Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Evaluating our end-of-life practice.

M M Levy1

  • 1Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island, USA. Mitchell_Levy@brown.edu

Critical Care (London, England)
|August 21, 2001
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Beta Cell Replacement Therapy in the 1990's An Overview of Pancreatic and Islet Cell Transplantation.

Surgical technology international·2015
Same author

Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock.

Intensive care medicine·2004
Same author

Osteoprogenitor cells of mature human skeletal muscle tissue: an in vitro study.

Bone·2001
Same author

Paying attention to death.

Critical care medicine·2001
Same author

Infected aortic pseudoaneurysm following laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Annals of vascular surgery·2001
Same author

End-of-life care in the intensive care unit: can we do better?

Critical care medicine·2001
Same journal

Correction: VExUS score: optimizing its use in perioperative and critical care management.

Critical care (London, England)·2026
Same journal

Optimizing β-lactam antibiotics with the highest concentration-for continuous infusion reduce carbon footprint in intensive care.

Critical care (London, England)·2026
Same journal

Physiological and clinical effects of selected airway clearance techniques in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients: a systematic review and synthesis without meta-analysis.

Critical care (London, England)·2026
Same journal

How we use the neurological pupil index (NPi).

Critical care (London, England)·2026
Same journal

45th International Symposium on Intensive Care & Emergency Medicine.

Critical care (London, England)·2026
Same journal

High-resolution monitoring reveals fragmented 24-hour light exposure in intensive care units.

Critical care (London, England)·2026
See all related articles

Reporting end-of-life practices is crucial for improving care. A French study reveals similar reasons for withholding or withdrawing life support across cultures, despite differing decision-making models.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Ethics
  • Intensive Care Medicine
  • End-of-Life Care

Background:

  • End-of-life care practices vary globally, influenced by cultural decision-making models.
  • Previous research indicates differences in European paternalistic versus US patient autonomy models.
  • Formal guidelines for end-of-life decisions are lacking in some regions, such as France.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To analyze the practices of withholding and withdrawing life support in French intensive care units.
  • To compare decision-making processes and underlying reasons between French and US intensivists.
  • To emphasize the importance of reporting end-of-life practices for care enhancement.

Main Methods:

  • A study examining end-of-life practices in intensive care units in France.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analysis of decision-making approaches in end-of-life care.
  • Comparison of intensivists' reported reasons for withholding or withdrawing life support.

    • Main Results:

    • Intensivists in France report similar reasons for withholding or withdrawing life support compared to their US counterparts.
    • Decision-making in France reflects a paternalistic approach, contrasting with the US patient autonomy model.
    • French intensivists make these critical decisions without formal national guidelines.

    Conclusions:

    • Despite cultural differences in decision-making, the rationale for withholding or withdrawing life support remains consistent.
    • The study underscores the need for greater transparency and monitoring of end-of-life practices.
    • This research should encourage public education and the development of formal guidelines for end-of-life care.