From the viewpoint of a health economist, the intensive care unit (leU)
is a particularly fascinating phenomenon. It is the epitome of
"high-tech" medicine and frequently portrayed as the place where
life-saving miracles are routinely wrought. But the popular imagina-
tion is also caught up in the darker side, when agonizing decisions have
to be made to avoid futile and inhuman continuation of expen- sive
treatments. My analytical interests led me to approach these issues by
asking what the evidence tells us about which leu activities are very
bene- ficial in relationship to their costs and which are not. This
quickly translates into a slightly different question, namely, which
patients are most appropriately treated in an leu and which not. Unfor-
tunately, it is very hard to answer these questions because it has pro-
ved very difficult to investigate these issues in the manner which is
now regarded as the "gold standard: ' namely by conducting rando- mized
clinical trials or alternative courses of action. I think this is a
pity, and I am not at all convinced that it would be unethical to do so
in many cases, because there is wide variation in practice and ge- nuine
doubt as to which practices are best -the two conditions that need to be
fulfilled before such a trial is justifiable.