Opinión de los profesionales de una unidad de cuidados intensivos sobre la limitación del esfuerzo terapéutico

A. González-Castro, O. Azcune, Y. Peñasco, J.C. Rodríguez, M.J. Domínguez, R. Rojas
{"title":"Opinión de los profesionales de una unidad de cuidados intensivos sobre la limitación del esfuerzo terapéutico","authors":"A. González-Castro,&nbsp;O. Azcune,&nbsp;Y. Peñasco,&nbsp;J.C. Rodríguez,&nbsp;M.J. Domínguez,&nbsp;R. Rojas","doi":"10.1016/j.cali.2015.12.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To determine the opinion held by professionals in an intensive care unit on the limitation of therapeutic effort process at the end-of-life (LTE). To collect this information, and then use it to improve the basic aspects that the LTE have on the quality of care by intensive care unit staff.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>A prospective descriptive study was carried out in the Intensive Care Unit of a third level public university hospital. A questionnaire was prepared that included questions on their demographic profile and others to provide an ethical valuation profile, as well as to find out the knowledge and information that the professional had on the LTE. Descriptive study of the sample and comparative statistics were performed using the chi-squared statistical test.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 65 valid questionnaires were obtained from a convenience sample of 70 professionals. Almost all of them (98%) were in favour of the limitation of therapeutic effort. The LTE was considered as some kind of euthanasia (active or passive) in up to 28% of the replies, valuations by professional categories is shown in. More than three-quarters (77%) had the belief that not to start treatment was not the same as withdrawing an already established treatment. Just over half (52%) of the respondents believe the value that should have more weight when considering LET would be the prognosis of the current illness of the patient, and 46% the future quality of life of the patient. The economic cost of treatment to be applied was not considered in any case.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The LTE is approved by the majority of professionals in our Intensive Care Unit. Although a non-negligible percentage understood it as a form of euthanasia.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101101,"journal":{"name":"Revista de Calidad Asistencial","volume":"31 5","pages":"Pages 262-266"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.cali.2015.12.007","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de Calidad Asistencial","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1134282X16000300","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Objective

To determine the opinion held by professionals in an intensive care unit on the limitation of therapeutic effort process at the end-of-life (LTE). To collect this information, and then use it to improve the basic aspects that the LTE have on the quality of care by intensive care unit staff.

Material and methods

A prospective descriptive study was carried out in the Intensive Care Unit of a third level public university hospital. A questionnaire was prepared that included questions on their demographic profile and others to provide an ethical valuation profile, as well as to find out the knowledge and information that the professional had on the LTE. Descriptive study of the sample and comparative statistics were performed using the chi-squared statistical test.

Results

A total of 65 valid questionnaires were obtained from a convenience sample of 70 professionals. Almost all of them (98%) were in favour of the limitation of therapeutic effort. The LTE was considered as some kind of euthanasia (active or passive) in up to 28% of the replies, valuations by professional categories is shown in. More than three-quarters (77%) had the belief that not to start treatment was not the same as withdrawing an already established treatment. Just over half (52%) of the respondents believe the value that should have more weight when considering LET would be the prognosis of the current illness of the patient, and 46% the future quality of life of the patient. The economic cost of treatment to be applied was not considered in any case.

Conclusions

The LTE is approved by the majority of professionals in our Intensive Care Unit. Although a non-negligible percentage understood it as a form of euthanasia.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重症监护病房专业人员对治疗努力限制的意见
目的了解重症监护病房专业人员对生命末期治疗努力过程局限性的看法。收集这些信息,然后利用它来改善LTE对重症监护病房工作人员护理质量的基本方面。材料与方法在某三级公立大学附属医院重症监护病房进行前瞻性描述性研究。准备了一份调查问卷,其中包括关于他们的人口统计资料和其他问题,以提供道德评估资料,并找出专业人员对LTE的知识和信息。采用卡方统计检验对样本进行描述性研究和比较统计。结果方便抽样70名专业人员,共回收有效问卷65份。几乎所有人(98%)都赞成限制治疗努力。在多达28%的回复中,LTE被认为是某种安乐死(主动或被动),专业类别的估值显示在。超过四分之三(77%)的人认为,不开始治疗与退出已经确定的治疗不同。超过一半(52%)的受访者认为,在考虑LET时,应该更重视的价值是患者当前疾病的预后,46%的受访者认为应该重视患者未来的生活质量。在任何情况下,都没有考虑到将要实施的治疗的经济费用。我们重症监护室的大多数专业人员都认可LTE。尽管有不可忽略的百分比将其理解为安乐死的一种形式。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Del papel a las nuevas tecnologías en la comunicación con nuestros pacientes Impacto de un programa de gestión de riesgo en la tasa de úlceras por presión La enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica (EPOC): ¿esa gran conocida? Reflexiones sobre cómo mejorar la calidad diagnóstica El capital social como determinante de salud pública Efectividad de la evaluación de historias clínicas informatizadas en un hospital universitario
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1