INTRODUCTION: Decision-making regarding admission to UK intensive care units is challenging. Demand for beds exceeds capacity, yet the need to provide emergency cover creates pressure to build redundancy into the system. Guidelines to aid clinical decision-making are outdated, resulting in an over-reliance on professional judgement. Although clinicians are highly skilled, there is variability in intensive care unit decision-making, especially at the inter-specialty level wherein cognitive biases contribute to disagreement. METHOD: This research is the first to explore intensive care unit referral and admission decision-making using the Critical Decision Method interviewing technique. We interviewed intensive care unit (n = 9) and non-intensive care unit (n = 6) consultants about a challenging referral they had dealt with in the past where there was disagreement about the patient's suitability for intensive care unit. RESULTS: We present: (i) a description of the referral pathway; (ii) challenges that appear to derail referrals (i.e. process issues, decision biases, inherent stressors, post-decision consequences) and (iii) potential solutions to improve this process. DISCUSSION: This research provides a foundation upon which interventions to improve inter-specialty decision-making can be based.
INTRODUCTION: Decision-making regarding admission to UK intensive care units is challenging. Demand for beds exceeds capacity, yet the need to provide emergency cover creates pressure to build redundancy into the system. Guidelines to aid clinical decision-making are outdated, resulting in an over-reliance on professional judgement. Although clinicians are highly skilled, there is variability in intensive care unit decision-making, especially at the inter-specialty level wherein cognitive biases contribute to disagreement. METHOD: This research is the first to explore intensive care unit referral and admission decision-making using the Critical Decision Method interviewing technique. We interviewed intensive care unit (n = 9) and non-intensive care unit (n = 6) consultants about a challenging referral they had dealt with in the past where there was disagreement about the patient's suitability for intensive care unit. RESULTS: We present: (i) a description of the referral pathway; (ii) challenges that appear to derail referrals (i.e. process issues, decision biases, inherent stressors, post-decision consequences) and (iii) potential solutions to improve this process. DISCUSSION: This research provides a foundation upon which interventions to improve inter-specialty decision-making can be based.
Authors: Lluís Blanch; Fayez François Abillama; Pravin Amin; Michael Christian; Gavin M Joynt; John Myburgh; Joseph L Nates; Paolo Pelosi; Charles Sprung; Arzu Topeli; Jean-Louis Vincent; Susan Yeager; Janice Zimmerman Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2016-06-22 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: Linda H Aiken; Douglas M Sloane; Luk Bruyneel; Koen Van den Heede; Peter Griffiths; Reinhard Busse; Marianna Diomidous; Juha Kinnunen; Maria Kózka; Emmanuel Lesaffre; Matthew D McHugh; M T Moreno-Casbas; Anne Marie Rafferty; Rene Schwendimann; P Anne Scott; Carol Tishelman; Theo van Achterberg; Walter Sermeus Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-02-26 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Sylvia Brinkman; Ferishta Bakhshi-Raiez; Ameen Abu-Hanna; Evert de Jonge; Nicolette F de Keizer Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Frederik J van der Sluis; Cornelis Slagt; Barbara Liebman; Jan Beute; Jan W R Mulder; Alexander F Engel Journal: BMC Surg Date: 2011-08-23 Impact factor: 2.102