Key result
Outcomes research involving critically ill elderly populations is crucial to mitigate the risk of ageism and rationing in intensive care.
Highlights the risk of ageism in intensive care delivery and advocates for outcomes research in critically ill elderly patients to prevent inappropriate rationing of care.
May warrant caution against ageism in ICU decisions; leaves open the value of outcomes research for elderly critically ill patients.
Ageism, as a mind-set, amplifies a belief that intensive care for the elderly is ineffectual. However, there are little data to support the notion that advanced chronological age alone predicts unfavorable outcomes in response to intensive care. A lack of outcome data, combined with ageism, may place older patients at risk for rationing of intensive care. Currently, neither public policy nor cultural norms directly support a limitation in services to the elderly. However, as pressure to reduce health care costs increases, critically ill elderly patients may be targeted for rationing. In this context, outcomes research involving elderly populations is crucial. The purpose of this report is to explicate the risk of ageism in the delivery of intensive care and to describe methods for implementing outcomes assessment for critically ill elderly patients as an essential element in a continuum of care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mick et al. (1997) conducted a review in Critical illness in the elderly. Outcomes research was evaluated. Outcomes research involving critically ill elderly populations is crucial to mitigate the risk of ageism and rationing in intensive care.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: