Abstract

Professional guidelines have identified key communication skills for shared decision-making for critically ill patients, but it is unclear how intensivists interpret and implement them. To compare the self-evaluations of intensivists reviewing transcripts of their own simulated intensive care unit family meetings with the evaluations of trained expert colleagues. A posttrial web-based survey of intensivists was conducted between January and March 2019. Intensivists reviewed transcripts of simulated intensive care unit family meetings in which they participated in a previous trial from October 2016 to November 2017. In the follow-up survey, participants identified if and how they performed key elements of shared decision-making for an intensive care unit patient at high risk of death. Transcript texts that intensivists self-identified as examples of key communication skills recommended by their professional society's policy on shared decision-making were categorized. Comparison of the evaluations of 2 blinded nonparticipant intensivist colleagues with the self-reported responses of the intensivists. Of 116 eligible intensivists, 76 (66%) completed the follow-up survey (mean [SD] respondent age was 43.1 [8.1] years; 72% were male). Sixty-one of 76 intensivists reported conveying prognosis; however, blinded colleagues who reviewed the deidentified transcripts were less likely to report that prognosis had been conveyed than intensivists reviewing their own transcripts (42 of 61; odds ratio, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.01-0.44; P < .001). When reviewing their own transcript, intensivists reported presenting many choices, with the most common choice being code status. They also provided a variety of recommendations, with the most common being to continue the current treatment plan. Thirty-three participants (43%) reported that they offered care focused on comfort, but blinded colleagues rated only 1 (4%) as explaining this option in a clear manner. In this study, guidelines for shared decision-making and end of life care were interpreted by intensivists in disparate ways. In the absence of training or personalized feedback, self-assessment of communication skills may not be interpreted consistently.

Highlights

  • For 2 decades, treatment in intensive care units (ICUs) during the last month of life has increased among Americans age 65 years and older,[1] including among people with advanced dementia who are unlikely to live longer as a consequence of being in an ICU.[2]

  • Sixty-one of 76 intensivists reported conveying prognosis; blinded colleagues who reviewed the deidentified transcripts were less likely to report that prognosis had been conveyed than intensivists reviewing their own transcripts (42 of 61; odds ratio, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.01-0.44; P < .001)

  • Study Design and Participants We conducted a survey study that followed up intensivists who had participated in the Simulated Communication with ICU Proxies (SCIP) trial (NCT02721810).[14]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

For 2 decades, treatment in intensive care units (ICUs) during the last month of life has increased among Americans age 65 years and older,[1] including among people with advanced dementia who are unlikely to live longer as a consequence of being in an ICU.[2] intensive care at the end of life is common, many people would prefer to prioritize comfort. To help ensure that critically ill patients and their families can choose care that aligns with their values and goals, critical care societies. Encourage ICU physicians (intensivists) to practice shared decision-making regarding preferencesensitive interventions.[3]. Determining how doctors are interpreting and implementing recommendations about shared decision-making in the ICU presents a challenge. For a recommendation or guideline to change practice, clinicians must either be able to independently determine whether they are following it or receive feedback on adherence.[13]

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.