Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, Vol 2, 1235-1240, Copyright © 1992 by American Society of Nephrology

REGULAR ARTICLES

Nephrologists' experience with and attitudes towards decisions to forego dialysis. The End-Stage Renal Disease Network of New England

PA Singer
Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Ethicists and lawyers agree that competent adult patients or their surrogate decision-makers have the right to forego life-sustaining treatment, but the views of practicing physicians have not been well- studied. To examine nephrologists' experience with and attitudes towards decisions to forego dialysis, a questionnaire was sent to all 161 nephrologists performing chronic dialysis in six New England states; 118 (73%) responded. The proportion of nephrologists who reported withholding (not starting) dialysis from the cited numbers of patients during the previous year was 11%, 0; 58%, 1 to 5; 20%, 6 to 10; 8%, 11 to 15; and 3%, greater than or equal to 16. For withdrawing (stopping), the proportions were 19%, 0; 73%, 1 to 5; 9%, 6 to 10; and 0%, greater than or equal to 11. The nephrologists withheld dialysis more times than they withdrew it (chi 2 = 26; P = 0.004). If requested to do so by a competent patient, 88% of nephrologists would stop dialysis. If requested by the family of an incompetent patient, 90% would stop if the patient had clear prior wishes, but only 63% would stop if prior wishes were unclear. With competent patients, the issue of withdrawal of dialysis was usually raised by the patient (56%). With incompetent patients, the issue was raised by the family (42%) or nephrologist (30%). It was concluded that decisions to withhold dialysis are more frequent than decisions to withdraw it. Moreover, nephrologists agree about the management of requests to withdraw dialysis in competent patients or incompetent patients with clear prior wishes; they disagree about the management of incompetent patients with unclear prior wishes.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. L. Holley, S. N. Davison, and A. H. Moss Nephrologists' Changing Practices in Reported End-of-Life Decision-Making Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., January 1, 2007; 2(1): 107 - 111. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. J. Farber, P. Simpson, T. Salam, V. U. Collier, J. Weiner, and E. G. Boyer Physicians' decisions to withhold and withdraw life-sustaining treatment. Arch Intern Med, March 13, 2006; 166(5): 560 - 564. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Clement, P. Chevalet, O. Rodat, V. Ould-Aoudia, and M. Berger Withholding or withdrawing dialysis in the elderly: the perspective of a western region of France Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., November 1, 2005; 20(11): 2446 - 2452. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. Van Biesen, N. Lameire, N. Veys, and B. Vanderhaegen From curing to caring: one character change makes a world of difference. Issues related to withholding/withdrawing renal replacement therapy (RRT) from patients with important co-morbidities Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., March 1, 2004; 19(3): 536 - 540. [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. M. Cohen, M. J. Germain, and D. M. Poppel Practical Considerations in Dialysis Withdrawal: "To Have That Option Is a Blessing" JAMA, April 23, 2003; 289(16): 2113 - 2119. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. M. Cohen, M. J. Germain, D. M. Poppel, A. L. Woods, P. S. Pekow, and C. M. Kjellstrand Dying Well After Discontinuing the Life-Support Treatment of Dialysis Arch Intern Med, September 11, 2000; 160(16): 2513 - 2518. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				N. Mallick and A. El Marasi Controversy. Dialysis in the elderly, to treat or not to treat? Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., January 1, 1999; 14(1): 37 - 39. [PDF]

Copyright © 2008 by the American Society of Nephrology. Online ISSN: 1533-3450 Print ISSN: 1046-6673