Worse Than Death: Survey of Public Perceptions of Disability Outcomes After Hypothetical Traumatic Brain Injury

Disclosing Results of Tests for Covert Consciousness: A Framework for Ethical Translation

The advent of neurotechnologies including advanced functional magnetic resonance imaging and electroencephalography to detect states of awareness not detectable by traditional bedside neurobehavioral techniques (i.e., covert consciousness) promises to transform neuroscience research and clinical practice for patients with brain injury. As these interventions progress from research tools into actionable, guideline-endorsed clinical tests, ethical guidance for clinicians on how to responsibly communicate the sensitive results they yield is crucial yet remains underdeveloped. Drawing on insights from empirical and theoretical neuroethics research and our clinical experience with advanced neurotechnologies to detect consciousness in behaviorally unresponsive patients, we critically evaluate ethical promises and perils associated with disclosing the results of clinical covert consciousness assessments and describe a semistructured approach to responsible data sharing to mitigate potential risks.

Surrogate Perception of Disability after Hospitalization for Traumatic Brain Injury

BACKGROUND

The Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE) is a measure of recovery after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Public surveys rate some GOSE states as worse than death. Direct family experience caring for patients with TBI may impact views of post-TBI disability.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a national cross-sectional computer-adaptive survey of surrogates of TBI dependents incurring injury more than 1 year earlier. Using a standard gamble approach in randomized order, surrogates evaluated preferences for post-TBI GOSE states from GOSE 2 (bedridden, unaware) to GOSE 8 (good recovery). We calculated median (interquartile range [IQR]) health utilities for each post-TBI state, ranging from -1 to 1, with 0 as reference (death = GOSE 1), and assessed sociodemographic associations using proportional odds logistic regression modeling.

RESULTS

Of 515 eligible surrogates, 298 (58%) completed scenarios. Surrogates were median aged 46 (IQR 35 to 60), 54% married, with Santa Clara strength of faith 14 (10 to 18). TBI dependents had a median GOSE5 (3 to 7). Median (IQR) health utility ratings for GOSE 2, GOSE 3, and GOSE 4 were -0.06 (-0.50 to -0.01), -0.01 (-0.30 to 0.45), and 0.30 (-0.01 to 0.80), rated worse than death by 91%, 65%, and 40%, respectively. Surrogates rated GOSE 4 (daily partial help) worse than the general population. Married surrogates rated GOSE 4 higher (p < 0.01). Higher strength of faith was associated with higher utility scores across GOSE states (p = 0.034).

CONCLUSIONS

In this index study of surrogate perceptions about disability after TBI, poor neurologic outcomes-vegetative, needing all-day or partial daily assistance-were perceived as worse than death by at least 1 in 3 surrogates. Surrogate perceptions differed from the unexposed public. Long-term perceptions about post-TBI disability may inform earlier, tailored shared decision-making after neurotrauma.

Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-3L in South Australia: a multi-method non-preference-based validation study

OBJECTIVE

Although HRQoL tools such as the EQ-5D-3L are significant in determining health status, these measures have not been validated in general populations in Australia. This study aims to psychometrically validate the EQ-5D-3L in a large population sample in Australia for the first time.

METHODS

The EQ-5D-3L was included in the Dental Care and Oral Health study (DCOHS), conducted in a South Australian population sample. The participants were 23-91 years old, and 44.1% were male. The EQ-5D-3L was responded to on a three-point rating scale ("none"/"no", "some" and "extremely"/"unable"/"confined"). We employed the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) to evaluate whether the EQ-5D-3L total score could identify participants with diagnosed diseases and mental health disorders. Psychometric validation of the EQ-5D-3L investigated dimensionality with Exploratory Graph Analysis, model fit, floor/ceiling effects and criterion validity.

RESULTS

The EQ-5D-3L comprised two dimensions, Activities and Symptoms. According to Root Mean Squared Error of Approximation (RMSEA) (<.05) and Comparative Fit Index (CFI) (>.950), the 2-dimensional structure showed excellent model fit with good reliability for the Activities subscale (Ωc = 0.80-95% CI [0.77, 0.83]), and poor reliability for the Symptom subscale (Ωc = 0.56-95% CI [0.53, 0.58]). The EQ-5D-3L showed adequate reliability (Ωc = 0.70-95% CI [0.67, 0.72]). The EQ-5D-3L showed good discrimination for diagnosed diseases (ranging from 64.3% to 86.3%). Floor/ceiling effects were observed across all items. The EQ-5D-3L total score discriminated between respondents who were experiencing health conditions (e.g. cancer, cardiovascular disease, stroke) from healthy individuals.

DISCUSSION

Despite the ceiling effects, the EQ-5D-3L displayed good psychometric properties as an HRQoL measure and discriminated between health states in the general South Australian population. Further research should investigate the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in South Australia and whether an increased number of response categories can mitigate the observed ceiling effects.

Ethics and the 2018 Practice Guideline on Disorders of Consciousness: A Framework for Responsible Implementation

The 2018 practice guideline on disorders of consciousness marks an important turning point in the care of patients with severe brain injury. As clinicians and health systems implement the guideline in practice, several ethical challenges will arise in assessing the benefits, harms, feasibility, and cost of recommended interventions. We provide guidance for clinicians when interpreting these recommendations and call on professional societies to develop an ethical framework to complement the guideline as it is implemented in clinical practice.

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

IMPORTANCE:

Withdrawal-of-life-sustaining treatments (WOLST) rates vary widely among critically ill neurologic patients (CINPs) and cannot be solely attributed to patient and family characteristics. Research in general critical care has shown that clinicians prognosticate to families with high variability. Little is known about how clinicians disclose prognosis to families of CINPs, and whether any associations exist with WOLST.

OBJECTIVES:

Primary: to demonstrate feasibility of audio-recording clinician-family meetings for CINPs at multiple centers and characterize how clinicians communicate prognosis during these meetings. Secondary: to explore associations of 1) clinician, family, or patient characteristics with clinicians’ prognostication approaches and 2) prognostication approach and WOLST.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:

Forty-three audio-recorded clinician-family meetings during which prognosis was discussed from seven U.S. centers for 39 CINPs with 88 family members and 27 clinicians.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:

Two investigators qualitatively coded transcripts using inductive methods (inter-rater reliability > 80%) to characterize how clinicians prognosticate. We then applied univariate and multivariable multinomial and binomial logistic regression.

RESULTS:

Clinicians used four distinct prognostication approaches: Authoritative (21%; recommending treatments without discussing values and preferences); Informational (23%; disclosing just the prognosis without further discussions); advisory (42%; disclosing prognosis followed by discussion of values and preferences); and responsive (14%; eliciting values and preferences, then disclosing prognosis). Before adjustment, prognostication approach was associated with center (p < 0.001), clinician specialty (neurointensivists vs non-neurointensivists; p = 0.001), patient age (p = 0.08), diagnosis (p = 0.059), and meeting length (p = 0.03). After adjustment, only clinician specialty independently predicted prognostication approach (p = 0.027). WOLST decisions occurred in 41% of patients and were most common under the advisory approach (56%). WOLST was more likely in older patients (p = 0.059) and with more experienced clinicians (p = 0.07). Prognostication approach was not independently associated with WOLST (p = 0.198).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:

It is feasible to audio-record sensitive clinician-family meetings about CINPs in multiple ICUs. We found that clinicians prognosticate with high variability. Our data suggest that larger studies are warranted in CINPs to examine the role of clinicians’ variable prognostication in WOLST decisions.