Literature DB >> 1729042

Patients' preferences for intensive care.

E H Elpern1, P A Patterson, D Gloskey, R C Bone.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine patients' preferences for intensive care and to evaluate the influence of a recent ICU experience on preferences for future ICU treatment.
DESIGN: Survey of nonrandomized patient sample using structured interviews.
SETTING: Large, urban, tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS: Eighty-four adult inpatients discharged from the medical ICU between June and August 1990. MEASUREMENTS: Agreement with life-supportive care under each of four potential outcome scenarios was assessed on a 5-point scale. An overall preference score was created by summing scores for the four items. Patients were also asked about their recent experiences in the ICU.
RESULTS: Patients identified sources of stress associated with their ICU stay, yet most (76%) rated their ICU experience positively. Preferences for future intensive care varied with perceived outcome, and were strongest for health restoration and weakest for persistent vegetative states. No significant relationships were found between ICU preferences and any demographic or clinical variable except race.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients tolerate intensive care well and desire it to restore health. Most patients modify their desire for intensive care if less favorable outcomes are likely. Patients' preferences for intensive care cannot be predicted from demographic features or previous ICU experiences.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Professional Patient Relationship; Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Center (Chicago, IL)

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1729042     DOI: 10.1097/00003246-199201000-00014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Med        ISSN: 0090-3493            Impact factor:   7.598


  6 in total

1.  [Validation of an advance directive].

Authors:  H Rüddel; M Zenz
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2010-12-25       Impact factor: 1.041

2.  Attitudes of European physicians, nurses, patients, and families regarding end-of-life decisions: the ETHICATT study.

Authors:  Charles L Sprung; Sara Carmel; Peter Sjokvist; Mario Baras; Simon L Cohen; Paulo Maia; Albertus Beishuizen; Daniel Nalos; Ivan Novak; Mia Svantesson; Julie Benbenishty; Beverly Henderson
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2006-10-26       Impact factor: 17.440

3.  Stressors in ICU: patients' evaluation.

Authors:  M A Novaes; A Aronovich; M B Ferraz; E Knobel
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  The views of patients and relatives of what makes a good intensivist: a European survey.

Authors: 
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2007-08-15       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  Application of the Italian version of the Intensive Care Unit Memory tool in the clinical setting.

Authors:  Maurizia Capuzzo; Vanna Valpondi; Emiliano Cingolani; Serena De Luca; Giovanna Gianstefani; Luigi Grassi; Raffaele Alvisi
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2003-12-24       Impact factor: 9.097

6.  Time-Limited Trials Among Critically Ill Patients With Advanced Medical Illnesses to Reduce Nonbeneficial Intensive Care Unit Treatments: Protocol for a Multicenter Quality Improvement Study.

Authors:  Dong Chang; Jennifer Parrish; Nader Kamangar; Janice Liebler; May Lee; Thanh Neville
Journal:  JMIR Res Protoc       Date:  2019-11-25
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.