IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ulb/ulbeco/2013-331296.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Outcomes of ICU patients with and without perceptions of excessive care: a comparison between cancer and non-cancer patients

Author

Listed:
  • Dominique Benoit
  • Esther E.N. van der Zee
  • Michael Darmon
  • An A.K.L. Reyners
  • Victoria Metaxa
  • Djamel Mokart
  • Alexander Wilmer
  • Pieter Depuydt
  • Andreas Hvarfner
  • Katerina Rusinova
  • Jan G.Zijlstra
  • François Vincent
  • Dimitrios Lathyris
  • Anne-Pascale Meert
  • Jacques Devriendt
  • Emma Uyttersprot
  • Erwin Jo E.J.O. Kompanje
  • Ruth R.D. Piers
  • Elie Azoulay

Abstract

Background: Whether Intensive Care Unit (ICU) clinicians display unconscious bias towards cancer patients is unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of critically ill patients with and without perceptions of excessive care (PECs) by ICU clinicians in patients with and without cancer. Methods: This study is a sub-analysis of the large multicentre DISPROPRICUS study. Clinicians of 56 ICUs in Europe and the United States completed a daily questionnaire about the appropriateness of care during a 28-day period. We compared the cumulative incidence of patients with concordant PECs, treatment limitation decisions (TLDs) and death between patients with uncontrolled and controlled cancer, and patients without cancer. Results: Of the 1641 patients, 117 (7.1%) had uncontrolled cancer and 270 (16.4%) had controlled cancer. The cumulative incidence of concordant PECs in patients with uncontrolled and controlled cancer versus patients without cancer was 20.5%, 8.1%, and 9.1% (p

Suggested Citation

  • Dominique Benoit & Esther E.N. van der Zee & Michael Darmon & An A.K.L. Reyners & Victoria Metaxa & Djamel Mokart & Alexander Wilmer & Pieter Depuydt & Andreas Hvarfner & Katerina Rusinova & Jan G.Zij, 2021. "Outcomes of ICU patients with and without perceptions of excessive care: a comparison between cancer and non-cancer patients," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/331296, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    • Handle: RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/331296
    Note: SCOPUS: ar.j
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/331296/1/doi_314940.pdf
    File Function: Full text for the whole work, or for a work part
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bias; Cancer; Critical care; ICU; Perception of care; Prognostication; Treatment limitation;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ulb:ulbeco:2013/331296. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Benoit Pauwels (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecsulbe.html .

    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.