IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i8p3938-d532728.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Neonatal End-of-Life Decision Making: The Possible Behavior of Greek Physicians, Midwives, and Nurses in Clinical Scenarios

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Dagla

    (Department of Midwifery, University of West Attica, 12243 Athens, Greece)

  • Vasiliki Petousi

    (Department of Sociology, University of Crete, 74100 Crete, Greece)

  • Antonios Poulios

    (Department of Psychology, National Kapodestrian University, 10679 Athens, Greece)

Abstract

Background: This study investigates the acceptability, bioethical justification, and determinants of the provision of intensive care to extremely preterm or ill neonates among healthcare professionals serving in NICUs in Greek hospitals. Methods: Healthcare professionals (71 physicians, 98 midwives, and 82 nurses) employed full-time at all public Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICUs) ( n = 17) in Greece were asked to report their potential behavior in three clinical scenarios. Results: The majority of healthcare professionals would start and continue intensive care to (a) an extremely preterm neonate, (b) a full-term neonate with an unfavorable prognosis, and (c) a neonate with complete phocomelia. In cases (a) and (b), midwives and nurses compared to physicians ( p = 0.009 and p = 0.004 in scenarios (a) and (b), respectively) and health professionals ascribing to the quality-of-life principle compared to those ascribing to the intrinsic value of life ( p = 0.001 and p = 0.01 scenarios (a) and (b) respectively), tend towards withholding or withdrawing care. Religion plays an important role in all three scenarios ( p = 0.005, p = 0.017 and p = 0.043, respectively). Conclusions: Understanding healthcare professionals’ therapeutic intensiveness in the face of NICU ethical dilemmas can improve NICU policies, support strategies, and, consequently, the quality of neonatal intensive care.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Dagla & Vasiliki Petousi & Antonios Poulios, 2021. "Neonatal End-of-Life Decision Making: The Possible Behavior of Greek Physicians, Midwives, and Nurses in Clinical Scenarios," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-12, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:8:p:3938-:d:532728
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/8/3938/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/8/3938/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maria Dagla & Vasiliki Petousi & Antonios Poulios, 2020. "Bioethical Decisions in Neonatal Intensive Care: Neonatologists’ Self-Reported Practices in Greek NICUs," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-14, May.
    2. Kuhberger, Anton & Schulte-Mecklenbeck, Michael & Perner, Josef, 2002. "Framing decisions: Hypothetical and real," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 1162-1175, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jindrich Matousek & Tomas Havranek & Zuzana Irsova, 2022. "Individual discount rates: a meta-analysis of experimental evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 318-358, February.
    2. Wardley, Marcus & Alberhasky, Max, 2021. "Framing zero: Why losing nothing is better than gaining nothing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    3. Lefebvre, Mathieu & Vieider, Ferdinand M. & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2010. "Incentive effects on risk attitude in small probability prospects," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 115-120, November.
    4. Kai Ruggeri & Amma Panin & Milica Vdovic & Bojana Većkalov & Nazeer Abdul-Salaam & Jascha Achterberg & Carla Akil & Jolly Amatya & Kanchan Amatya & Thomas Lind Andersen & Sibele D. Aquino & Arjoon Aru, 2022. "The globalizability of temporal discounting," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(10), pages 1386-1397, October.
    5. Manel Baucells & Cristina Rata, 2006. "A Survey Study of Factors Influencing Risk-Taking Behavior in Real-World Decisions Under Uncertainty," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 163-176, September.
    6. Tubetov, Dulat & Maart, Syster Christin & Musshoff, Oliver, 2012. "Comparison of the investment behavior of Kazakhstani and German farmers: An experimental approach," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124650, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Khan, Mohammad Tariqul Islam & Tan, Siow-Hooi & Chong, Lee-Lee, 2017. "How past perceived portfolio returns affect financial behaviors—The underlying psychological mechanism," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1478-1488.
    8. Guido Baltussen & G. Post & Martijn Assem & Peter Wakker, 2012. "Random incentive systems in a dynamic choice experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 15(3), pages 418-443, September.
    9. Dufwenberg, Martin & Gächter, Simon & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike, 2011. "The framing of games and the psychology of play," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 459-478.
    10. Hans-Rüdiger Pfister & Gisela Böhm, 2012. "Responder Feelings in a Three-Player Three-Option Ultimatum Game: Affective Determinants of Rejection Behavior," Games, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-29, February.
    11. Dorian Jullien, 2013. "Asian Disease-type of Framing of Outcomes as an Historical Curiosity," GREDEG Working Papers 2013-47, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    12. Anastassiadis, Friederike & Liebe, Ulf & Musshoff, Oliver, 2012. "Finanzielle Flexibilität In Landwirtschaftlichen Investitionsentscheidungen: Ein Discrete Choice Experiment," 52nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 26-28, 2012 137142, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    13. repec:cup:judgdm:v:2:y:2007:i::p:312-316 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Czap, Hans J. & Czap, Natalia V. & Khachaturyan, Marianna & Burbach, Mark E. & Lynne, Gary D., 2011. "Smiley or Frowney: The effect of emotions and framing in a downstream water pollution game," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 102696, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Kuehnhanss, Colin R. & Heyndels, Bruno, 2018. "All’s fair in taxation: A framing experiment with local politicians," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 26-40.
    16. Tubetov, Dulat & Maart, Syster Christin & Musshoff, Oliver, 2012. "Comparison of the Investment Behavior of German and Kazakhstani Farmers: an Experimental Approach," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 122422, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    17. Matthew L. Locey & Bryan A. Jones & Howard Rachlin, 2011. "Real and hypothetical rewards in self-control and social discounting," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(6), pages 552-564, August.
    18. Annemie Maertens & A. V. Chari & David R. Just, 2014. "Why Farmers Sometimes Love Risks: Evidence from India," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62(2), pages 239-274.
    19. Klein, Galit & Shtudiner, Zeev & Zwilling, Moti, 2021. "Uncovering gender bias in attitudes towards financial advisors," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 257-273.
    20. Martin Dufwenberg & Simon Gaechter & Heike Hennig-Schmidt, 2006. "The Framing of Games and the Psychology of Strategic Choice," Discussion Papers 2006-20, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    21. Feil, J.-H. & Anastassiadis, F. & Mußhoff, O. & Schilling, P., 2015. "Analysing Farmers’ Use of Price Hedging Instruments: An Experimental Approach," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 50, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:8:p:3938-:d:532728. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.