• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

A cross-sectional survey of Australian and New Zealand public opinion on methods totriage intensive care patients in an influenza pandemic

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Crit Care Resusc. 2017 Sep;19(3):254-265.
[h=1]A cross-sectional survey of Australian and New Zealand public opinion on methods totriage intensive care patients in an influenza pandemic.[/h] Cheung W[SUP]1[/SUP], Myburgh J[SUP]2[/SUP], McGuinness S[SUP]3[/SUP], Chalmers D[SUP]4[/SUP], Parke R[SUP]3[/SUP], Blyth F[SUP]5[/SUP], Seppelt I[SUP]6[/SUP], Parr M[SUP]7[/SUP], Hooker C[SUP]8[/SUP], Blackwell N[SUP]9[/SUP], DeMonte S[SUP]10[/SUP], Gandhi K[SUP]11[/SUP], Kol M[SUP]12[/SUP], Kerridge I[SUP]8[/SUP], Nair P[SUP]13[/SUP], Saunders NM[SUP]14[/SUP], Saxena MK[SUP]15[/SUP], Thanakrishnan G[SUP]12[/SUP], Naganathan V[SUP]5[/SUP]; Influenza Pandemic ICU Triage 3 study investigators; Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group.
[h=3]Author information[/h]

[h=3]Abstract[/h] [h=4]BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE:[/h] An influenza pandemic has the potential to overwhelm intensive care resources, but the views of the general public on how resources should be allocated in such a scenario were unknown. We aimed to determine Australian and New Zealand public opinion on how intensive care unit beds should be allocated during an influenza pandemic.
[h=4]DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:[/h] A postal questionnaire was sent to 4000 randomly selected registered voters; 2000 people each from the Australian Electoral Commission and New Zealand Electoral Commission rolls.
[h=4]MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE:[/h] The respondents' preferred method to triage ICU patients in an influenza pandemic. Respondents chose from six methods: use a "first in, first served" approach; allow a senior doctor to decide; use pre-determined health department criteria; use random selection; use the patient's ability to pay; use the importance of the patient to decide. Respondents also rated each of the triage methods for fairness.
[h=4]RESULTS:[/h] Australian respondents preferred that patients be triaged to the ICU either by a senior doctor (43.2%) or by pre-determined health department criteria (38.7%). New Zealand respondents preferred that triage be performed by a senior doctor (45.9%). Respondents from both countries perceived triage by a senior doctor and by pre-determined health department criteria to be fair, and the other four methods of triage to be unfair.
[h=4]CONCLUSION:[/h] In an influenza pandemic, when ICU resources would be overwhelmed, survey respondents preferred that ICU triage be performed by a senior doctor, but also perceived the use of pre-determined triage criteria to be fair.


PMID: 28866976
 
Back
Top Bottom