Variability of Prognostic Communication in Critically Ill Neurologic Patients: A Pilot Multicenter Mixed-Methods Study

Limitation of life sustaining therapy in disorders of consciousness: ethics and practice

Clinical conversations surrounding the continuation or limitation of life-sustaining therapies (LLST) are both challenging and tragically necessary for patients with disorders of consciousness (DoC) following severe brain injury. Divergent cultural, philosophical and religious perspectives contribute to vast heterogeneity in clinical approaches to LLST-as reflected in regional differences and inter-clinician variability. Here we provide an ethical analysis of factors that inform LLST decisions among patients with DoC. We begin by introducing the clinical and ethical challenge and clarifying the distinction between withdrawing and withholding life-sustaining therapy. We then describe relevant factors that influence LLST decision-making including diagnostic and prognostic uncertainty, perception of pain, defining a 'good' outcome, and the role of clinicians. In concluding sections, we explore global variation in LLST practices as they pertain to patients with DoC and examine the impact of cultural and religious perspectives on approaches to LLST. Understanding and respecting the cultural and religious perspectives of patients and surrogates is essential to protecting patient autonomy and advancing goal-concordant care during critical moments of medical decision-making involving patients with DoC.

Prognostication in Neurocritical Care

OBJECTIVE

This article synthesizes the current literature on prognostication in neurocritical care, identifies existing challenges, and proposes future research directions to reduce variability and enhance scientific and patient-centered approaches to neuroprognostication.

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

Patients with severe acute brain injury often lack the capacity to make their own medical decisions, leaving surrogate decision makers responsible for life-or-death choices. These decisions heavily rely on clinicians' prognostication, which is still considered an art because of the previous lack of specific guidelines. Consequently, there is significant variability in neuroprognostication practices. This article examines various aspects of neuroprognostication. It explores the cognitive approach to prognostication, highlights the use of statistical modeling such as Bayesian models and machine learning, emphasizes the importance of clinician-family communication during prognostic disclosures, and proposes shared decision making for more patient-centered care.

ESSENTIAL POINTS

This article identifies ongoing challenges in the field and emphasizes the need for future research to ameliorate variability in neuroprognostication. By focusing on scientific methodologies and patient-centered approaches, this research aims to provide guidance and tools that may enhance neuroprognostication in neurocritical care.

Neurocritical Care for Patients With Ischemic Stroke

OBJECTIVE

Management of stroke due to large vessel occlusion (LVO) has undergone unprecedented change in the past decade. Effective treatment with thrombectomy has galvanized the field and led to advancements in all aspects of care. This article provides a comprehensive examination of neurologic intensive care unit (ICU) management of patients with stroke due to LVO. The role of the neurocritical care team in stroke systems of care and the importance of prompt diagnosis, initiation of treatment, and continued monitoring of patients with stroke due to LVO is highlighted.

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

The management of complications commonly associated with stroke due to LVO, including malignant cerebral edema and respiratory failure, are addressed, stressing the importance of early identification and aggressive treatment in mitigating negative effects on patients' prognoses. In the realm of medical management, this article discusses various medical therapies, including antithrombotic therapy, blood pressure management, and glucose control, outlining evidence-based strategies for optimizing patient outcomes. It further emphasizes the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to provide a comprehensive care model. Lastly, the critical aspect of family communication and prognostication in the neurologic ICU is addressed.

ESSENTIAL POINTS

This article emphasizes the multidimensional aspects of neurocritical care in treating patients with stroke due to LVO.

Mastering the brain in critical conditions: an update

Acute brain injuries, such as traumatic brain injury and ischemic and hemorragic stroke, are a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. While characterized by clearly distict primary events-vascular damage in strokes and biomechanical damage in traumatic brain injuries-they share common secondary injury mechanisms influencing long-term outcomes. Growing evidence suggests that a more personalized approach to optimize energy substrate delivery to the injured brain and prognosticate towards families could be beneficial. In this context, continuous invasive and/or non-invasive neuromonitoring, together with clinical evaluation and neuroimaging to support strategies that optimize cerebral blood flow and metabolic delivery, as well as approaches to neuroprognostication are gaining interest. Recently, the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine organized a 2-day course focused on a practical case-based clinical approach of acute brain-injured patients in different scenarios and on future perspectives to advance the management of this population. The aim of this manuscript is to update clinicians dealing with acute brain injured patients in the intensive care unit, describing current knowledge and clinical practice based on the insights presented during this course.

Prevalence and predictors of shared decision-making in goals-of-care clinician-family meetings for critically ill neurologic patients: a multi-center mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making is a joint process where patients, or their surrogates, and clinicians make health choices based on evidence and preferences. We aimed to determine the extent and predictors of shared decision-making for goals-of-care discussions for critically ill neurological patients, which is crucial for patient-goal-concordant care but currently unknown.

METHODS

We analyzed 72 audio-recorded routine clinician-family meetings during which goals-of-care were discussed from seven US hospitals. These occurred for 67 patients with 72 surrogates and 29 clinicians; one hospital provided 49/72 (68%) of the recordings. Using a previously validated 10-element shared decision-making instrument, we quantified the extent of shared decision-making in each meeting. We measured clinicians' and surrogates' characteristics and prognostic estimates for the patient's hospital survival and 6-month independent function using post-meeting questionnaires. We calculated clinician-family prognostic discordance, defined as ≥ 20% absolute difference between the clinician's and surrogate's estimates. We applied mixed-effects regression to identify independent associations with greater shared decision-making.

RESULTS

The median shared decision-making score was 7 (IQR 5-8). Only 6% of meetings contained all 10 shared decision-making elements. The most common elements were "discussing uncertainty"(89%) and "assessing family understanding"(86%); least frequent elements were "assessing the need for input from others"(36%) and "eliciting the context of the decision"(33%). Clinician-family prognostic discordance was present in 60% for hospital survival and 45% for 6-month independent function. Univariate analyses indicated associations between greater shared decision-making and younger clinician age, fewer years in practice, specialty (medical-surgical critical care > internal medicine > neurocritical care > other > trauma surgery), and higher clinician-family prognostic discordance for hospital survival. After adjustment, only higher clinician-family prognostic discordance for hospital survival remained independently associated with greater shared decision-making (p = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

Fewer than 1 in 10 goals-of-care clinician-family meetings for critically ill neurological patients contained all shared decision-making elements. Our findings highlight gaps in shared decision-making. Interventions promoting shared decision-making for high-stakes decisions in these patients may increase patient-value congruent care; future studies should also examine whether they will affect decision quality and surrogates' health outcomes.

Cognitive Biases and Shared Decision Making in Acute Brain Injury

Many patients hospitalized after severe acute brain injury are comatose and require life-sustaining therapies. Some of these patients make favorable recoveries with continued intensive care, while others do not. In addition to providing medical care, clinicians must guide surrogate decision makers through high-stakes, emotionally charged decisions about whether to continue life-sustaining therapies. These consultations require clinicians first to assess a patient's likelihood of recovery given continued life-sustaining therapies (i.e., prognosticate), then to communicate that prediction to surrogates, and, finally, to elicit and interpret the patient's preferences. At each step, both clinicians and surrogates are vulnerable to flawed decision making. Clinicians can be imprecise, biased, and overconfident when prognosticating after brain injury. Surrogates can misperceive the choice and misunderstand or misrepresent a patient's wishes, which may never have been communicated clearly. These biases can undermine the ability to reach choices congruent with patients' preferences through shared decision making (SDM). Decision science has extensively studied these biases. In this article, we apply that research to improving SDM for patients who are comatose after acute brain injury. After introducing SDM and the medical context, we describe principal decision science results as they relate to neurologic prognostication and end-of-life decisions, by both clinicians and surrogates. Based on research regarding general processes that can produce imprecise, biased, and overconfident prognoses, we propose interventions that could improve SDM, supporting clinicians and surrogates in making these challenging decisions.

Futility and Shared Decision-Making

Medical futility is an ancient and yet consistent challenge in clinical medicine. The means of balancing conflicting priorities and stakeholders' preferences has changed as much as the science that powers the understanding and treatment of disease. The introduction of patient self-determination and choice in medical decision-making shifted the locus of power in the physician-patient relationship but did not obviate the physician's responsibilities to provide benefit and prevent harm. As we have refined the process in time, new paradigms, specialists, and tools have been developed to help navigate the ever-changing landscape.

Prognostic Language in Critical Neurologic Illness: A Multicenter Mixed-Methods Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

There are no evidence-based guidelines for discussing prognosis in critical neurologic illness, but in general, experts recommend that clinicians communicate prognosis using estimates, such as numerical or qualitative expressions of risk. Little is known about how real-world clinicians communicate prognosis in critical neurologic illness. Our primary objective was to characterize prognostic language clinicians used in critical neurologic illness. We additionally explored whether prognostic language differed between prognostic domains (e.g., survival, cognition).

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter cross-sectional mixed-methods study analyzing deidentified transcripts of audio-recorded clinician-family meetings for patients with neurologic illness requiring intensive care (e.g., intracerebral hemorrhage, traumatic brain injury, severe stroke) from 7 US centers. Two coders assigned codes for prognostic language type and domain of prognosis to each clinician prognostic statement. Prognostic language was coded as probabilistic (estimating the likelihood of an outcome occurring, e.g., "80% survival"; "She'll probably survive") or nonprobabilistic (characterizing outcomes without offering likelihood; e.g., "She may not survive"). We applied univariate and multivariate binomial logistic regression to examine independent associations between prognostic language and domain of prognosis.

RESULTS

We analyzed 43 clinician-family meetings for 39 patients with 78 surrogates and 27 clinicians. Clinicians made 512 statements about survival (median 0/meeting [interquartile range (IQR) 0-2]), physical function (median 2 [IQR 0-7]), cognition (median 2 [IQR 0-6]), and overall recovery (median 2 [IQR 1-4]). Most statements were nonprobabilistic (316/512 [62%]); 10 of 512 prognostic statements (2%) offered numeric estimates; and 21% (9/43) of family meetings only contained nonprobabilistic language. Compared with statements about cognition, statements about survival (odds ratio [OR] 2.50, 95% CI 1.01-6.18, p = 0.048) and physical function (OR 3.22, 95% 1.77-5.86, p < 0.001) were more frequently probabilistic. Statements about physical function were less likely to be uncertainty-based than statements about cognition (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.17-0.66, p = 0.002).

DISCUSSION

Clinicians preferred not to use estimates (either numeric or qualitative) when discussing critical neurologic illness prognosis, especially when they discussed cognitive outcomes. These findings may inform interventions to improve prognostic communication in critical neurologic illness.

Prognostic Discussion for Infants with Neurologic Conditions: Qualitative Analysis of Family Conferences

OBJECTIVE

We characterize the content and role of prognostic discussion for infants with neurologic conditions.

METHODS

In this descriptive qualitative study, we prospectively enrolled infants (age < 1 year) in the intensive care unit with a neurologic condition anticipated to have ≥1 family conference about prognosis or goals of care. We audiorecorded family conferences as they occurred. We used a rapid-cycle qualitative approach to identify and refine themes.

RESULTS

Forty infants and 61 parents were enrolled; 68 family conferences occurred for 24 infants. The majority of infant cases (n = 23/24, 96%) and conferences (n = 64/68, 94%) included discussion of neurologic prognosis. Common infant diagnoses included prematurity (n = 12, 52%), genetic conditions (n = 9, 35%), and brain malformations (n = 7, 30%). We identified 2 themes relating to the characterization of the infant's prognosis: (1) predictions of impairment and (2) rationale for prognostic predictions. We identified 3 themes characterizing the role of prognostic discussion: (1) aligning parent and clinician understanding of infant outcome, (2) influencing decision-making, and (3) preparing for life at home. We identified 2 themes characterizing discussion of prognostic uncertainty: (1) multilayered types of uncertainty and (2) holding space for hope alongside uncertainty.

INTERPRETATION

In this cohort of infants with neurologic conditions and their parents, we identified salient themes characterizing the content and role of discussion about neurologic outcome. Our findings highlight that prognostic discussion focuses on anticipated impairments, informs decision-making, and helps families prepare for home life. Future work should characterize whether these findings align with parent preferences for prognostic disclosure. ANN NEUROL 2022;92:699-709.

Prognostication and shared decision making in neurocritical care

Prognostication is crucial in the neurological intensive care unit (neuroICU). Patients with severe acute brain injury (SABI) are unable to make their own decisions because of the insult itself or sedation needs. Surrogate decision makers, usually family members, must make decisions on the patient's behalf. However, many are unprepared for their role as surrogates owing to the sudden and unexpected nature of SABI. Surrogates rely on clinicians in the neuroICU to provide them with an outlook (prognosis) with which to make substituted judgments and decide on treatments and goals of care on behalf of the patient. Therefore, how a prognostic estimate is derived, and then communicated, is extremely important. Prognostication in the neuroICU is highly variable between clinicians and institutions, and evidence based guidelines are lacking. Shared decision making (SDM), where surrogates and clinicians arrive together at an individualized decision based on patient values and preferences, has been proposed as an opportunity to improve clinician-family communication and ensure that patients receive treatments they would choose. This review outlines the importance and current challenges of prognostication in the neuroICU and how prognostication and SDM intersect, based on relevant research and expert opinion.