To ventilate or not to ventilate: A qualitative analysis of physicians' experience during the first and second waves of the COVID-19 pandemic

Galia Weinberg-Kurnik,Uri Manor,Amitai Avnon Sawicki,Shmuel Steinlauf,Ronit Dina Leichtentritt
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07481187.2024.2432288
2024-12-13
Death Studies
Abstract:Little is known about experiences of physicians when deciding on initiating life support during medical crises of mass casualties and undersupply. We performed a qualitative analysis of interviews with 14 physicians about their decision-making experience when considering initiating mechanical ventilation in patients with severe COVID-19 during the early pandemic. Three themes were revealed: (a) The accumulating clinical experience with invasive ventilation, and the physicians' perception of ventilation as effective or futile in these patients; (b) Preferences of patients and their families regarding mechanical ventilation; and (c) Economic, logistic, and organizational considerations of the undersupplied healthcare system. The circumstances under which end-of-life decisions were made often caused moral injury to physicians, in particular when their personal ethical standpoints were not integrated in the decision-making process. Our findings explore the moral injury suffered by physicians and may help identify strategies to mitigate moral injury of healthcare staff in times of medical crisis.
social sciences, biomedical,psychology, multidisciplinary,social issues
What problem does this paper attempt to address?