Futility

Medical Futility

NOTE: The UW Dept. of Bioethics & Humanities is in the process of updating all Ethics in Medicine articles for attentiveness to the issues of equity, diversity, and inclusion.  Please check back soon for updates!

Author: 

Nancy S. Jecker, PhD

Topics addressed:

  • What is "medical futility"?
  • What are the ethical obligations of physicians when a health care provider judges an intervention is futile?
  • Who decides when a particular treatment is futile?
  • What if the patient or family requests an intervention that the health care team considers futile?
  • What is the difference between futility and rationing?
  • What is the difference between a futile intervention and an experimental intervention?
  • Is an intervention more likely to be futile if a patient is elderly?
  • Why is medical futility controversial?

While you will hear colleagues referring to particular cases or interventions as "futile," the technical meaning and moral weight of this term is not always appreciated. As you will make clinical decisions using futility as a criterion, it is important to be clear about the meaning of the concept. (For a related discussion, see Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders.)

What is "medical futility"?

"Medical futility" refers to interventions that are unlikely to produce any significant benefit for the patient. Two kinds of medical futility are often distinguished:

  1. Quantitative futility, where the likelihood that an intervention will benefit the patient is exceedingly poor, and
  2. Qualitative futility, where the quality of benefit an intervention will produce is exceedingly poor.

Both quantitative and qualitative futility refer to the prospect that a specific treatment will benefit (not simply have a physiological effect) on the patient.

Futility does not apply to treatments globally, to a patient, or to a general medical situation. Instead, it refers to a particular intervention at a particular time, for a specific patient. For example, rather than stating, “It is futile to continue to treat this patient,” one would state, “CPR would be medically futile for this patient.”

What are the ethical obligations of physicians when a health care provider judges an intervention is futile?

The goal of medicine is to help the sick. Physicians have no obligation to offer treatments that do not benefit patients. Futile interventions may increase a patient's pain and discomfort in the final days and weeks of life; give patients and family false hope; delay palliative and comfort care; and expend finite medical resources. However, determining which interventions are beneficial to a patient can be difficult, since the patient or surrogate might see an intervention as beneficial while the physician does not. Physicians should follow professional standards, and should consider empirical studies and their own clinical experience when making futility judgments. They should also show sensitivity to patients and families in carrying out decisions to withhold or withdraw futile interventions.

Although the ethical requirement to respect patient autonomy entitles a patient to choose from among medically acceptable treatment options (or to reject all options), it does not entitle patients to receive whatever treatments they ask for. Instead, the obligations of physicians are limited to offering treatments that are consistent with professional standards of care and that confer benefit to the patient.

Who decides when a particular treatment is futile?

Generally the term medical futility applies when, based on medical data and professional experience, a treating health care provider determines that an intervention is no longer beneficial. Because health professionals may reasonably disagree about when an intervention is futile, all members of the health care team would ideally reach consensus. While physicians have the ethical authority to withhold or withdraw medically futile interventions, communicating with professional colleagues involved in a patient’s care, and with patients and family, greatly improves the experience and outcome for all.

What if the patient or family requests an intervention that the health care team considers futile?

You have a duty as a physician to communicate openly with the patient or family members about interventions that are being withheld or withdrawn and to explain the rationale for such decisions. The aim of respectful communication should be to elicit the patient’s goals, explain the goals of treatment, and help patients and families understand how particular medical interventions would help or hinder their goals and the goals of treatment. It is important to approach such conversations with compassion. For example, rather than saying to a patient or family, "there is nothing I can do for you," it is important to emphasize that "everything possible will be done to ensure the patient's comfort and dignity."

In some instances, it may be appropriate to continue temporarily to make a futile intervention available in order to assist the patient or family in coming to terms with the gravity of their situation and reaching closure. For example, a futile intervention for a terminally ill patient may in some instances be continued temporarily in order to allow time for a loved one arriving from another state to see the patient for the last time. However, futile interventions should not be used for the benefit of family members if this is likely to cause the patient substantial suffering, or if the family’s interests are clearly at odds with those of the patient.

If intractable conflict arises, a fair process for conflict resolution should occur. Involvement of an ethics consultation service is desirable in such situations. The 1999 Texas Advance Directives Act provides one model for designing a fair process for conflict resolution.

What is the difference between futility and rationing?

Futility refers to the benefit of a particular intervention for a particular patient. With futility, the central question is not, "How much money does this treatment cost?" or, "Who else might benefit from it?" but instead, "Does the intervention have any reasonable prospect of helping this patient?"

What is the difference between a futile intervention and an experimental intervention?

Making a judgment of futility requires solid empirical evidence documenting the outcome of an intervention for different groups of patients. Futility establishes the negative determination that the evidence shows no significant likelihood of conferring a significant benefit. By contrast, treatments are considered experimental when empirical evidence is lacking and the effects of an intervention are unknown.

Is an intervention more likely to be futile if a patient is elderly?

Futility has no necessary correlation with a patient’s age. What determines whether a treatment is futile is whether or not the treatment benefits the patient. In cases where evidence clearly shows that older patients have poorer outcomes than younger patients, age may be a reliable indicator of patient benefit, but it is benefit, not age, that supports a judgment of medical futility. For patients of all ages, health care professionals should advocate for medically beneficial care, and refrain from treatments that do not help the patient.

Why is medical futility controversial?

While medical futility is a well-established basis for withdrawing and withholding treatment, it has also been the source of ongoing debate. One source of controversy centers on the exact definition of medical futility, which continues to be debated in the scholarly literature. Second, an appeal to medical futility is sometimes understood as giving unilateral decision-making authority to physicians at the bedside. Proponents of medical futility reject this interpretation, and argue that properly understood futility should reflect a professional consensus, which ultimately is accepted by the wider society that physicians serve. Third, in the clinical setting, an appeal to “futility” can sometimes function as a conversation stopper. Thus, some clinicians find that even when the concept applies, the language of “futility” is best avoided in discussions with patients and families. Likewise, some professionals have dispensed with the term “medical futility” and replaced it with other language, such as “medically inappropriate.” Finally, an appeal to medical futility can create the false impression that medical decisions are value-neutral and based solely on the physician’s scientific expertise. Yet clearly this is not the case. The physician’s goal of helping the sick is itself a value stance, and all medical decision making incorporates values.

  • Back AI, Arnold RM. Dealing with Conflict in Caring for the Seriously Ill: ‘It was Just Out of the Question’. Journal of the American Medical Association 2005; 293:1374-1381.
  • Dominic JC & J Savulescu. Knowing when to stop: futility in the ICU. Current Opinion in Anesthesiology 2011, 24:160-165.
  • Moratti, S. The development of ‘medical futility’: towards a procedural approach based on the role of the medical profession. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2009; 35:369-372.
  • Quill TE, Arnold R, Back AL. Discussing Treatment Preferences with Patients Who Want Everything. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2009; 151:345-9.
  • Rubin, S. When Doctors Say No: the Battleground of Medical Futility. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1998.
  • Schneiderman LJ, Jecker NS, Jonsen AR. Medical futility: its meaning and ethical implications. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1990; 112:949-54.
  • Schneiderman LJ, Jecker NS, Jonsen AR. Medical futility: responses to critiques. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1996; 125:669-74.
  • Schneiderman LJ, Jecker NS. Wrong Medicine, 2nd Edition. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2011.
  • Texas Health and Safety Code, Annotated, sec.166.046 (West 2006).
  • Truog RD. Is it Always Wrong to Perform Futile CPR? New England Journal of Medicine.2010;362(6): 477-479.
 
 
 
 

CASE STUDIES

A young accident victim has been in a persistent vegetative state for several months and family members have insisted that "everything possible" be done to keep the patient alive.

What are your professional obligations?

Case Discussion

Case 1 illustrates the possible conflicts that can arise with patients or family members about withholding or withdrawing futile interventions. If you and other members of the health care team agree that the interventions in question would be futile, the goals of treatment should be clarified. It can be helpful to ask patients and family members to also articulate their goals, which may reveal some agreement among parties. Once goals are clear, physicians can discuss how various interventions help or frustrate these goals. This requires a process of working with the patient and/or family, and possibly drawing on other resources, such as social workers, palliative care services, hospital chaplains, and ethics consultants. If there is no professional consensus about the futility of a particular intervention, then there is no ethical basis for overriding the requests of patients and/or family members for that intervention.

An elderly patient with irreversible respiratory disease is in the intensive care unit where repeated efforts to wean him from ventilator support have been unsuccessful. There is general agreement among the health care team that he could not survive outside of an intensive care setting. The patient has requested antibiotics should he develop an infection and CPR if he has a cardiac arrest.

Should a distinction be made between the interventions requested by the patient? Should the patient’s age be a factor?
 

Case Discussion

Like Case 1, Case 2 illustrates possible conflicts that can arise with patients or family members about withholding or withdrawing futile interventions. Ventilator support clearly produces a physiologic effect by contracting and expanding the patient’s lungs with oxygen. Yet this does not suffice to show that the treatment helps the patient, which is medicine’s goal. If the patient will never leave the intensive care unit, does ventilator support constitute a benefit to the patient?  A central issue this case raises concerns qualitative futility, namely: does the patient’s quality of life fall well below a threshold considered minimal? If you and other members of the health care team agree that the interventions in question would be qualitatively futile, the goal should be to withdraw or withhold these interventions. Achieving this goal requires working in tandem with the patient and/or family, as well as drawing upon resources, such as social workers, hospital chaplains, and ethics committees. If there is no professional consensus about the futility of a particular intervention, then there is no ethical basis for overriding the requests of patients and/or family members for that intervention.  

An elderly man who lives in a nursing home is admitted to the medical ward with pneumonia. He is awake but severely demented. He can only mumble, but interacts and acknowledges family members. The admitting resident says that treating his pneumonia with antibiotics would be "futile" and suggests approaching the family with this stance.

Do you agree?

Case Discussion

In many cases, "futility" is used inaccurately to describe situations that appear undesirable. For this patient, treating pneumonia with antibiotics stands a reasonable chance of success. The patient's quality of life, though low, is not unacceptably so. Unless the patient (or if found incapacitated, his surrogate) were to say that he would find this quality of life unacceptably low, there is neither quantitative nor qualitative grounds for calling antibiotics futile in this case. Unlike Cases 1 and 2, in Case 3 there is a treatment available that benefits the patient.