Answers to all your Biology Questions

Evidence concerning how Japanese physicians think and behave in specific clinical situations …

Tables
- Attitudes and behaviors of Japanese physicians concerning withholding and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment for end-of-life patients: results from an Internet survey

Table 1

Distributions of the respondents (N = 304)
Age stratum	(%)

39 years or younger	41
40–49 years	42
50 years or older	15
Missing data	2
Sex
Female	15
male	85
Fields of practice
Pediatrics	2
Family practice	11
General internal medicine	44
Specialty internal medicine	21
Surgery-related	7
Emergency medicine	9
The other fields	7
Size of employing facilities
Office-based clinic	24
1–100 beds	13
101–250 beds	17
251–500 beds	17

501 or more beds	28
Bito et al. BMC Medical Ethics 2007 8:7 doi:10.1186/1472-6939-8-7

"Should/should not" awareness and what is actually done answers toward the Cases (n = 304)
	Should/should not" awareness of treatment options (%)
	Should be done (withdrawn)	Should not be done (not withdrawn)	Judgment is not possible

	What is actually being done (%)
	Usually, initiate	Usually, withhold	Cannot say one more than the other	Have not encountered

Case1	55	15	30
(Initiation of tube feeding)	70	11	14	5
Case2	18	54	28
(Attachment of respirator)	18	59	19	4
Case3	16	53	31
(Withdrawal of tube feeding)	11	53	16	20
Bito et al. BMC Medical Ethics 2007 8:7 doi:10.1186/1472-6939-8-7

Predictors of the attitudes for withholdings in Case 1 and 2, and for withdrawal of tube feeding in Case 3*
	Odds Ratio [95% CI]

Predictors	Case 1	Case 2	Case 3

Female (male)	0.7 [0.3 – 1.5]	0.6 [0.4 –1.1]	1.2 [0.5 – 2.7]
Age over 50 (younger age)	0.8 [0.4 – 3.0]	0.7 [0.4 – 1.5]	1.2 [0.4 – 3.1]
Surgical specialty (others)	0.5 [0.2 – 2.1]	0.6 [0.3 – 1.2]	0.3 [0.1 – 1.1]
Large volume facility over 500 beds (under 500 beds)	0.3 [0.1 – 0.9]	1.3 [0.7 – 2.4]	1.3 [0.6 – 2.9]
Primary care clinic (hospital)	0.9 [0.4 – 2.2]	0.8 [0.4 –1.5]	0.9 [0.4 – 2.2]
Urban area (rural)	1.5 [0.7 – 3.0]	0.2 [0.4 – 1.2]	1.4 [0.7 – 2.7]
"Frequently" consult with colleagues ("very seldom" or "no")	0.4 [0.3 – 1.6]	1.0 [0.5 – 1.8]	0.8 [0.3 – 2.0]
"Have experience of consultation" with ethics committees (have no experience)	2.1 [0.8 – 6.2]	1.0 [0.4 – 2.2]	6.4 [2.5 – 16.3]
* Reference category in parentheses * If the independent variables were missing, there were indicated as reference data.
Bito et al. BMC Medical Ethics 2007 8:7 doi:10.1186/1472-6939-8-7

Go to page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

rating: 0.00 from 0 votes | updated on: 27 Nov 2007 | views: 917 |

Rate article:

Science Network - Braintrack.com - University Directory | Chemicool.com - Chemistry | EquationSheet.com - Equations