Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2014 Feb;42(2):296-302.
doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3182a272db.

Timing of limitations in life support in acute lung injury patients: a multisite study*

Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Timing of limitations in life support in acute lung injury patients: a multisite study*

Alison E Turnbull et al. Crit Care Med. 2014 Feb.

Abstract

Objective: Substantial variability exists in the timing of limitations in life support for critically ill patients. Our objective was to investigate how the timing of limitations in life support varies with changes in organ failure status and time since acute lung injury onset.

Design, setting, and patients: This evaluation was performed as part of a prospective cohort study evaluating 490 consecutive acute lung injury patients recruited from 11 ICUs at three teaching hospitals in Baltimore, MD.

Interventions: None.

Measurements: The primary exposure was proportion of days without improvement in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, evaluated as a daily time-varying exposure. The outcome of interest was a documented limitation in life support defined as any of the following: 1) no cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 2) do not reintubate, 3) no vasopressors, 4) no hemodialysis, 5) do not escalate care, or 6) other limitations (e.g., "comfort care only").

Main results: For medical ICU patients without improvement in daily Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, the rate of limitation in life support tripled in the first 3 days after acute lung injury onset, increased again after day 5, and peaked at day 19. Compared with medical ICU patients, surgical ICU patients had a rate of limitations that was significantly lower during the first 5 days after acute lung injury onset. In all patients, more days without improvement in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores was associated with limitations in life support, independent of the absolute magnitude of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score.

Conclusions: Persistent organ failure is associated with an increase in the rate of limitations in life support independent of the absolute magnitude of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, and this association strengthens during the first weeks of treatment. During the first 5 days after acute lung injury onset, limitations were significantly more common in medical ICUs than surgical ICUs.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Rate of Limitations in Life Support Over 21 Days After Acute Lung Injury Onset
Estimates for the rate of limitations in life support over 21 days among prototypical patients in this acute lung injury cohort, assuming median values for continuous covariates and mode values for binary covariates. Abbreviations: MICU, Medical Intensive Care Unit; SICU, Surgical Intensive Care Unit; SOFA, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score; ALI, acute lung injury
Figure 2
Figure 2. Time-Dependent Relative Hazards of Limitations in Life Support Over 21 Days After Acute Lung Injury Onset
Time dependent relative hazards (dotted line) and 95% confidence intervals (shaded areas) for limitations in life support over 21 days of follow-up for prototypical patients in this acute lung injury cohort. Horizontal solid line at a relative hazard of 1.0 indicates no difference in the rate of limitations in life support for compared groups. Abbreviations: ICU, intensive care unit; MICU, medical intensive care unit; SICU, surgical intensive care unit; SOFA, sequential organ failure assessment; ALI, acute lung injury

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Angus DC, Barnato AE, Linde-Zwirble WT, Weissfeld LA, Watson RS, Rickert T, Rubenfeld GD. Use of intensive care at the end of life in the United States: an epidemiologic study. Crit Care Med. 2004;32:638–643. - PubMed
    1. Prendergast TJ, Luce JM. Increasing incidence of withholding and withdrawal of life support from the critically ill. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1997;155:15–20. - PubMed
    1. Prendergast TJ, Claessens MT, Luce JM. A national survey of end-of-life care for critically ill patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1998;158:1163–1167. - PubMed
    1. Hall RI, Rocker GM. End-of-life care in the ICU: treatments provided when life support was or was not withdrawn. Chest. 2000;118:1424–1430. - PubMed
    1. Prendergast TJ, Puntillo KA. Withdrawal of life support: intensive caring at the end of life. Jama J Am Med Assoc. 2002;288:2732–2740. - PubMed

Publication types