Literature DB >> 30558662

Patients' primary activities prior to critical illness: how well do clinicians know them and how likely are patients to return to them?

Alexi T Gosset1,2, Michael C Sklar3, Aaron M Delman4, Michael E Detsky2,5,6.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30558662      PMCID: PMC6296083          DOI: 10.1186/s13054-018-2283-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care        ISSN: 1364-8535            Impact factor:   9.097


× No keyword cloud information.
Admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) can make patients feel anonymous and depersonalized [1]. Knowledge of a patient’s primary activity can mitigate the risk of depersonalization by providing insight into a patient’s values, preferences, and overall function. A patient’s primary activity is defined by how they report spending their free time. This information can be used to engage in shared decision-making, ensuring patients receive care that is goal-concordant based on the feasibility of recovering from their critical illness [2]. Therefore, we conducted a prospective observational study to determine if ICU physicians and nurses could identify their patients’ primary activities. Other objectives included determining if patients were able to return to these activities and the probability of patients surviving based on their primary activity. From October 2013 to May 2014 [3], enrolled patients (or their surrogates) were asked to identify their primary activity prior to hospitalization (Table 1). Attending physicians and nurses on admission days 3–6 were asked to identify this activity. Patients were followed to 6 months after enrollment to assess if they had survived and returned to their activities.
Table 1

Activity category and frequency, description, ability to return to activity, and survival

Activity categoryDescription and examplesFull return to activity (%)aDid not fully return to activity (%)bDeceased (%)cUnknown (%)dTotal
EmploymentWork, vocation, or employment status33 (38)26 (30)28 (32)1 (1)e88
StudentInvolves school or academics2 (67)1 (33)0 (0)0 (0)3
Physical activityPhysical exercise or strain (i.e., weight lifting, walking)13 (45)4 (14)12 (41)0 (0)29
HouseholdChores requiring some amount of activity (i.e., cleaning house, shopping)17 (32)10 (19)24 (45)2 (4)53
ActiveInvolves activity but not as main focus (i.e., traveling, fishing)4 (44)1 (11)4 (44)0 (0)e9
SocialEngaging with other people (i.e., family time, visiting friends, therapy)14 (45)2 (6)13 (42)2 (6)31
Active sedentaryNo physical strain but requires active engagement (i.e., arts and crafts, reading)7 (28)1 (4)15 (60)2 (8)25
Passive sedentaryNo physical strain and no active engagement (i.e., watching TV)20 (50)0 (0)17 (43)3 (8)40
Not reportedNo activity listedNANA17 (68)8 (32)25
TotalNA110 (36)45 (15)130 (43)18 (6)303

aFrequency and percentage of patients within each activity category that were alive and fully returned to their primary activity 6 months post-enrollment in the study. All percentages calculated by dividing the frequency by the activity type’s total

bFrequency and percentage of patients within each activity category that were alive but did not fully return to their primary activity 6 months post-enrollment in the study

cFrequency and percentage of patients within each activity category that were deceased 6 months post-enrollment in the study

dFrequency and percentage of patients within each activity category with unknown vital and/or return to pastime status 6 months post-enrollment in the study

ePercentages do not add to 100% due to decimal place rounding

Activity category and frequency, description, ability to return to activity, and survival aFrequency and percentage of patients within each activity category that were alive and fully returned to their primary activity 6 months post-enrollment in the study. All percentages calculated by dividing the frequency by the activity type’s total bFrequency and percentage of patients within each activity category that were alive but did not fully return to their primary activity 6 months post-enrollment in the study cFrequency and percentage of patients within each activity category that were deceased 6 months post-enrollment in the study dFrequency and percentage of patients within each activity category with unknown vital and/or return to pastime status 6 months post-enrollment in the study ePercentages do not add to 100% due to decimal place rounding We found that clinicians had low rates of reporting knowledge of their patients’ primary activities at 13% (38/303) and 12% (35/300) for nurses and physicians, respectively. Patients’ primary activities were reported correctly for 7% (20/303) and 5% (15/300) of patients by nurses and physicians, respectively (Table 1). Among patient reported activities, the most frequent were employment (29%, 88/303) and household work (17%, 53/303). Among survivors 64% (110/173) could perform their primary activity at 6 months, 26% (45/173) could not. For 10% (18/173) of survivors we were unable to confirm if they returned to their primary activity (Table 2).
Table 2

Physician and nurse accuracy in predicting patient primary activities

Physicians (n = 300; %)aNurses (n = 303; %)a
Correctb15 (5)20 (7)
Incorrectc18 (6)13 (4)
No patient responsed2 (1)5 (2)
No clinician responsee265 (88)265 (87)

aTotal number of responses and percentage relative to total patient count

bInstances where clinician and patient primary activity responses agreed

cClinician and patient primary activity responses disagreed

dPatient provided no activity response but the clinician did

eClinician failed to provide an activity response

Physician and nurse accuracy in predicting patient primary activities aTotal number of responses and percentage relative to total patient count bInstances where clinician and patient primary activity responses agreed cClinician and patient primary activity responses disagreed dPatient provided no activity response but the clinician did eClinician failed to provide an activity response We believe that knowing how patients spend their time prior to their illness can help in shared decision-making and ensure the delivery of goal-concordant care [4]. In our study, ICU clinicians rarely reported knowing their patient’s primary activity and were correct in only half of those responses, suggesting that ICU clinicians lack an understanding of their patients’ lives prior to critical illness. This is consistent with previous work that assessed physicians’ knowledge of patients’ broader values [5]. The systematic collection of information related to patients’ values may mitigate the risk of depersonalization. Further work is needed to understand the potential impact of whether knowledge of patient activities leads to improved health outcomes and the delivery of goal-concordant care.

Abbreviations

ICU Intensive care unit
  5 in total

1.  The Practice of Respect in the ICU.

Authors:  Samuel M Brown; Elie Azoulay; Dominique Benoit; Terri Payne Butler; Patricia Folcarelli; Gail Geller; Ronen Rozenblum; Ken Sands; Lauge Sokol-Hessner; Daniel Talmor; Kathleen Turner; Michael D Howell
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 21.405

2.  Physicians' decision-making roles for an acutely unstable critically and terminally ill patient.

Authors:  Jamie Uy; Douglas B White; Deepika Mohan; Robert M Arnold; Amber E Barnato
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 7.598

3.  Patient-centered medicine. A professional evolution.

Authors:  C Laine; F Davidoff
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1996-01-10       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Discriminative Accuracy of Physician and Nurse Predictions for Survival and Functional Outcomes 6 Months After an ICU Admission.

Authors:  Michael E Detsky; Michael O Harhay; Dominique F Bayard; Aaron M Delman; Anna E Buehler; Saida A Kent; Isabella V Ciuffetelli; Elizabeth Cooney; Nicole B Gabler; Sarah J Ratcliffe; Mark E Mikkelsen; Scott D Halpern
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-06-06       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Goal-concordant care in the ICU: a conceptual framework for future research.

Authors:  Alison E Turnbull; Christiane S Hartog
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 17.440

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.