Are the GFRUP’s recommendations for withholding or withdrawing treatments in critically ill children applicable? Results of a two-year survey

Objective: To evaluate feasibility of the guidelines of the Groupe Francophone de Réanimation et Urgence Pédiatriques (French-speaking group of paediatric intensive and emergency care; GFRUP) for limitation of treatments in the paediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Design: A 2-year prospective surv...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Authors: Cremer, R. (Author) ; Binoche, A. (Author) ; Noizet, O. (Author) ; Fourier, C. (Author) ; Leteurtre, S. (Author) ; Moutel, G. (Author) ; Leclerc, F. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: BMJ Publ. 2007
In: Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2007, Volume: 33, Issue: 3, Pages: 128-133
Online Access: Presumably Free Access
Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1816132225
003 DE-627
005 20220908053436.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220908s2007 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1136/jme.2006.015990  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1816132225 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1816132225 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Cremer, R.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Are the GFRUP’s recommendations for withholding or withdrawing treatments in critically ill children applicable? Results of a two-year survey 
264 1 |c 2007 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Objective: To evaluate feasibility of the guidelines of the Groupe Francophone de Réanimation et Urgence Pédiatriques (French-speaking group of paediatric intensive and emergency care; GFRUP) for limitation of treatments in the paediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Design: A 2-year prospective survey. Setting: A 12-bed PICU at the Hôpital Jeanne de Flandre, Lille, France. Patients: Were included when limitation of treatments was expected. Results: Of 967 children admitted, 55 were included with a 2-day median delay. They were younger than others (24 v 60 months), had a higher paediatric risk of mortality (PRISM) score (14 v 4), and a higher paediatric overall performance category (POPC) score at admission (2 v 1); all p<0.002. 34 (50% of total deaths) children died. A limitation decision was made without meeting for 7 children who died: 6 received do-not-resuscitate orders (DNROs) and 1 received withholding decision. Decision-making meetings were organised for 31 children, and the following decisions were made: 12 DNROs (6 deaths and 6 survivals), 4 withholding (1 death and 3 survivals), with 14 withdrawing (14 deaths) and 1 continuing treatment (survival). After limitation, 21 (31% of total deaths) children died and 10 survived (POPC score 4). 13 procedures were interrupted because of death and 11 because of clinical improvement (POPC score 4). Parents’ opinions were obtained after 4 family conferences (for a total of 110 min), 3 days after inclusion. The first meeting was planned for 6 days after inclusion and held on the 7th day after inclusion; 80% of parents were immediately informed of the decision, which was implemented after half a day. Conclusions: GFRUPs procedure was applicable in most cases. The main difficulties were anticipating the correct date for the meeting and involving nurses in the procedure. Children for whom the procedure was interrupted because of clinical improvement and who survived in poor condition without a formal decision pointed out the need for medical criteria for questioning, which should systematically lead to a formal decision-making process. 
700 1 |a Binoche, A.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Noizet, O.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Fourier, C.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Leteurtre, S.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Moutel, G.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Leclerc, F.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of medical ethics  |d London : BMJ Publ., 1975  |g 33(2007), 3, Seite 128-133  |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:33  |g year:2007  |g number:3  |g pages:128-133 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/27719809  |x JSTOR 
856 |u https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2598266  |x unpaywall  |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang  |h repository [oa repository (via pmcid lookup)] 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2006.015990  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u http://jme.bmj.com/content/33/3/128.abstract  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
936 u w |d 33  |j 2007  |e 3  |h 128-133 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4185586086 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1816132225 
LOK |0 005 20220908053436 
LOK |0 008 220908||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-08-02#54C94119031A234ED341CD29029B363B72C3E41E 
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/27719809 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw