How doctors actually (do not) involve families in decisions to continue or discontinue life-sustaining treatment in neonatal, pediatric, and adult intensive care: A qualitative study

Incorporating parental values in complex paediatric and perinatal decisions

Incorporating parental values in complex medical decisions for young children is important but challenging. In this Review, we explore what it means to incorporate parental values in complex paediatric and perinatal decisions. We provide a narrative overview of the paediatric, ethics, and medical decision-making literature, focusing on value-based and ethically complex decisions for children who are too young to express their own preferences. We explain key concepts and definitions, discuss paediatric-specific features, reflect on challenges in learning and expressing values for both parents and health-care providers, and provide recommendations for clinical practice. Decisional values are informed by global and external values and could relate to the child, the parents, and the whole family. These values should inform preferences and assure value-congruent choices. Additionally, parents might hold various meta values on the process of decision making itself. Complex decisions for young children are emotionally taxing, ethically difficult, and often surrounded by uncertainty. These contextual factors make it more likely that values and preferences are initially absent or unstable and need to be constructed or stabilised. Health-care professionals and parents should work together to construct and clarify values and incorporate them into personalised decisions for the child. An open communication style, with unbiased and tailored information in a supportive environment, is helpful. Dedicated training in communication and shared decision making could help to improve the incorporation of parental values in complex decisions for young children.

Varying (preferred) levels of involvement in treatment decision-making in the intensive care unit before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods study among relatives

BACKGROUND

In the intensive care unit (ICU) relatives play a crucial role as surrogate decision-makers, since most patients cannot communicate due to their illness and treatment. Their level of involvement in decision-making can affect their psychological well-being. During the COVID-19 pandemic, relatives' involvement probably changed. We aim to investigate relatives' involvement in decision-making in the ICU before and during the pandemic and their experiences and preferences in this regard.

METHODS

A mixed-methods study among relatives of ICU patients admitted to an ICU before or during the COVID-19 pandemic. Relatives in six ICUs completed a questionnaire (n = 329), including two items on decision-making. These were analysed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses. Subsequently, relatives (n = 24) were interviewed about their experiences and preferences regarding decision-making. Thematic analysis was used for analysing the qualitative data.

RESULTS

Nearly 55% of the relatives indicated they were at least occasionally asked to be involved in important treatment decisions and of these relatives 97.1% reported to have had enough time to discuss questions and concerns when important decisions were to be made. During the first COVID-19 wave relatives were significantly less likely to be involved in decision-making compared to relatives from pre-COVID-19. The interviews showed that involvement varied from being informed about an already made decision to deliberation about the best treatment option. Preferences for involvement also varied, with some relatives preferring no involvement due to a perceived lack of expertise and others preferring an active role as the patient's advocate. Discussing a patient's quality of life was appreciated by relatives, and according to relatives healthcare professionals also found this valuable. In some cases the preferred and actual involvement was in discordance, preferring either a larger or a smaller role.

CONCLUSIONS

As treatment alignment with a patient's values and preferences and accordance between preferred and actual involvement in decision-making is very important, we suggest that the treatment decision-making process should start with discussions about a patient's quality of life, followed by tailoring the process to relatives' preferences as much as possible. Healthcare professionals should be aware of relatives' heterogeneous and possibly changing preferences regarding the decision-making process.

The role of law in end-of-life decision-making in emergency departments and intensive care units: a retrospective review of current practice in a Queensland health service

Objective There is limited evidence about how legal frameworks that underpin end-of-life decisions are applied in practice. This study aimed to identify how end-of-life decisions are made and documented in emergency departments and intensive care units. The secondary aim was to explore the extent to which the legal processes featured in these decisions. Methods A retrospective chart audit of 85 adult patients who died in the emergency departments and intensive care units of a Queensland health service was undertaken. Quantitative data were analysed and reported using descriptive statistics. Qualitative textual data were analysed using inductive content analysis. Results Nearly all admissions were unplanned (97.6%), and most patients (74.1%) were admitted from home. Only one patient had an advance health directive, although all had an eligible substitute decision-maker. The qualitative analysis revealed two main concepts - 'healthcare professionals choreograph the end of life' and 'patients and families are carried on an unplanned journey'. Conclusions There was limited documentation related to the application of the legal framework in these decisions. Healthcare professionals relied on their clinical judgment about what was in the best interest of the patient. It was common for there to be a substantial effort to achieve consensus in decision-making which coincidently complied with the law.

[News in intensive care unit communication]

Current publications on the topic of communication in intensive care units (ITS) are shaped by the experiences of the COVID19 pandemic and the restrictions on personal contact and communication experienced during this time. Virtual, computer-based and telemedical concepts have grown out of this situation with limited contact and communication possibilities with patients and their relatives, but also between the individual service providers in the health system. It can also be assumed that artificial intelligence will increasingly be an issue in communication in intensive care units in the coming years. However, the significance, consequences and risks of the use of these new possibilities remain to be seen.

Diversity of Parent Emotions and Physician Responses During End-of-Life Conversations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

To provide support to parents of critically ill children, it is important that physicians adequately respond to parents' emotions. In this study, we investigated emotions expressed by parents, physicians' responses to these expressions, and parents' emotions after the physicians' responses in conversations in which crucial decisions regarding the child's life-sustaining treatment had to be made.

METHODS

Forty-nine audio-recorded conversations between parents of 12 critically ill children and physicians working in the neonatal and pediatric intensive care units of 3 Dutch university medical centers were coded and analyzed by using a qualitative inductive approach.

RESULTS

Forty-six physicians and 22 parents of 12 children participated. In all 49 conversations, parents expressed a broad range of emotions, often intertwining, including anxiety, anger, devotion, grief, relief, hope, and guilt. Both implicit and explicit expressions of anxiety were prevalent. Physicians predominantly responded to parental emotions with cognition-oriented approaches, thereby limiting opportunities for parents. This appeared to intensify parents' expressions of anger and protectiveness, although their anxiety remained under the surface. In response to more tangible emotional expressions, for instance, grief when the child's death was imminent, physicians provided parents helpful support in both affect- and cognition-oriented ways.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings illustrate the diversity of emotions expressed by parents during end-of-life conversations. Moreover, they offer insight into the more and less helpful ways in which physicians may respond to these emotions. More training is needed to help physicians in recognizing parents' emotions, particularly implicit expressions of anxiety, and to choose helpful combinations of responses.

Using expert opinion rounds to develop valid and realistic manipulations for experimental video-vignette research: Results from a study on clinicians' (un)reasonable argumentative support for treatment decisions in neonatal care

OBJECTIVE

To develop valid and realistic manipulations for video-vignette research using expert opinion rounds, in preparation of an experimental study on clinicians' (un)reasonable argumentative support for treatment decisions in neonatal care.

METHODS

In three rounds, N = 37 participants (parents/clinicians/researchers) provided feedback on four video-vignette scripts and completed listing, ranking, and rating exercises to determine which (un)reasonable arguments clinicians may provide to support treatment decisions.

RESULTS

Round 1: participants deemed the scripts realistic. They judged that, on average, clinicians should provide two arguments for a treatment decision. They listed 13-20 reasonable arguments, depending on the script. Round 2: participants ranked the two most salient, reasonable arguments per script. Round 3: participants rated the most plausible, unreasonable arguments from a predefined list. These results guided the design of 12 experimental conditions.

CONCLUSION

Expert opinion rounds are an effective method to develop video-vignettes that are theoretically sound and ecologically realistic and offer a powerful means to include stakeholders in experimental research design. Our study yielded some preliminary insights into what are considered prevalent (un)reasonable arguments for clinicians' treatment plans.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

We provide hands-on guidelines on involving stakeholders in the design of video-vignette experiments and the development of video-based health communication interventions - both for research and practice.

Argumentation in end-of-life conversations with families in Dutch intensive care units: a qualitative observational study

PURPOSE

In intensive care units (ICUs), decisions about the continuation or discontinuation of life-sustaining treatment (LST) are made on a daily basis. Professional guidelines recommend an open exchange of standpoints and underlying arguments between doctors and families to arrive at the most appropriate decision. Yet, it is still largely unknown how doctors and families argue in real-life conversations. This study aimed to (1) identify which arguments doctors and families use in support of standpoints to continue or discontinue LST, (2) investigate how doctors and families structure their arguments, and (3) explore how their argumentative practices unfold during conversations.

METHOD

A qualitative inductive thematic analysis of 101 audio-recorded conversations between doctors and families.

RESULTS

Seventy-one doctors and the families of 36 patients from the neonatal, pediatric, and adult ICU (respectively, N-ICU, P-ICU, and A-ICU) of a large university-based hospital participated. In almost all conversations, doctors were the first to argue and families followed, thereby either countering the doctor's line of argumentation or substantiating it. Arguments put forward by doctors and families fell under one of ten main types. The types of arguments presented by families largely overlapped with those presented by doctors. A real exchange of arguments occurred in a minority of conversations and was generally quite brief in the sense that not all possible arguments were presented and then discussed together.

CONCLUSION

This study offers a detailed insight in the argumentation practices of doctors and families, which can help doctors to have a sharper eye for the arguments put forward by doctors and families and to offer room for true deliberation.

When Should Providers Defer versus Impose Their Views?

AbstractThis piece discusses perhaps the most agonizing ethical decision ethics consultants and other providers encounter. This is the extent to which providers should defer decisions to patients or to their proxy decision makers as opposed to imposing their own views as to what they think is ethically right. It discusses the most difficult issues these providers may encounter, especially when they wish to depart from authoritative bodies' standards or guidelines, and it presents initial steps providers may take to help patients and their families work together to resolve these dilemmas more harmoniously. It highlights how providers may inadvertently impose flawed biases on patients and families. Finally, it discusses how providers should take initiative with both parties to offer to help appeal when these avenues already exist and seek to establish the appellate procedures when they are absent.

The Future of Cardiothoracic Surgical Critical Care Medicine as a Medical Science: A Call to Action

Cardiothoracic surgical critical care medicine (CT-CCM) is a medical discipline centered on the perioperative care of diverse groups of patients. With an aging demographic and an increase in burden of chronic diseases the utilization of cardiothoracic surgical critical care units is likely to escalate in the coming decades. Given these projections, it is important to assess the state of cardiothoracic surgical intensive care, to develop goals and objectives for the future, and to identify knowledge gaps in need of scientific inquiry. This two-part review concentrates on CT-CCM as its own subspeciality of critical care and cardiothoracic surgery and provides aspirational goals for its practitioners and scientists. In part one, a list of guiding principles and a call-to-action agenda geared towards growth and promotion of CT-CCM are offered. In part two, an evaluation of selected scientific data is performed, identifying gaps in CT-CCM knowledge, and recommending direction to future scientific endeavors.

How doctors manage conflicts with families of critically ill patients during conversations about end-of-life decisions in neonatal, pediatric, and adult intensive care

PURPOSE

Intensive care is a stressful environment in which team-family conflicts commonly occur. If managed poorly, conflicts can have negative effects on all parties involved. Previous studies mainly investigated these conflicts and their management in a retrospective way. This study aimed to prospectively explore team-family conflicts, including its main topics, complicating factors, doctors' conflict management strategies and the effect of these strategies.

METHODS

Conversations between doctors in the neonatal, pediatric, and adult intensive care unit of a large university-based hospital and families of critically ill patients were audio-recorded from the moment doubts arose whether treatment was still in patients' best interest. Transcripts were coded and analyzed using a qualitative deductive approach.

RESULTS

Team-family conflicts occurred in 29 out of 101 conversations (29%) concerning 20 out of 36 patients (56%). Conflicts mostly concerned more than one topic. We identified four complicating context- and/or family-related factors: diagnostic and prognostic uncertainty, families' strong negative emotions, limited health literacy, and burden of responsibility. Doctors used four overarching strategies to manage conflicts, namely content-oriented, process-oriented, moral and empathic strategies. Doctors mostly used content-oriented strategies, independent of the intensive care setting. They were able to effectively address conflicts in most conversations. Yet, if they did not acknowledge families' cues indicating the existence of one or more complicating factors, conflicts were likely to linger on during the conversation.

CONCLUSION

This study underlines the importance of doctors tailoring their communication strategies to the concrete conflict topic(s) and to the context- and family-related factors which complicate a specific conflict.

Paediatric advance care planning in life-limiting conditions: scoping review of parent experiences

Background

Advance care planning is considered best practice for children and young people with life-limiting conditions but there is limited evidence how parents’ perceive, understand and engage with the process.

Aim

To understand parents’ experience of advance care planning for a child or young person with a life-limiting condition.

Design

Scoping review, theoretically informed by Family Sense of Coherence. Parents’ experience was conceptualised in terms of meaningfulness, comprehensibility and manageability.

Data sources

Electronic databases Medline, CINAHL and PyschINFO were searched for studies published between 1990 and 2021, using MeSH and broad-base terms.

Results

150 citations were identified and screened; 15 studies were included: qualitative (n=10), survey (n=3) and participatory research (n=2). Parents’ experience of advance care planning was contextualised by their family values and beliefs, needs and goals and the day-to-day impact of caring for their child and family. They valued conversations, which helped them to maximise their child’s quality of life and minimise their suffering. They preferred flexible, rather than definitive decisions about end-of-life care and treatment.

Conclusions

Advance care planning which solely focuses on treatment decisions is at odds with parents’ concerns about the current and future impact of illness on their child and family. Parents want advance care planning for their child to reflect what matters to them as a family. Future longitudinal and comparative studies are needed to understand the influence of advance care planning on parental decision-making over time and how social, cultural and contextual nuances influence parental experience.

How Physicians Discuss Uncertainty With Parents in Intensive Care Units

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Physicians and parents of critically ill neonates and children receiving intensive care have to make decisions on the child's behalf. Throughout the child's illness and treatment trajectory, adequately discussing uncertainties with parents is pivotal because this enhances the quality of the decision-making process and may positively affect the child's and parents' well-being. We investigated how physicians discuss uncertainty with parents and how this discussion evolves over time during the trajectory.

METHODS

We asked physicians working in the NICU and PICU of 3 university medical centers to audio record their conversations with parents of critically ill children from the moment doubts arose whether treatment was in the child's best interests. We qualitatively coded and analyzed the anonymized transcripts, thereby using the software tool MAXQDA 2020.

RESULTS

Physicians were found to adapt the way they discussed uncertainty with parents to the specific phase of the child's illness and treatment trajectory. When treatment options were still available, physicians primarily focused on uncertainty related to diagnostic procedures, treatment options, and associated risks and effects. Particularly when the child's death was imminent, physicians had less "scientific" guidance to offer. They eliminated most uncertainty and primarily addressed practical uncertainties regarding the child's dying process to offer parents guidance.

CONCLUSIONS

Our insights may increase physicians' awareness and enhance their skills in discussing uncertainties with parents tailored to the phase of the child's illness and treatment trajectory and to parental needs in each specific phase.

NEO-SPEAK: A conceptual framework that underpins breaking bad news in neonatology

OBJECTIVE

Breaking bad news in neonatology is a frequent and difficult challenge. Although there are guidelines for communicating with parents in pediatrics and neonatology, the specific framework for breaking bad news in neonatology has not been studied in more detail. Therefore, we aimed to identify determinants that are important for successful managing breaking bad news in neonatology from professionals' perspective and to develop a conceptual framework that underpins this challenging task.

METHODS

We conducted seventeen semi-structured interviews with senior neonatologists of six perinatal centers of the highest level of care in Germany. The transcripts were analyzed according to Mayring's method of qualitative content analysis using inductive and deductive coding.

RESULTS

Eight determinants of breaking bad news in neonatology could be identified from the interviews. From these, we developed the conceptual framework NEO-SPEAK. The first three determinants, Neonatal prognostic uncertainty, Encounter in (triangular-)partnerships, Organization and teamwork (NEO) are directly related to the specific care situation in neonatology, whereas the others, Situational stress, Processuality, Emotional burden, Attention to individuality, Knowledge and experience, play a role for difficult conversations in general, but are subject to special modifications in neonatology (SPEAK). In addition, the results show that the context in neonatology as well as reciprocal effects on the team and the individual level of the physicians are important influencing factors in breaking bad news.

CONCLUSION

On the one hand, the constitutional framework NEO-SPEAK shows which special aspects play a role in neonatology for the delivery of bad news, and on the other hand, it can help to identify and consider these aspects in clinical routine and training. Considering or reinforcing each NEO-SPEAK element when planning or delivering bad news may guide healthcare professionals through communication with parents of critically ill or premature newborns and support the resilience of the caring team.