Developing an intervention around referral and admissions to intensive care: a mixed-methods study

Shared decision-making with older people on TReatment Escalation planning for Acute deterioration in the emergency Medical Setting: a qualitative study of Clinicians' perspectives (STREAMS-C)

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) is increasingly expected in healthcare systems prioritising patient autonomy. Treatment escalation plans (TEPs) outline contingency for medical intervention in the event of patient deterioration. This study aimed to understand clinicians' perspectives on SDM in TEP for older patients in the acute medical setting.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study following a constructivist approach. Semistructured interviews with vignettes were conducted with 26 consultant and registrar doctors working in emergency medicine, general internal medicine, intensive care medicine and palliative care medicine. Reflexive thematic analysis was performed.

RESULTS

There were three themes: 'An unequal partnership', 'Options without equipoise' and 'Decisions with shared understanding'. Clinicians' expertise in synthesising complex, uncertain clinical information was contrasted with perceived patient unfamiliarity with future health planning and medical intervention. There was a strong sense of morality underpinning decision-making and little equipoise about appropriate TEP decisions. Communication around the TEP was important, and clinicians sought control over the high-stakes decision whilst avoiding conflict and achieving shared understanding.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians take responsibility for securing a 'good' TEP decision for older patients in the acute medical setting. They synthesise clinical data with implicit ethical reasoning according to their professional predictions of qualitative and quantitative success following medical intervention. SDM is seldom considered a priority for this context. Nonetheless, avoidance of conflict, preserving the clinical relationship and shared understanding with the patient and family are important.

Critical care beyond organ support: the importance of geriatric rehabilitation

Very old critically ill patients pose a growing challenge for intensive care. Critical illness and the burden of treatment in the intensive care unit (ICU) can lead to a long-lasting decline of functional and cognitive abilities, especially in very old patients. Multi-complexity and increased vulnerability to stress in these patients may lead to new and worsening disabilities, requiring careful assessment, prevention and rehabilitation. The potential for rehabilitation, which is crucial for optimal functional outcomes, requires a systematic, multi-disciplinary approach and careful long-term planning during and following ICU care. We describe this process and provide recommendations and checklists for comprehensive and timely assessments in the context of transitioning patients from ICU to post-ICU and acute hospital care, and review the barriers to the provision of good functional outcomes.

Escalation to intensive care for the older patient. An exploratory qualitative study of patients aged 65 years and older and their next of kin during the COVID-19 pandemic: the ESCALATE study

BACKGROUND

older people comprise the majority of hospital medical inpatients so decision-making regarding admission of this cohort to the intensive care unit (ICU) is important. ICU can be perceived by clinicians as overly burdensome for patients and loved ones, and long-term impact on quality of life considered unacceptable, effecting potential bias against admitting older people to ICU. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the challenge of selecting those who could most benefit from ICU.

OBJECTIVE

this qualitative study aimed to explore the views and recollections of escalation to ICU from older patients (aged ≥ 65 years) and next of kin (NoK) who experienced a COVID-19 ICU admission.

SETTING

the main site was a large NHS Trust in London, which experienced a high burden of COVID-19 cases.

SUBJECTS

30 participants, comprising 12 patients, 7 NoK of survivor and 11 NoK of deceased.

METHODS

semi-structured interviews with thematic analysis using a framework approach.

RESULTS

there were five major themes: inevitability, disconnect, acceptance, implications for future decision-making and unique impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Life was highly valued and ICU perceived to be the only option. Prior understanding of ICU and admission decision-making explanations were limited. Despite benefit of hindsight, having experienced an ICU admission and its consequences, most could not conceptualise thresholds for future acceptable treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

in this study of patients ≥65 years and their NoK experiencing an acute ICU admission, survival was prioritised. Despite the ordeal of an ICU stay and its aftermath, the decision to admit and sequelae were considered acceptable.

Investigating the impact of brief training in decision-making on treatment escalation to intensive care using objective structured clinical examination-style scenarios

Background

The decision to admit patients to the intensive care unit (ICU) is complex. Structuring the decision-making process may be beneficial to patients and decision-makers alike. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility and impact of a brief training intervention on ICU treatment escalation decisions using the Warwick model- a structured decision-making framework for treatment escalation decisions.

Methods

Treatment escalation decisions were assessed using Objective Structured Clinical Examination-style scenarios. Participants were ICU and anaesthetic registrars with experience of making ICU admission decisions. Participants completed one scenario, followed by training with the decision-making framework and subsequently a second scenario. Decision-making data was collected using checklists, note entries and post-scenario questionnaires.

Results

Twelve participants were enrolled. Brief decision-making training was successfully delivered during the normal ICU working day. Following training participants demonstrated greater evidence of balancing the burdens and benefits of treatment escalation. On visual analogue scales of 0-10, participants felt better trained to make treatment escalation decisions (4.9 vs 6.8, p = 0.017) and felt their decision-making was more structured (4.7 vs 8.1, p = 0.017).Overall, participants provided positive feedback and reported feeling more prepared for the task of making treatment escalation decisions.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that a brief training intervention is a feasible way to improve the decision-making process by improving decision-making structure, reasoning and documentation. Training was implemented successfully, acceptable to participants and participants were able to apply their learning. Further studies of regional and national cohorts are needed to determine if training benefit is sustained and generalisable.

Talking to multi-morbid patients about critical illness: an evolving conversation

Conversations around critical illness outcomes and benefits from intensive care unit (ICU) treatment have begun to shift away from binary discussions on living versus dying. Increasingly, the reality of survival with functional impairment versus survival with a late death is being recognised as relevant to patients. Most ICU admissions are associated with new functional and cognitive disabilities that are significant and long lasting. When discussing outcomes, clinicians rightly focus on patients' wishes and the quality of life (QoL) that they would find acceptable. However, patients' views may encompass differing views on acceptable QoL post-critical illness, not necessarily reflected in standard conversations. Maintaining independence is a greater priority to patients than simple survival. QoL post-critical illness determines judgments on the benefits of ICU support but translating this into clinical practice risks potential conflation of health outcomes and QoL. This article discusses the concept of response shift and the implication for trade-offs between number/length of invasive treatments and change in physical function or death. Conversations need to delineate how health outcomes (e.g. tracheostomy, muscle wasting, etc.) may affect individual outcomes most relevant to the patient and hence impact overall QoL. The research strategy taken to explore decision-making for critically ill patients might benefit from gathering qualitative data, as a complement to quantitative data. Patients, families and doctors are motivated by far wider considerations, and a consultation process should relate to more than the simple likelihood of mortality in a shared decision-making context.

Assessing the quality of ReSPECT documentation using an accountability for reasonableness framework

Background

The Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) form, which supports the ReSPECT process, is designed to prompt clinicians to discuss wider emergency treatment options with patients and to structure the documentation of decision-making for greater transparency.

Methods

Following an accountability for reasonableness framework (AFR), we analysed 141 completed ReSPECT forms (versions 1.0 and 2.0), collected from six National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England during the early adoption of ReSPECT. Structured through an evaluation tool developed for this study, the analysis assessed the extent to which the records reflected consistency, transparency, and ethical justification of decision-making.

Results

Recommendations relating to CPR were consistently recorded on all forms and were contextualised within other treatment recommendations in most forms. The level of detail provided about treatment recommendations varied widely and reasons for treatment recommendations were rarely documented. Patient capacity, patient priorities and preferences, and the involvement of patients/relatives in ReSPECT conversations were recorded in some, but not all, forms. Clinicians almost never documented their weighing of potential burdens and benefits of treatments on the ReSPECT forms.

Conclusion

In most ReSPECT forms, CPR recommendations were captured alongside other treatment recommendations. However, ReSPECT form design and associated training should be modified to address inconsistencies in form completion. These modifications should emphasise the recording of patient values and preferences, assessment of patient capacity, and clinical reasoning processes, thereby putting patient/family involvement at the core of good clinical practice. Version 3.0 of ReSPECT responds to these issues.

The diagnostic certainty levels of junior clinicians: A retrospective cohort study

Background:

Clinical decision-making is influenced by many factors, including clinicians’ perceptions of the certainty around what is the best course of action to pursue.

Objective:

To characterise the documentation of working diagnoses and the associated level of real-time certainty expressed by clinicians and to gauge patient opinion about the importance of research into clinician decision certainty.

Method:

This was a single-centre retrospective cohort study of non-consultant grade clinicians and their assessments of patients admitted from the emergency department between 01 March 2019 and 31 March 2019. De-identified electronic health record proformas were extracted that included the type of diagnosis documented and the certainty adjective used. Patient opinion was canvassed from a focus group.

Results:

During the study period, 850 clerking proformas were analysed; 420 presented a single diagnosis, while 430 presented multiple diagnoses. Of the 420 single diagnoses, 67 (16%) were documented as either a symptom or physical sign and 16 (4%) were laboratory-result-defined diagnoses. No uncertainty was expressed in 309 (74%) of the diagnoses. Of 430 multiple diagnoses, uncertainty was expressed in 346 (80%) compared to 84 (20%) in which no uncertainty was expressed. The patient focus group were unanimous in their support of this research.

Conclusion:

The documentation of working diagnoses is highly variable among non-consultant grade clinicians. In nearly three quarters of assessments with single diagnoses, no element of uncertainty was implied or quantified. More uncertainty was expressed in multiple diagnoses than single diagnoses.

Implications:

Increased standardisation of documentation will help future studies to better analyse and quantify diagnostic certainty in both single and multiple working diagnoses. This could lead to subsequent examination of their association with important process or clinical outcome measures.

Ethical conflicts during the process of deciding about ICU admission: an empirically driven ethical analysis

BACKGROUND

Besides balancing burdens and benefits of intensive care, ethical conflicts in the process of decision-making should also be recognised. This calls for an ethical analysis relevant to clinicians. The aim was to analyse ethically difficult situations in the process of deciding whether a patient is admitted to intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

Analysis using the 'Dilemma method' and 'wide reflective equilibrium', on ethnographic data of 45 patient cases and 96 stakeholder interviews in six UK hospitals.

ETHICAL ANALYSIS

Four moral questions and associated value conflicts were identified. (1) Who should have the right to decide whether a patient needs to be reviewed? Conflicting perspectives on safety/security. (2) Does the benefit to the patient of getting the decision right justify the cost to the patient of a delay in making the decision? Preventing longer-term suffering and understanding patient's values conflicted with preventing short-term suffering and provision of security. (3) To what extent should the intensivist gain others' input? Professional independence versus a holistic approach to decision-making. (4) Should the intensivist have an ongoing duty of care to patients not admitted to ICU? Short-term versus longer-term duty to protect patient safety. Safety and security (experienced in a holistic sense of physical and emotional security for patients) were key values at stake in the ethical conflicts identified. The life-threatening nature of the situation meant that the principle of autonomy was overshadowed by the duty to protect patients from harm. The need to fairly balance obligations to the referred patient and to other patients was also recognised.

CONCLUSION

Proactive decision-making including advance care planning and escalation of treatment decisions may support the inclusion of patient autonomy. However, our analysis invites binary choices, which may not sufficiently reflect reality. This calls for a complementary relational ethics analysis.

Decision-making around admission to intensive care in the UK pre-COVID-19: a multicentre ethnographic study

Predicting who will benefit from admission to an intensive care unit is not straightforward and admission processes vary. Our aim was to understand how decisions to admit or not are made. We observed 55 decision-making events in six NHS hospitals. We interviewed 30 referring and 43 intensive care doctors about these events. We describe the nature and context of the decision-making and analysed how doctors make intensive care admission decisions. Such decisions are complex with intrinsic uncertainty, often urgent and made with incomplete information. While doctors aspire to make patient-centred decisions, key challenges include: being overworked with lack of time; limited support from senior staff; and a lack of adequate staffing in other parts of the hospital that may be compromising patient safety. To reduce decision complexity, heuristic rules based on experience are often used to help think through the problem; for example, the patient's functional status or clinical gestalt. The intensive care doctors actively managed relationships with referring doctors; acted as the hospital generalist for acutely ill patients; and brought calm to crisis situations. However, they frequently failed to elicit values and preferences from patients or family members. They were rarely explicit in balancing burdens and benefits of intensive care for patients, so consistency and equity cannot be judged. The use of a framework for intensive care admission decisions that reminds doctors to seek patient or family views and encourages explicit balancing of burdens and benefits could improve decision-making. However, a supportive, adequately resourced context is also needed.

Patient or family perceived deterioration in functional status and outcome after intensive care admission: a retrospective cohort analysis of routinely collected data

OBJECTIVE

To explore the association of patient or family reported functional deterioration (defined by a single question) in the preceding year, with mortality outcome for those admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU).

DESIGN

Retrospective observational analysis of a routinely collected data source.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients that were admitted to the ICU at Northwick Park and St Marks Hospitals, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust between 01 October 2017 to 15 June 2019 were included. Patients were excluded if they had a prior ICU admission during the existing hospital episode or if information on functional deterioration could not be retrieved from either the patient or their advocate.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

Mortality at the point of hospital discharge and 1 year following admission to the ICU.

RESULTS

Of the 1006 patients who were admitted to the ICU during the study period, information on functional deterioration was available for 621 patients who were included in the analysis. From these, 251 (40.4%) patients had patient or family reported functional deterioration in the preceding year, while 370 (59.6%) patients had a perceived stable functional baseline. Comparing the two groups, mortality was significantly higher in those who had functionally deteriorated compared with those with stable baseline function, at the point of hospital discharge (45.4% vs 25.9%; p<0.0001) and at 1 year (59.4% vs 33.0%; p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Patient or family reported functional deterioration was significantly associated with higher mortality at the point of hospital discharge and at 1 year. The concept of functional deterioration in the lead up to ICU admission warrants further exploration.