Should the therapeutic effort in artificial nutrition be limited

BASIS: There exists general agreement among the experts in Bioethics in order not to maintain a treatment if it is considered that it is useless. However, there is no unanimity about if serotherapy, enteral nutrition (EN), and parenteral nutrition (PN) are really therapeutic measures or else they are measures that they are part of the concept of palliative care. OBJECTIVE: Know the opinion of users and health workers of National Health System (NHS) in these issues. DESIGN: Cross-sectional descriptive study. AREA: Primary and specialized care. METHODS: A survey was distributed to 219 individuals (84 users of the NHS, 135 health workers), that it included sociodemographic parameters, the opinion on different aspects of ethics and nutritional support, and the measures regarded as palliative care. RESULTS: The majority of the respondents think that the EN (70.8%; 95% IC: 64.2-76.8) and PN (54.8%; 95% IC: 47.9-61.6) are part of the basic care, with differences between the health personnel and the users of the NHS. 50.2% considers that there are no differences between applying or removing nutritional support. 71.3% of the health professionals answer that this decision depends on the medical, 60.5% of the users of the NHS thinks that it depends on the patient himself and/or its family members. All the evaluated measures are regarded as basic care, regardless of the characteristics of the respondent. CONCLUSIONS: Artificial nutrition is understood as a basic care, regardless of the situation and quality of life of the patient. While the health professionals think that the decision to initiate/to retire artificial nutrition depends on the physician, the users of the NHS consider that it depends on the patient/family in case of disability of this.