Escalation of Commitment in the Surgical ICU:

Cognitive Bias and Dissonance in Surgical Practice: A Narrative Review

A cognitive bias describes "shortcuts" subconsciously applied to new scenarios to simplify decision-making. Unintentional introduction of cognitive bias in surgery may result in surgical diagnostic error that leads to delayed surgical care, unnecessary procedures, intraoperative complications, and delayed recognition of postoperative complications. Data suggest that surgical error secondary to the introduction of cognitive bias results in significant harm. Thus, debiasing is a growing area of research which urges practitioners to deliberately slow decision-making to reduce the effects of cognitive bias.

What is appropriate care? A qualitative study into the perceptions of healthcare professionals in Flemish university hospital intensive care units

Aim

This study examines when healthcare professionals consider intensive care as appropriate care.

Background

Despite attempts to conceptualize appropriate care in prior research, there is a lack of insight into its meaning and implementation in practice. This is an important issue because healthcare professionals as well as patients and relatives report inappropriate care in the intensive care unit (ICU) on a regular basis.

Methods

A qualitative study was designed, based on principles of grounded theory. Seventeen semi-structured interviews were conducted with nurses, doctors and doctors in training from three Flemish university hospitals. Analyses followed the Quagol method; insights were gained by means of the constant comparative method.

Results

Healthcare professionals described appropriate care as socially sustainable care, high-quality care, patient-oriented care, dignified care and meaningful care. They considered it important that care is not only proportional to the expected survival and quality of life of the patient and in line with the patient's or relatives' wishes, but also that the pursuit of the care goals is proportional to the patient's suffering.Although healthcare professionals indicated the same elements of appropriate care, they were defined and interpreted in individual and therefore different ways. This diversity lies at the basis of fields of tension and frustrations among healthcare professionals.

Conclusion

Appropriate care is defined and interpreted in individual and therefore different ways. In order to decide which type of care is appropriate for a specific patient, a process of open and constructive communication in a team is recommended.

Changes in Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment in Patients Requiring Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation

Background: Growing numbers of acute critical illness survivors experience chronic critical illness (CCI) marked by prolonged dependence on life support, delirium, and/or disability. There is minimal recent data on treatment limitations in CCI. Objectives: To evaluate the natural history of changes in orders for life-sustaining treatment (OLST) in patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. Design: Retrospective cohort study of 410 patients who received tracheostomy in an intensive care unit for prolonged respiratory failure. Results: Three hundred twenty-four patients had one OLST throughout the admission, with no limitations on prearrest life-sustaining treatment or cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The 86 patients who underwent at least one change in OLST were older, had longer admissions, were more likely to be deceased at hospital discharge, and were more likely to have received specialty palliative care. Thirty percent of OLST changes occurred in the last week of admission. Conclusions: OLST occur infrequently and late in patients with CCI.

The intersection of prognostication and code status in patients with severe brain injury

Accurately estimating the prognosis of brain injury patients can be difficult, especially early in their course. Prognostication is important because it largely determines the care level we provide, from aggressive treatment for patients we predict could have a good outcome to withdrawal of treatment for those we expect will have a poor outcome. Accurate prognostication is required for ethical decision-making. However, several studies have shown that prognostication is frequently inaccurate and variable. Overly optimistic prognostication can lead to false hope and futile care. Overly pessimistic prognostication can lead to therapeutic nihilism. Overlapping is the powerful effect that cognitive biases, in particular code status, can play in shaping our perceptions and the care level we provide. The presence of Do Not Resuscitate orders has been shown to be associated with increased mortality. Based on a comprehensive search of peer-reviewed journals using a wide range of key terms, including prognostication, critical illness, brain injury, cognitive bias, and code status, the following is a review of prognostic accuracy and the effect of code status on outcome. Because withdrawal of treatment is the most common cause of death in the ICU, a clearer understanding of this intersection of prognostication and code status is needed.

When is it considered reasonable to start a risky and uncomfortable treatment in critically ill patients? A random sample online questionnaire study

Background

Health care professionals have to judge the appropriateness of treatment in critical care on a daily basis. There is general consensus that critical care interventions should not be performed when they are inappropriate. It is not yet clear which chances of survival are considered necessary or which risk for serious disabilities is acceptable in quantitative terms for different stakeholders to start intensive care treatment.

Methods

We performed an anonymous online survey in a random sample of 1,052 participants recruited via email invitation and social media. Age, sex, nationality, education, professional involvement in health care, critical care medicine and treatment decisions in critical care medicine as well as personal experience with critical illness were assessed as potential influencing variables. Participants provided their opinion on the necessary chances of survival and the acceptable risk for serious disabilities to start a high-risk or uncomfortable therapy for themselves, relatives or for their patients on a scale of 0–100%.

Results

Answers ranged from 0 to 100% for all questions. A three-peak pattern with different distributions of the peaks was observed. Sex, education, being a health care professional, being involved in treatment decisions and religiosity influence these opinions. Male respondents and those with a university education would agree that a risky and uncomfortable treatment should be started even with a low chance of survival for themselves, relatives and patients. More respondents would choose a lower necessary chance of survival (0–33% survival) when deciding for patients compared to themselves or relatives to start a risky and uncomfortable treatment. On the other hand, the majority of respondents would accept only a low risk of severe disability for both themselves and their patients.

Conclusion

No cut-off can be identified for the necessary chances of survival or the acceptable risk of disability to help quantify the “inappropriateness” of critical care treatment. Sex and education are the strongest influencing factors on this opinion. The large variation in personal opinions, depending on demographic and personality variables and education needs to be considered in the communication between health care professionals and patients or surrogates.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12910-021-00705-4.