BACKGROUND: A majority of end-of-life medical decisions are made by surrogate decision-makers who have varying degrees of preparation and comfort with their role. Having a seriously ill family member is stressful for surrogates. Moreover, most clinicians have had little training in working effectively with surrogates. OBJECTIVES: To better understand the challenges of decision-making from the surrogate's perspective. DESIGN: Semistructured telephone interview study of the experience of surrogate decision-making. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty designated surrogates with previous decision-making experience. APPROACH: We asked surrogates to describe and reflect on their experience of making medical decisions for others. After coding transcripts, we conducted a content analysis to identify and categorize factors that made decision-making more or less difficult for surrogates. RESULTS: Surrogates identified four types of factors: (1) surrogate characteristics and life circumstances (such as coping strategies and competing responsibilities), (2) surrogates' social networks (such as intrafamily discord about the "right" decision), (3) surrogate-patient relationships and communication (such as difficulties with honoring known preferences), and (4) surrogate-clinician communication and relationship (such as interacting with a single physician whom the surrogate recognizes as the clinical spokesperson vs. many clinicians). CONCLUSIONS: These data provide insights into the challenges that surrogates encounter when making decisions for loved ones and indicate areas where clinicians could intervene to facilitate the process of surrogate decision-making. Clinicians may want to include surrogates in advance care planning prior to decision-making, identify and address surrogate stressors during decision-making, and designate one person to communicate information about the patient's condition, prognosis, and treatment options.
BACKGROUND: A majority of end-of-life medical decisions are made by surrogate decision-makers who have varying degrees of preparation and comfort with their role. Having a seriously ill family member is stressful for surrogates. Moreover, most clinicians have had little training in working effectively with surrogates. OBJECTIVES: To better understand the challenges of decision-making from the surrogate's perspective. DESIGN: Semistructured telephone interview study of the experience of surrogate decision-making. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty designated surrogates with previous decision-making experience. APPROACH: We asked surrogates to describe and reflect on their experience of making medical decisions for others. After coding transcripts, we conducted a content analysis to identify and categorize factors that made decision-making more or less difficult for surrogates. RESULTS: Surrogates identified four types of factors: (1) surrogate characteristics and life circumstances (such as coping strategies and competing responsibilities), (2) surrogates' social networks (such as intrafamily discord about the "right" decision), (3) surrogate-patient relationships and communication (such as difficulties with honoring known preferences), and (4) surrogate-clinician communication and relationship (such as interacting with a single physician whom the surrogate recognizes as the clinical spokesperson vs. many clinicians). CONCLUSIONS: These data provide insights into the challenges that surrogates encounter when making decisions for loved ones and indicate areas where clinicians could intervene to facilitate the process of surrogate decision-making. Clinicians may want to include surrogates in advance care planning prior to decision-making, identify and address surrogate stressors during decision-making, and designate one person to communicate information about the patient's condition, prognosis, and treatment options.
Authors: Elizabeth K Vig; Janelle S Taylor; Helene Starks; Elizabeth K Hopley; Kelly Fryer-Edwards Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: P H Ditto; J H Danks; W D Smucker; J Bookwala; K M Coppola; R Dresser; A Fagerlin; R M Gready; R M Houts; L K Lockhart; S Zyzanski Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2001-02-12
Authors: Donald R Sullivan; Xinggang Liu; Douglas S Corwin; Avelino C Verceles; Michael T McCurdy; Drew A Pate; Jennifer M Davis; Giora Netzer Journal: Chest Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Barak Gaster; Kelly Edwards; Susan Brown Trinidad; Thomas H Gallagher; Clarence H Braddock Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2010-11-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Yael Schenker; Megan Crowley-Matoka; Daniel Dohan; Greer A Tiver; Robert M Arnold; Douglas B White Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2012-07-28 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Latifat Apatira; Elizabeth A Boyd; Grace Malvar; Leah R Evans; John M Luce; Bernard Lo; Douglas B White Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2008-12-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Yael Schenker; Mary Amanda Dew; Charles F Reynolds; Robert M Arnold; Greer A Tiver; Amber E Barnato Journal: Palliat Support Care Date: 2014-02-13
Authors: Ellen Iverson; Aaron Celious; Carie R Kennedy; Erica Shehane; Alexander Eastman; Victoria Warren; Bradley D Freeman Journal: Intensive Crit Care Nurs Date: 2013-11-07 Impact factor: 3.072