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
Observational Study
. 2021 Oct;9(10):1101-1110.
doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(21)00261-7. Epub 2021 Aug 6.

Variations in end-of-life practices in intensive care units worldwide (Ethicus-2): a prospective observational study

Affiliations
Observational Study

Variations in end-of-life practices in intensive care units worldwide (Ethicus-2): a prospective observational study

Alexander Avidan et al. Lancet Respir Med. 2021 Oct.

Abstract

Background: End-of-life practices vary among intensive care units (ICUs) worldwide. Differences can result in variable use of disproportionate or non-beneficial life-sustaining interventions across diverse world regions. This study investigated global disparities in end-of-life practices.

Methods: In this prospective, multinational, observational study, consecutive adult ICU patients who died or had a limitation of life-sustaining treatment (withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining therapy and active shortening of the dying process) during a 6-month period between Sept 1, 2015, and Sept 30, 2016, were recruited from 199 ICUs in 36 countries. The primary outcome was the end-of-life practice as defined by the end-of-life categories: withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining therapy, active shortening of the dying process, or failed cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Patients with brain death were included in a separate predefined end-of-life category. Data collection included patient characteristics, diagnoses, end-of-life decisions and their timing related to admission and discharge, or death, with comparisons across different regions. Patients were studied until death or 2 months from the first limitation decision.

Findings: Of 87 951 patients admitted to ICU, 12 850 (14·6%) were included in the study population. The number of patients categorised into each of the different end-of-life categories were significantly different for each region (p<0·001). Limitation of life-sustaining treatment occurred in 10 401 patients (11·8% of 87 951 ICU admissions and 80·9% of 12 850 in the study population). The most common limitation was withholding life-sustaining treatment (5661 [44·1%]), followed by withdrawing life-sustaining treatment (4680 [36·4%]). More treatment withdrawing was observed in Northern Europe (1217 [52·8%] of 2305) and Australia/New Zealand (247 [45·7%] of 541) than in Latin America (33 [5·8%] of 571) and Africa (21 [13·0%] of 162). Shortening of the dying process was uncommon across all regions (60 [0·5%]). One in five patients with treatment limitations survived hospitalisation. Death due to failed CPR occurred in 1799 (14%) of the study population, and brain death occurred in 650 (5·1%). Failure of CPR occurred less frequently in Northern Europe (85 [3·7%] of 2305), Australia/New Zealand (23 [4·3%] of 541), and North America (78 [8·5%] of 918) than in Africa (106 [65·4%] of 162), Latin America (160 [28·0%] of 571), and Southern Europe (590 [22·5%] of 2622). Factors associated with treatment limitations were region, age, and diagnoses (acute and chronic), and country end-of-life legislation.

Interpretation: Limitation of life-sustaining therapies is common worldwide with regional variability. Withholding treatment is more common than withdrawing treatment. Variations in type, frequency, and timing of end-of-life decisions were observed. Recognising regional differences and the reasons behind these differences might help improve end-of-life care worldwide.

Funding: None.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interests AD reports grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Philips, and Respinor; personal fees from Baxter, Getinge, Lowenstein, and Gilead; personal fees and non-financial support from Fisher & Paykel and Lungpacer; and grants from the French Ministry of Health, outside of the submitted work. JCS reports grants from Orion Pharma, Abbott Nutrition International, B Braun Medical AG, CSEM AG, Edwards Lifesciences Services GmbH, Kenta Biotech, Maquet Critical Care AB, Omnicare Clinical Research AG, Nestle, and Phagenesis, outside of the submitted work. Monies went into departmental funds directly. AG and and MP report grants from the Austrian Center for Documentation and Quality Assurance in Intensive Care during the conduct of the study. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources