and October 2023.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study group consisted of 488 respondents including anaesthesiologists and residents in anaesthesiology and intensive therapy. About 80% of the respondents were anaesthesiologists, with an average ICU experience of about 15 years. The vast majority of anaesthesiologists (<i>n</i> = 458) were of the opinion that the decisions on intensive care limits should be subject to legal regulations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Polish anaesthesiologists recognise the need to regulate the decision-making process as part of the legal system while not perceiving a need for their decisions to be subject to authorization by hospital ethics committees. Respondents also note the need to educate the public on the subject of end-of-life care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7750,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anaesthesiology intensive therapy\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"50-58\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anaesthesiology intensive therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5114/ait/200232\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesiology intensive therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/ait/200232","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

前言:本调查的目的是调查麻醉医师和住院医师在麻醉和强化治疗中对无效治疗的看法,并确定无效治疗方案的使用频率。此外,该调查旨在确定在重症监护病房(icu)仍在进行无效治疗的因素。材料和方法:为了研究的目的,作者制作了一份问卷。除了有关专业地位、性别、年龄、资历和工作地点的问题外,研究工具还包括有关医疗决策背景下无效治疗方面的问题。还有人问,新冠疫情是否影响了“治疗无效”的观念。该调查采用计算机辅助网络访谈(CAWI)技术进行。这些调查问卷是在2023年5月至10月期间以在线形式完成的。结果:研究组由488名调查对象组成,包括麻醉医师和麻醉及强化治疗住院医师。约80%的受访者为麻醉医师,平均在ICU工作15年。绝大多数麻醉医师(n = 458)认为对重症监护限制的决定应受法律规定的约束。结论:波兰麻醉师认识到需要规范决策过程作为法律制度的一部分,而不认为他们的决定需要受到医院伦理委员会的授权。受访者还指出,有必要对公众进行临终关怀方面的教育。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Futile therapy: a survey of Polish anaesthesiologists.

Introduction: The purpose of this survey was to investigate the opinions on futile therapy among anaesthesiologists and residents in anaesthesiology and intensive therapy as well as to determine the frequency of the futile therapy protocol being used. Additionally, the survey aimed to determine the factors responsible for futile therapy being still practised in intensive care units (ICUs).

Material and methods: The authors developed a questionnaire for the purpose of the study. In addition to questions about professional status, gender, age, seniority, and place of work, questions regarding aspects of futile therapy in the context of medical decision-making were included in the study tool. A question was also asked about whether the COVID-19 pandemic might have influenced the perception of futile therapy. The survey was conducted using the computer-assisted web interview (CAWI) technique. The questionnaires were completed in an online form between May and October 2023.

Results: The study group consisted of 488 respondents including anaesthesiologists and residents in anaesthesiology and intensive therapy. About 80% of the respondents were anaesthesiologists, with an average ICU experience of about 15 years. The vast majority of anaesthesiologists (n = 458) were of the opinion that the decisions on intensive care limits should be subject to legal regulations.

Conclusions: Polish anaesthesiologists recognise the need to regulate the decision-making process as part of the legal system while not perceiving a need for their decisions to be subject to authorization by hospital ethics committees. Respondents also note the need to educate the public on the subject of end-of-life care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.90%
发文量
48
审稿时长
25 weeks
×
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