Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (11)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Onwuteaka-Philipsen, B. D.
Right arrow Articles by van der Wal, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Onwuteaka-Philipsen, B. D.
Right arrow Articles by van der Wal, G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Age and Ageing 2001; 30: 459-465
© 2001, British Geriatrics Society

Research papers

Withholding or withdrawing artificial administration of food and fluids in nursing-home patients

Bregje D. Onwuteaka-Philipsen, H. Roeline W. Pasman, Aline Kruit1, Agnes van der Heide2, Miel W. Ribbe and Gerrit van der Wal

Institute for Research in Extramural Medicine, Department of General Practice, Nursing Home Medicine and Social Medicine, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
1 VZR, Centres for Nursing Home Care and Rehabilitation, Heerlen, The Netherlands
2 Department of Public Health, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Abstract

Background: withholding or withdrawing artificial administration of food and fluids, especially in incompetent patients, has been the subject of turbulent discussions. Insight into this practice may be useful in the debate, and also in the development of guidelines.

Objectives: to gain insight into the frequency and circumstances of forgoing artificial administration of food and fluids in nursing homes.

Design: we sent a written questionnaire to the nursing-home physicians of a stratified sample of 6060 people who died in the Netherlands in 1995, and interviewed a random sample of 74 nursing-home physicians.

Setting: Dutch nursing homes.

Main outcome measures: incidence of withholding or withdrawing artificial administration of food, patient characteristics and features of the decision-making process.

Results: in 23% of deaths in nursing homes, artificial administration of food and fluids were foregone. In two-thirds of cases, life was shortened by 1 week at most. The decision was almost always discussed with competent patients. In the case of incompetent patients, the decision was almost always discussed with the patient's relatives. Frequently mentioned considerations in the decision were: the patient's (presumed) wish, low quality of life, no prospect of improvement and the desire not unnecessarily to prolong life.

Conclusions: artificial administration of food and fluids is one of the most frequently forgone treatments in nursing homes. In general, the physician involves the patient or the patient's relatives and the nursing staff in the decision-making. In most cases, the nursing-home physicians thought that the decision to forgo artificial administration of food and fluids improved the patient's quality of dying.

Keywords: decision-making, enteral nutrition, nursing homes, withholding/withdrawing treatment


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Nurs EthicsHome page
L. Sandman, I. Agren Bolmsjo, and A. Westergren
Ethical Considerations of Refusing Nutrition After Stroke
Nursing Ethics, March 1, 2008; 15(2): 147 - 159.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch Intern MedHome page
G. Bosshard, T. Nilstun, J. Bilsen, M. Norup, G. Miccinesi, J. J. M. van Delden, K. Faisst, A. van der Heide, and for the European End-of-Life (EURELD) Consortium
Forgoing Treatment at the End of Life in 6 European Countries
Arch Intern Med, February 28, 2005; 165(4): 401 - 407.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.