Full disclosure of risks

Rationing in the intensive care unit: to disclose or disguise?

INTRODUCTION

Growing pressures to ration intensive care unit beds and services pose novel challenges to clinicians. Whereas the question of how to allocate scarce intensive care unit resources has received much attention, the question of whether to disclose these decisions to patients and surrogates has not been explored.

KEY CONSIDERATIONS

We explore how considerations of professionalism, dual agency, patients' and surrogates' preferences, beneficence, and healthcare efficiency and efficacy influence the propriety of disclosing rationing decisions in the intensive care unit.

CONCLUSIONS

There are compelling conceptual reasons to support a policy of routine disclosure. Systematic disclosure of prevailing intensive care unit norms for making allocation decisions, and of at least the most consequential specific decisions, can promote transparent, professional, and effective healthcare delivery. However, many empiric questions about how best to structure and implement disclosure processes remain to be answered. Specifically, research is needed to determine how best to operationalize disclosure processes so as to maximize prospective benefits to patients and surrogates and minimize burdens on clinicians and intensive care units.

[Information for patients about hospital infections in psychiatry: An assessment of healthcare professionals' knowledge, opinion and attitude]

INTRODUCTION

French legislation makes mandatory for healthcare providers the disclosure of hospital infection (HI) risk and actual occurrence to the patient. Given the specific diseases encountered in psychiatry, some difficulties may be expected in practical application of this regulation.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of our study was to describe the knowledge, declared practices and opinions of healthcare workers (HCW) in psychiatry concerning information for patients about HI.

METHODS

We randomly selected doctors, nurses and head nurses from four hospitals with psychiatric activity in Normandy. The HCW were asked to self-complete an anonymous questionnaire, including data describing the responding HCW and questions aiming at describing his/her knowledge, attitude in routine daily practice and opinion about information to patients about HI.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-one HCW were initially selected, of which 114 (80.9%) eventually agreed to complete the questionnaire. Only eight HCW (7.0%) were considered to have a correct overall knowledge of legal obligations. Main errors concerned the obligation to inform the patient of the HI risk according to the medical procedures that are to be performed (43.9% of correct answers) and the obligation to inform the patient of the HI risk according to his/her medical condition (46.5%). The obligation to inform the patient of the occurrence of a HI was largely known (84.2%). HCW usually giving information about the risk of HI to patients without HI accounted for 5.3%. Main reasons advocated for not informing patients were a low level risk of HI in psychiatry (80.4%) and the lack of patients' demand (59.8%). In the case of HI occurrence, the percentage of HCW routinely informing patients was 13.2%. HCW systematically informing the patient's family about the occurrence of HI accounted for 9.6%. A large proportion of HCW supported delivering information to patients about HI (86.0%). HCW expected from information better approval of prevention programs by the patients (87.7%) but feared an increased anxiety in patients (75.4%) and a higher rate of care refusal (48.2%).

CONCLUSION

Whereas a very large proportion of HCW in psychiatry support delivering information to patients about HI, our study shows HCW's lack of awareness of regulations and lack of declared practices. Among factors explaining this contrast, a lower perceived HI risk and severity level are to be mentioned. Training programs focusing on risk and mechanisms of HI could be offered to professionals in psychiatry. The issue of specific communication difficulties with psychiatric patients should be addressed as well. In order to develop information on HI, specific methods suited to those patients should be developed.

What factors influence healthcare professionals' opinion and attitude regarding information for patients about hospital infection?

Although informing patients about medical risks is said to decrease the number of malpractice claims, most inpatients receive no information about hospital infection. Using a self-administered questionnaire, we surveyed 1270 healthcare workers randomly selected from 22 French hospitals to assess their opinion on information for patients about hospital infection risks, and their practice of informing patients with, or without, hospital infection. The influence of healthcare worker characteristics on opinion and practice was assessed using logistic regression. Response rate was 87.2%. Although 85.4% supported giving more information, only 17.0% routinely informed non-infected patients and 31.6% informed infected patients about infection. Attitudes were influenced by healthcare worker characteristics and environmental factors. Knowledge of obligations influenced practice when informing non-infected patients, but not those with hospital-acquired infection. Further research is needed to help healthcare professionals improve risk communication and disclosure of hospital infection.