The decision making process regarding the withdrawal or withholding of potential life-saving treatments in a children's hospital

Objectives—To investigate the factors considered by staff, and the practicalities involved in the decision making process regarding the withdrawal or withholding of potential life-sustaining treatment in a children's hospital. To compare our current practice with that recommended by the Royal C...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Authors: Street, Karen (Author) ; Ashcroft, Richard (Author) ; Henderson, John (Author) ; Campbell, V. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: BMJ Publ. 2000
In: Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2000, Volume: 26, Issue: 5, Pages: 346-352
Online Access: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1816120626
003 DE-627
005 20230427025708.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220908s2000 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1136/jme.26.5.346  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1816120626 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1816120626 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Street, Karen  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 4 |a The decision making process regarding the withdrawal or withholding of potential life-saving treatments in a children's hospital 
264 1 |c 2000 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Objectives—To investigate the factors considered by staff, and the practicalities involved in the decision making process regarding the withdrawal or withholding of potential life-sustaining treatment in a children's hospital. To compare our current practice with that recommended by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) guidelines, published in 1997. Design—A prospective, observational study using self-reported questionnaires. Setting—Tertiary paediatric hospital. Patients and participants—Consecutive patients identified during a six-month period, about whom a formal discussion took place between medical staff, nursing staff and family regarding the withholding or withdrawal of potentially life-sustaining treatments. The primary physician and primary nurse involved in the discussion were identified. Method—Two questionnaires completed independently by the primary physician and nurse. Results—Twenty-two patients were identified (median age 1 year; range 1 day—34 years). In 20 cases treatment was withdrawn or withheld, in two cases treatment was continued. Nursing staff considered family wishes and family perceptions of patient suffering as significantly more important factors in decision making than medical staff, who considered prognostic factors as most important. In only two cases were the patient's expressed wishes apparently available. In most cases staff considered the patient's best interests were served and the process would not be enhanced by the involvement of an independent ethics committee. The exceptions were those cases in which treatment was continued following disagreement between parties. Conclusions—Our current practice is consistent with that recommended by the RCPCH. The contribution of the patient, provision of staff counselling and general practitioner (GP) involvement were identified as areas for improvement. 
700 1 |a Ashcroft, Richard  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Henderson, John  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Campbell, V.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of medical ethics  |d London : BMJ Publ., 1975  |g 26(2000), 5, Seite 346-352  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)323607802  |w (DE-600)2026397-1  |w (DE-576)260773972  |x 1473-4257  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:26  |g year:2000  |g number:5  |g pages:346-352 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/27718565  |x JSTOR 
856 |u https://jme.bmj.com/content/medethics/26/5/346.full.pdf  |x unpaywall  |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang  |h publisher [open (via free pdf)] 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.26.5.346  |x Resolving-System  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u http://jme.bmj.com/content/26/5/346.abstract  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
936 u w |d 26  |j 2000  |e 5  |h 346-352 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4185573464 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1816120626 
LOK |0 005 20220908053315 
LOK |0 008 220908||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-08-02#2BB67AE9F93017A7189C00E51E35D6E6BB6FC51E 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 866   |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/27718565 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw