探討末期病人撤除氣管內管後仍接受維生醫療處置狀況。採電子病歷回溯性調查設計，以2013 年9 月1 日至2018 年08 月31 日加護病房撤除氣管內管之末期病人共126 人為研究對象。統計2013 年9 月1 日至2018 年08 月31 日(共五年) 撤除氣管內管之末期病人共126 人，撤除原因大多數為非癌末期病人(n =114; 佔90.5%)、癌末病人較少(n =12; 佔9.5%)。其中有47 人(37.3%) 在入住加護病房時即符合末期定義，撤管後死亡之個案有113 人(89.7%)、有13 位(10.3%) 出院返家。撤管病人有使用緩和鎮靜藥物者共69 位(佔54.8%)、撤管後仍持續使用抗生素治療者13 位( 佔10.3%)、血管升壓劑藥物者有3 位(佔2.4%)，統計其撤除後仍持續接受之維生醫療以鼻胃管最多為3.6 次(SD = 6.6)、抽痰及導尿管裝置天數次之，而撤管後仍使用的維生醫療五年區間比較未見差異(p 值=0.246)。撤除氣管內管有九成係為非癌末期病人、近四成在入住加護病房時即符合末期定義。撤管後仍使用之維生醫療在五年區間未見差異，維生醫療之使用以鼻胃管留置居多，因此建議持續推動預立醫療照護計畫，對於末期病人人工營養、流體餵養(鼻胃管) 之使用需在尊重病人自主前提之下充分討論。

Discuss the conditions of patients with terminal illness receiving life sustaining treatment after the withdrawal of endotracheal tubes. It's a retrospective study of electric medical records, targeted at 126 patients with terminal illness in intensive care units after the withdrawal of endotracheal tubes. We collected from 1st September 2013 to 31st August 2018 (in total of five years), there were 126 patients with terminal illness whose endotracheal tubes were withdrawn. Most of the withdrawal patients were not at the terminal stage of cancer (n=114, accounting for 90.5%). Few patients were at their terminal stage of cancer (n=12, accounting for 9.5%). Among these subjects, the conditions of 47 people (37.7%) match the definition of terminal illness when they were admitted to ICUs, 113 of them (89.7%) passed away after the withdrawal, and 13 of them (10.3%) were discharged home. The number of withdrawal patients taking palliative sedation was 69 (54.8%), and the number of those being still treated with antibiotics was 13 (10.3%) and with vasopressors was 3 (2.4%). It has been calculated that nasogastric tubes were adopted for the most times (3.6 times, SD=6.6) for the life sustaining treatment afterwards, followed by sputum suction and foley catheter. Furthermore, the comparison within a 5-year interval when life sustaining treatment was still used after withdrawal has not seen a big difference (p value=0.246). 90% of patients whose endotracheal tubes were withdrawn were not at their terminal stage of cancer, and nearly 40% have matched the definition of terminal illness when admitted to ICUs. Within the 5-year interval, no obvious difference was found on patients who received life sustaining treatment after the withdrawal. Besides, nasogastric tubes were adopted the most in terms of the life sustaining treatment. As a result, it is suggested that advance care planning (ACP) be constantly promoted, and the use of artificial nutrition and hydration (nasogastric tube) be fully discussed in the premise of respecting patients’ autonomy.