Withholding or withdrawing invasive interventions may not accelerate time to death among dying ICU patients
Daniele Ramazzotti, Peter Clardy, Leo Anthony Celi, David J., Stone, Robert S. Rudin

TL;DR
This study analyzed ICU data from 2002-2011 and found that reductions in invasive interventions did not lead to shorter times to death among dying ICU patients, challenging assumptions about end-of-life care practices.
Contribution
It provides evidence that decreasing invasive interventions in ICU end-of-life care does not necessarily shorten patient survival time.
Findings
Reduced invasive interventions over time did not decrease time to death.
Increase in non-invasive ventilation use.
No significant change in time to death despite intervention reduction.
Abstract
We considered observational data available from the MIMIC-III open-access ICU database and collected within a study period between year 2002 up to 2011. If a patient had multiple admissions to the ICU during the 30 days before death, only the first stay was analyzed, leading to a final set of 6,436 unique ICU admissions during the study period. We tested two hypotheses: (i) administration of invasive intervention during the ICU stay immediately preceding end-of-life would decrease over the study time period and (ii) time-to-death from ICU admission would also decrease, due to the decrease in invasive intervention administration. To investigate the latter hypothesis, we performed a subgroups analysis by considering patients with lowest and highest severity. To do so, we stratified the patients based on their SAPS I scores, and we considered patients within the first and the third…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
