Literature DB >> 22885651

Association between physicians' beliefs and the option of comfort care for critically ill patients.

Yael Schenker1, Greer A Tiver, Seo Yeon Hong, Douglas B White.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: For critically ill patients at high risk of death, reasonable treatment options include attempts at life prolongation and treatment focused on comfort. Little is known about whether and how physicians present the option of comfort care to surrogates. This study assessed how comfort care is presented to surrogates and whether physicians' beliefs are associated with whether comfort care is presented as an option.
METHODS: Mixed-methods study of 72 audio-recorded family conferences about treatment decisions in five ICUs at two hospitals in San Francisco, California. One hundred sixty-nine family members and 54 physicians participated. Patients were at high risk of death or severe functional impairment. Transcripts of audio-recorded conferences were coded to identify whether physicians offered comfort care as an alternative to life-sustaining treatment and to characterize the stated risks and benefits. Physicians completed a questionnaire indicating the strength of their belief that life support should be foregone.
RESULTS: The inpatient mortality rate was 72 %. Using a broad definition of comfort-oriented treatment, this option was presented in 56 % (95 % CI, 44-67 %) of conferences. In clustered multivariate models, the only independent predictor of offering comfort care as an option was the strength of the physician's belief that life support should be foregone [OR 1.38 (1.14-1.66), p = 0.01].
CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians did not explicitly inform surrogates about the option of comfort-oriented treatment in roughly half of clinician-family meetings. Physicians who more strongly believe that the appropriate goal of care is life prolongation are less likely to inform surrogates about the option of comfort care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22885651      PMCID: PMC3470837          DOI: 10.1007/s00134-012-2671-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Intensive Care Med        ISSN: 0342-4642            Impact factor:   17.440


  39 in total

Review 1.  Whatever happened to qualitative description?

Authors:  M Sandelowski
Journal:  Res Nurs Health       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 2.228

Review 2.  Systematic review: the effect on surrogates of making treatment decisions for others.

Authors:  David Wendler; Annette Rid
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Communication and decision-making in seriously ill patients: findings of the SUPPORT project. The Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments.

Authors:  K E Covinsky; J D Fuller; K Yaffe; C B Johnston; M B Hamel; J Lynn; J M Teno; R S Phillips
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 5.562

4.  Informed decision making in outpatient practice: time to get back to basics.

Authors:  C H Braddock; K A Edwards; N M Hasenberg; T L Laidley; W Levinson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999 Dec 22-29       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system.

Authors:  W A Knaus; E A Draper; D P Wagner; J E Zimmerman
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  1985-10       Impact factor: 7.598

6.  In search of a good death: observations of patients, families, and providers.

Authors:  K E Steinhauser; E C Clipp; M McNeilly; N A Christakis; L M McIntyre; J A Tulsky
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2000-05-16       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Factors considered important at the end of life by patients, family, physicians, and other care providers.

Authors:  K E Steinhauser; N A Christakis; E C Clipp; M McNeilly; L McIntyre; J A Tulsky
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000-11-15       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Half the families of intensive care unit patients experience inadequate communication with physicians.

Authors:  E Azoulay; S Chevret; G Leleu; F Pochard; M Barboteu; C Adrie; P Canoui; J R Le Gall; B Schlemmer
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 7.598

9.  Year in review in Intensive Care Medicine 2010: II. Pneumonia and infections, cardiovascular and haemodynamics, organization, education, haematology, nutrition, ethics and miscellanea.

Authors:  Massimo Antonelli; Elie Azoulay; Marc Bonten; Jean Chastre; Giuseppe Citerio; Giorgio Conti; Daniel De Backer; Herwig Gerlach; Goran Hedenstierna; Michael Joannidis; Duncan Macrae; Jordi Mancebo; Salvatore M Maggiore; Alexandre Mebazaa; Jean-Charles Preiser; Jerôme Pugin; Jan Wernerman; Haibo Zhang
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2011-01-12       Impact factor: 17.440

10.  Family members' experiences of "wait and see" as a communication strategy in end-of-life decisions.

Authors:  Ranveig Lind; Geir F Lorem; Per Nortvedt; Olav Hevrøy
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2011-05-28       Impact factor: 17.440

View more
  27 in total

1.  The luck of the draw: physician-related variability in end-of-life decision-making in intensive care.

Authors:  Dominic J C Wilkinson; Robert D Truog
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2013-02-22       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  End-of-Life Care in Critical Condition.

Authors:  Sibyl S Wilmont
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  How clinicians discuss critically ill patients' preferences and values with surrogates: an empirical analysis.

Authors:  Leslie P Scheunemann; Thomas V Cunningham; Robert M Arnold; Praewpannarai Buddadhumaruk; Douglas B White
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 7.598

4.  Factors that contribute to physician variability in decisions to limit life support in the ICU: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Michael E Wilson; Lori M Rhudy; Beth A Ballinger; Ann N Tescher; Brian W Pickering; Ognjen Gajic
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2013-04-05       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  Effects of a Personalized Web-Based Decision Aid for Surrogate Decision Makers of Patients With Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Christopher E Cox; Douglas B White; Catherine L Hough; Derek M Jones; Jeremy M Kahn; Maren K Olsen; Carmen L Lewis; Laura C Hanson; Shannon S Carson
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Aligning critical care interventions with patient goals: A modified Delphi study.

Authors:  Alison E Turnbull; Sarina K Sahetya; Dale M Needham
Journal:  Heart Lung       Date:  2016-09-01       Impact factor: 2.210

7.  A scenario-based, randomized trial of patient values and functional prognosis on intensivist intent to discuss withdrawing life support.

Authors:  Alison E Turnbull; Jenna R Krall; A Parker Ruhl; J Randall Curtis; Scott D Halpern; Bryan M Lau; Dale M Needham
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 7.598

8.  [Communicating with families in the ICU : Background and practical recommendations].

Authors:  C S Hartog; S Jöbges; O Kumpf; U Janssens
Journal:  Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 0.840

9.  Do physicians' beliefs influence treatment options at the end of life?

Authors:  Erin K Kross
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2012-08-11       Impact factor: 17.440

10.  Rationale and Design of the Randomized Evaluation of Default Access to Palliative Services (REDAPS) Trial.

Authors:  Katherine R Courtright; Vanessa Madden; Nicole B Gabler; Elizabeth Cooney; Dylan S Small; Andrea Troxel; David Casarett; Mary Ersek; J Brian Cassel; Lauren Hersch Nicholas; Gabriel Escobar; Sarah H Hill; Dan O'Brien; Mark Vogel; Scott D Halpern
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2016-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.