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

Clinicians' Use of Choice Framing in ICU Family Meetings

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the frequency and patterns of clinicians' use of choice frames when discussing preference-sensitive care with surrogate decision-makers in the ICU.

DESIGN

Secondary sequential content analysis.

SETTING

One hundred one audio-recorded and transcribed conferences between surrogates and clinicians of incapacitated, critically ill adults from a prospective, multicenter cohort study.

SUBJECTS

Surrogate decision-makers and clinicians.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Four coders identified preference-sensitive decision episodes addressed in the meetings, including topics such as mechanical ventilation, renal replacement, and overall goals of care. Prior critical care literature provided specific topics identified as preference-sensitive specific to the critical care context. Coders then examined each decision episode for the types of choice frames used by clinicians. The choice frames were selected a priori based on decision science literature. In total, there were 202 decision episodes across the 101 transcripts, with 20.3% of the decision episodes discussing mechanical ventilation, 19.3% overall goals of care, 14.4% renal replacement therapy, 14.4% post-discharge care (i.e., discharge location such as a skilled nursing facility), and the remaining 32.1% other topics. Clinicians used default framing, in which an option is presented that will be carried out if another option is not actively chosen, more frequently than any other choice frame (127 or 62.9% of decision episodes). Clinicians presented a polar interrogative, or a "yes or no question" to accept or reject a specific care choice, in 43 (21.3%) decision episodes. Clinicians more frequently presented options emphasizing both potential losses and gains rather than either in isolation.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians frequently use default framing and polar questions when discussing preference-sensitive choices with surrogate decision-makers, which are known to be powerful nudges. Future work should focus on designing interventions promoting the informed use of these and the other most common choice frames used by practicing clinicians.

Understanding the provision of goal-concordant care in the intensive care unit: A sequential two-phase qualitative descriptive study

BACKGROUND

Goal-concordant care in intensive care is care that aligns with the patient's expressed goals, values, preferences and beliefs. Communication and shared decision-making are key to ensuring goal-concordant care.

AIMS

The aims of his study were to explore (i) critical care clinicians' perspectives on how patient goals of care were communicated between clinicians, patients, and family in the intensive care unit; (ii) critical care nurses' role in this process; and (iii) how goals of care were used to guide care.

METHOD

Sequential two-phase qualitative descriptive design. Data were collected from February to June 2022 in a level-3 intensive care unit in a private hospital in Melbourne, Australia. In Phase One, individual interviews were conducted with critical care nurse participants (n = 11). In Phase Two, the findings were presented to senior clinical leaders (n = 2) to build a more comprehensive understanding. Data were analysed using Braun and Clarke's six step reflexive thematic analysis.

FINDINGS

There was poor consensus on the term 'goals of care', with some participants referring to daily treatment goals or treatment limitations and others to patients' wishes and expectations beyond the ICU. Critical care nurses perceived themselves as information brokers and patient advocates responsible for ensuring patient goals of care were respected, but engaging in goals-of-care conversations was challenging. A lack of role clarity, poor team communication, and inadequate processes to communicate patient goals impeded goal-concordant care. Senior clinical leaders affirmed these views, emphasising the need to utilise critical care nurses' insight for practical solutions to improve patient care.

CONCLUSIONS

Clarity in both, the term 'goals of care' and the critical care nurses' role in these conversations, are the essential first steps to ensuring patients' values, preferences, and beliefs to guide shared-decision-making and goal-concordant care. Improved verbal and written communication that is inclusive of all members of the treating team is key to addressing these issues.

Next-generation tourniquet: Recommendations for future capabilities and design requirements

BACKGROUND

Advances in tourniquet development must meet new military needs for future large-scale combat operations or civilian mass casualty scenarios. This includes the potential use of engineering and automation technologies to provide advanced tourniquet features. A comprehensive set of design capabilities and requirements for an intelligent or smart tourniquet needed to meet the challenges currently does not exist. The goal of this project was to identify key features and capabilities that should be considered for the development of next-generation tourniquets.

METHODS

We used a modified Delphi consensus technique to survey a panel of 34 tourniquet subject matter experts to rate various statements and potential design characteristics relevant to tourniquets systems and their use scenarios. Three iterative rounds of surveys were held, followed by virtual working group meetings, to determine importance or agreement with any given statement. We used a tiered consensus system to determine final agreement over key features that were viewed as important or unimportant features or capabilities. This information was used to refine and clarify the necessary tourniquet design features and adjust questions for the following surveys.

RESULTS

Key features and capabilities of various were agreed upon by the panelists when consensus was reached. Some tourniquet features that were agreed upon included but are not limited to: Capable of being used longer than 2 hours, applied and monitored by anyone, data displays, semiautomated capabilities with inherent overrides, automated monitoring with notifications and alerts, and provide recommended actions.

CONCLUSION

We were able to identify key tourniquet features that will be important for future device development. These consensus results can guide future inventors, researchers, and manufacturers to develop a portfolio of next-generation tourniquets for enhancing the capabilities of a prehospital medical provider.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level V.

Family surrogate decision-makers' perspectives in decision-making of patients with disorders of consciousness

To explore and describe the experience of decision-making for patients with disorders of consciousness (DOC) from the perspectives of family surrogate decision-makers. A total of 21 face-to-face interviews with family surrogate decision-makers from a tertiary hospital in Shanghai, China were conducted from January 2021 to February 2021. Thematic analysis was used for data analysis. Four main themes were identified and were included in this study: (1) a tough choice between life and dignity, (2) a major responsibility for patient's voice, (3) complex considerations between ethics and morals, and (4) the importance of realistic basis. The surrogate decision-making of DOC patients in China has been affected by the Chinese cultural context and several practical roots. And the family surrogate decision-makers shared their experiences of trade-offs during the decision-making process. Moreover, family surrogate decision-makers realized their serious responsibility to make a decision that would be in the best interest of DOC patients.

For which decisions is Shared Decision Making considered appropriate? - A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To identify decision characteristics for which SDM authors deem SDM appropriate or not, and what arguments are used.

METHODS

We applied two search strategies: we included SDM models from an earlier review (strategy 1) and conducted a new search in eight databases to include papers other than describing an SDM model, such as original research, opinion papers and reviews (strategy 2).

RESULTS

From the 92 included papers, we identified 18 decision characteristics for which authors deemed SDM appropriate, including preference-sensitive, equipoise and decisions where patient commitment is needed in implementing the decision. SDM authors indicated limits to SDM, especially when there are immediate life-saving measures needed. We identified four decision characteristics on which authors of different papers disagreed on whether or not SDM is appropriate.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this review show the broad range of decision characteristics for which authors deem SDM appropriate, the ambiguity of some, and potential limits of SDM.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The findings can stimulate clinicians to (re)consider pursuing SDM in situations in which they did not before. Additionally, it can inform SDM campaigns and educational programs as it shows for which decision situations SDM might be more or less challenging to practice.

Protocol for a mixed method acceptability evaluation of a codesigned bundled COmmunication intervention for use in the adult ICU during the COVID-19 PandEmic: the COPE study

INTRODUCTION

Patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation via an artificial airway experience sudden voicelessness placing them at risk for adverse outcomes and increasing provider workload. Infection control precautions during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the use of personal protective equipment (eg, gloves, masks, etc), patient isolation, and visitor restrictions may exacerbate communication difficulty. The objective of this study is to evaluate the acceptability of a codesigned communication intervention for use in the adult intensive care unit when infection control precautions such as those used during COVID-19 are required.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This three-phased, prospective study will take place in a medical surgical ICU in a community teaching hospital in Toronto. Participants will include ICU healthcare providers, adult patients and their family members. Qualitative interviews (target n: 20-25) will explore participant perceptions of the barriers to and facilitators for supporting patient communication in the adult ICU in the context of COVID-19 and infection control precautions (phase 1). Using principles of codesign, a stakeholder advisory council of 8-10 participants will iteratively produce an intervention (phase 2). The codesigned intervention will then be implemented and undergo a mixed method acceptability evaluation in the study setting (phase 3). Acceptability, feasibility and appropriateness will be evaluated using validated measures (target n: 60-65). Follow-up semistructured interviews will be analysed using the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA). The primary outcomes of this study will be acceptability ratings and descriptions of a codesigned COmmunication intervention for use during and beyond the COVID-19 PandEmic.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study protocol has been reviewed, and ethics approval was obtained from the Michael Garron Hospital. Results will be made available to healthcare providers in the study setting throughout the study and through publications and conference presentations.

Coming to consensus: the Delphi technique

Delphi techniques are used in health care and nursing to systematically bring together explicit and implicit knowledge from experts with a research or practical background, often with the goal of reaching a group consensus. Consensus standards and findings are important for promoting the exchange of information and ideas on an interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary basis, and for guaranteeing comparable procedures in diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. Yet, the development of consensus standards using Delphi techniques is challenging because it is dependent on the willingness of experts to participate and the statistical definition of consensus.

Decision-making among the substitute decision makers in intensive care units: An investigation of decision control preferences and decisional conflicts

AIMS

To explore decision control preferences and decisional conflicts and to analyse their association among the surrogate decision makers in the intensive care unit.

DESIGN

The study carried out a cross-sectional survey among the surrogates.

METHODS

The participants were 115 surrogate decision makers of critical patients, from August to September 2019. A Chi-squared test and logistic regression were used to assess decision control preferences and decisional conflicts, and Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was employed to examine their association.

RESULTS

Of the 115 surrogate decision makers, 51.3% preferred a collaborative role, and 63.48% were somewhat unsure about making decisions. Logistic regression analysis identified decision control preferences was associated with surrogates' age, education level, and personality traits, while decisional conflicts was associated with surrogates' age, education level, character, medical expense burden, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-II score. Cohen's kappa statistics showed a bad concordance of decision-making expectations and actuality, with kappa values of 0.158 (p < .05). Wherein surrogates who experienced discordance between their preferred and actual roles, have relatively higher decisional conflicts.

CONCLUSION

This study identified individual differences of surrogate decision makers in decision control preferences and decisional conflicts. These results imply that incorporation of the individual decision preferences and communication styles into care plans is an important first step to develop high quality decision support.

IMPACT

This research is a contribution to the limited study on decision control preferences and decisional conflicts among surrogate decision makers of critically ill patients. Moreover based on the investigation of understanding the status and related factors of decision preferences and decisional conflicts set the stage for developing effective decision support interventions.

Barriers to and facilitators for the use of augmentative and alternative communication and voice restorative strategies for adults with an advanced airway in the intensive care unit: A scoping review

PURPOSE

To identify barriers and facilitators for the use of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) and voice restorative strategies for adult patients with an advanced airway in the intensive care unit (ICU).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Scoping review searching five databases between 1990 and 2019. We screened 13, 167 citations and included all study types reporting barriers and/or facilitators to using communication strategies in an ICU setting. Two authors independently extracted and coded reported barriers and facilitators to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) domains.

RESULTS

Of the 44 studies meeting inclusion criteria 18 (44%) used qualitative, 18 (44%) used quantitative, and 8 (18%) used mixed methods. In total, 39 unique barriers and 46 unique facilitators were identified and coded to the domains of the TDF. Barriers were most frequently coded to the Skills, Environmental Context and Resources, and Emotion domains. Facilitators were most frequently coded to Reinforcement, Environmental Context and Resources, and Social and Professional Roles/Identity domains. Thematic synthesis produced four potentially modifiable factors: context, emotional support, training, and decisional algorithms.

CONCLUSIONS

Identified barriers (skills, environment, resources, emotions) and facilitators (reinforcement, resources, roles) to ICU communication strategy use in the literature may be modified through formal training and role support.

Barriers to and facilitators for use of augmentative and alternative communication and voice restorative devices in the adult intensive care unit: a scoping review protocol

BACKGROUND

Mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) experience profound communication impairment, placing them at risk for poor physical and psychological outcomes. Patient communication strategies such as augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) and voice restorative devices are recommended to facilitate communication. These strategies, however, are inconsistently adopted in ICU practice signaling utilization barriers. Our objective is to map and synthesize the current evidence-base for stakeholder-reported barriers and facilitators to patient communication strategy utilization for adults with an advanced airway in the ICU.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will use Arskey and O'Malley's recommended methods to conduct a scoping review using a rapid review framework to streamline the process. A single reviewer will conduct a search and an initial screen of titles and abstracts from five electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature [CINAHL], and PsychInfo) from 1990 to present to identify English language peer-reviewed studies. Subsequently, two reviewers will independently screen a shorter list of studies for inclusion. We will also search the reference lists of eligible studies. Two reviewers will independently extract study characteristics, communication strategy, and stakeholder reported barriers and facilitators. We will code and categorize the extracted barriers and facilitators according to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), an integrative framework of behavior change.

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge, this will be the first scoping review to map and synthesize reported barriers and facilitators to communication strategy utilization in the adult ICU using a theoretical framework. The results of this scoping review will help to identify trends and gaps in the current evidence-base and support recommendations for improving patient-centered practice, policy, and research related to successfully establishing ICU patient communication.

More than one in three proxies do not know their loved one's current code status: An observational study in a Maryland ICU

Rationale

The majority of ICU patients lack decision-making capacity at some point during their ICU stay. However the extent to which proxy decision-makers are engaged in decisions about their patient’s care is challenging to quantify.

Objectives

To assess 1)whether proxies know their patient’s actual code status as recorded in the electronic medical record (EMR), and 2)whether code status orders reflect ICU patient preferences as reported by proxy decision-makers.

Methods

We enrolled proxy decision-makers for 96 days starting January 4, 2016. Proxies were asked about the patient’s goals of care, preferred code status, and actual code status. Responses were compared to code status orders in the EMR at the time of interview. Characteristics of patients and proxies who correctly vs incorrectly identified actual code status were compared, as were characteristics of proxies who reported a preferred code status that did vs did not match actual code status.

Measurements and main results

Among 111 proxies, 42 (38%) were incorrect or unsure about the patient’s actual code status and those who were correct vs. incorrect or unsure were similar in age, race, and years of education (P>0.20 for all comparisons). Twenty-nine percent reported a preferred code status that did not match the patient’s code status in the EMR. Matching preferred and actual code status was not associated with a patient’s age, gender, income, admission diagnosis, or subsequent in-hospital mortality or with proxy age, gender, race, education level, or relation to the patient (P>0.20 for all comparisons).

Conclusions

More than 1 in 3 proxies is incorrect or unsure about their patient’s actual code status and more than 1 in 4 proxies reported that a preferred code status that did not match orders in the EMR. Proxy age, race, gender and education level were not associated with correctly identifying code status or code status concordance.

Death in Trauma: The Role of the ACNP in Patient Advocacy and Familial Support in End-of-Life Care Decision-Making

The trauma acute care nurse practitioner (ACNP) participates in the care of critically-ill patients by utilizing his or her advanced clinical skills at the bedside and through communication with the interdisciplinary team, the patient, and the patient's family. Although the incidence of morbidity is decreasing in trauma, death can occur shortly after arrival to hospital, or in the days after initial injury, leading to the need for the unexpected conversation of end-of-life wishes with a patient or the patient's family. It is within the scope of the ACNP to facilitate these conversations, and it is recommended that ACNPs engage patients and their families in these conversations for overall improved patient outcomes. Many techniques exist to aid in this difficult decision-making process and may be useful to the trauma ACNP when having end-of-life discussions.

Inter-Rater Agreement of Intensivists Evaluating the Goal Concordance of Preference-Sensitive ICU Interventions

CONTEXT

Goal-concordant care has been identified as an important outcome of advance care planning and shared decision-making initiatives. However, validated methods for measuring goal concordance are needed.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the inter-rater reliability of senior critical care fellows rating the goal concordance of preference-sensitive interventions performed in intensive care units (ICUs) while considering patient-specific circumstances as described in a previously proposed methodology.

METHODS

We identified ICU patients receiving preference-sensitive interventions in three adult ICUs at Johns Hopkins Hospital. A simulated cohort was created by randomly assigning each patient one of 10 sets of goals and preferences about limiting life support. Critical care fellows then independently reviewed patient charts and answered two questions: 1) Is this patient's goal achievable? and 2) Will performing this intervention help achieve the patient's goal? When the answer to both questions was yes, the intervention was rated as goal concordant. Inter-rater agreement was summarized by estimating intraclass correlation coefficient using mixed-effects models.

RESULTS

Six raters reviewed the charts of 201 patients. Interventions were rated as goal concordant 22%-92% of the time depending on the patient's goal-limitation combination. Percent agreement between pairs of raters ranged from 59% to 86%. The intraclass correlation coefficient for ratings of goal concordance was 0.50 (95% CI 0.31-0.69) and was robust to patient age, gender, ICU, severity of illness, and lengths of stay.

CONCLUSION

Inter-rater agreement between intensivists using a standardized methodology to evaluate the goal concordance of preference-sensitive ICU interventions was moderate. Further testing is needed before this methodology can be recommended as a clinical research outcome.

Characteristics of Physician Empathetic Statements During Pediatric Intensive Care Conferences With Family Members: A Qualitative Study

IMPORTANCE

Pediatric intensive care unit care conferences often involve high-stakes decisions regarding critically ill children, resulting in strong family emotions. Families often report the need for physician empathy.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the characteristics of physician empathetic statements during pediatric intensive care unit care conferences.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this single-center, cross-sectional, qualitative phenomenology study, 68 transcripts of audio-recorded care conferences were analyzed from an urban, quaternary medical center from January 3, 2013, to January 5, 2017. Thirty physicians and 179 family members of 68 children participated in care conferences. Data analysis was conducted from June 5, 2017, to October 12, 2017.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

A qualitative thematic analysis was conducted to code physician empathetic statements and family's responses to these statements. Empathetic statements were classified using the previously published NURSE pneumonic (naming, understanding, respecting, supporting, exploring) and coded as unburied (statement followed by a pause allowing the family time to respond) or buried (empathetic statement encased in medical talk or terminated with a closed-ended statement). Family responses were categorized into 3 themes: alliance (emotion continued), cognitive (medical talk), or none. Missed opportunities for physicians to respond with empathy were identified.

RESULTS

Thirty physicians participated, of whom 13 (43%) were male, 24 (80%) were white, 24 (80%) had more than 5 years of practice, 10 (33%) specialized in critical care, and 7 (23%) specialized in hematology/oncology. Within 68 care conferences, physicians recognized families' emotional cues 74% of the time, making 364 empathetic statements. Of these statements, 224 (61.5%) were unburied and 140 (38.5%) were buried. Buried statements were most commonly followed by medical talk (133 [95.0%]). Unburied empathetic statements were associated with alliance responses from the family 71.4% of the time compared with 12.1% of the time when the statement was buried (odds ratio, 18; 95% CI, 10.1-32.4; P < .001). Physicians missed an opportunity to address emotion 26% of the time, with at least 1 missed opportunity occurring in 53 conferences (78%). Physicians attended to all family emotions in only 5 conferences (7%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this analysis, physicians responded with empathy frequently, but responses were buried within other pieces of medical data or missed entirely in nearly one-third of conferences. When physicians responded using unburied empathetic statements and allowed time for family members to respond, they were more likely to learn important information about the family's fears, values, and motivations.

A survey of Delphi panelists after core outcome set development revealed positive feedback and methods to facilitate panel member participation

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to elicit feedback on consensus methodology used for core outcome set (COS) development.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

An online survey of international Delphi panelists participating in a recent COS for clinical research studies evaluating acute respiratory failure (ARF) survivors was conducted. Panelists represented 14 countries (56% outside the United States).

RESULTS

Seventy (92%) panelists completed the survey, including 32 researchers, 19 professional association representatives, 4 research funding representatives, and 15 ARF survivors/caregiver members. Among respondents, 91% reported that the time required to participate was appropriate and 96% were not bothered by reminders for timely response. Attributes of measurement instruments and voting results from previous rounds were evaluated differently across stakeholder groups. When measurement properties were explained in the stem of the survey question, 59 (84%) panelists (including 73% of survivors/families) correctly interpreted information about an instrument's reliability. Without a reminder in the stem, only 20 (29%) panelists (including 38% of researchers) correctly identified properties of a COS.

CONCLUSION

This international Delphi panel, including >20% patients/caregivers, favorably reported on feasibility of the methodology. Providing all panelists pertinent information/reminders about the project's objective at each voting round is important to informed decision making across all stakeholder groups.

Core Domains for Clinical Research in Acute Respiratory Failure Survivors: An International Modified Delphi Consensus Study

OBJECTIVES

To identify the "core domains" (i.e., patient outcomes, health-related conditions, or aspects of health) that relevant stakeholders agree are essential to assess in all clinical research studies evaluating the outcomes of acute respiratory failure survivors after hospital discharge.

DESIGN

A two-round consensus process, using a modified Delphi methodology, with participants from 16 countries, including patient and caregiver representatives. Prior to voting, participants were asked to review 1) results from surveys of clinical researchers, acute respiratory failure survivors, and caregivers that rated the importance of 19 preliminary outcome domains and 2) results from a qualitative study of acute respiratory failure survivors' outcomes after hospital discharge, as related to the 19 preliminary outcome domains. Participants also were asked to suggest any additional potential domains for evaluation in the first Delphi survey.

SETTING

Web-based surveys of participants representing four stakeholder groups relevant to clinical research evaluating postdischarge outcomes of acute respiratory failure survivors: clinical researchers, clinicians, patients and caregivers, and U.S. federal research funding organizations.

SUBJECTS

None.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Survey response rates were 97% and 99% in round 1 and round 2, respectively. There were seven domains that met the a priori consensus criteria to be designated as core domains: physical function, cognition, mental health, survival, pulmonary function, pain, and muscle and/or nerve function.

CONCLUSIONS

This study generated a consensus-based list of core domains that should be assessed in all clinical research studies evaluating acute respiratory failure survivors after hospital discharge. Identifying appropriate measurement instruments to assess these core domains is an important next step toward developing a set of core outcome measures for this field of research.