1
|
Saint Denny K, Lamore K, Nandrino JL, Rethore S, Prieur C, Mur S, Storme L. Parents' experiences of palliative care decision-making in neonatal intensive care units: An interpretative phenomenological analysis. Acta Paediatr 2024; 113:992-998. [PMID: 38229540 DOI: 10.1111/apa.17109] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2023] [Revised: 12/18/2023] [Accepted: 01/08/2024] [Indexed: 01/18/2024]
Abstract
AIM This work explores the experiences and meaning attributed by parents who underwent the decision-making process of withholding and/or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment for their newborn. METHODS Audio-recorded face-to-face interviews were led and analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis. Eight families (seven mothers and five fathers) whose baby underwent withholding and/or withdrawing of life-sustaining treatment in three neonatal intensive care units from two regions in France were included. RESULTS The findings reveal two paradoxes within the meaning-making process of parents: role ambivalence and choice ambiguity. We contend that these paradoxes, along with the need to mitigate uncertainty, form protective psychological mechanisms that enable parents to cope with the decision, maintain their parental identity and prevent decisional regret. CONCLUSION Role ambivalence and choice ambiguity should be considered when shared decision-making in the neonatal intensive care unit. Recognising and addressing these paradoxical beliefs is essential for informing parent support practices and professional recommendations, as well as add to ethical discussions pertaining to parental autonomy and physicians' rapport to uncertainty.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelly Saint Denny
- Department of Neonatology, Lille University Hospital, Lille, France
- Cognitive and Affective Sciences, SCALab UMR CNRS 9193, University of Lille, Lille, France
| | - Kristopher Lamore
- Cognitive and Affective Sciences, SCALab UMR CNRS 9193, University of Lille, Lille, France
| | - Jean-Louis Nandrino
- Cognitive and Affective Sciences, SCALab UMR CNRS 9193, University of Lille, Lille, France
| | - Sabine Rethore
- Department of Neonatology, Valenciennes Hospital, Valenciennes, France
| | - Charlotte Prieur
- Regional Resource Team for Pediatric Palliative Care, Lille University Hospital, Lille, France
- Department of Neonatology, Lens Hospital, Lens, France
| | - Sebastien Mur
- Department of Neonatology, Lille University Hospital, Lille, France
| | - Laurent Storme
- Department of Neonatology, Lille University Hospital, Lille, France
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Geurtzen R, Wilkinson DJC. Incorporating parental values in complex paediatric and perinatal decisions. THE LANCET. CHILD & ADOLESCENT HEALTH 2024; 8:225-235. [PMID: 38219752 DOI: 10.1016/s2352-4642(23)00267-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2023] [Revised: 10/02/2023] [Accepted: 10/04/2023] [Indexed: 01/16/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosa Geurtzen
- Amalia Children's Hospital, Radboud Institute of Healthcare Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
| | - Dominic J C Wilkinson
- Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Oxford Newborn Care Unit, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University, Oxford, UK; Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Centre for Biomedical Ethics, National University of Singapore Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Schneider K, Roll S, Tissen-Diabaté T, Bührer C, Garten L. Public Attitudes Toward Ethics and Practices in End-of-Life Decision-Making for Neonates. JAMA Netw Open 2024; 7:e2353264. [PMID: 38270948 PMCID: PMC10811557 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.53264] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/27/2023] [Accepted: 12/05/2023] [Indexed: 01/26/2024] Open
Abstract
Importance Attitudes toward end-of-life decision-making in neonatology have been studied in physicians and other health care professionals and are mostly shaped by their clinical education and work experiences. In contrast, attitudes among the general public have not yet been investigated. Objective To assess (1) attitudes in the general public toward euthanasia and withdrawal of life-prolonging treatment in neonates with severe life-limiting conditions, (2) knowledge of current German recommendations, and (3) values in the German society regarding ethical issues and proxy decisions at the beginning of life. Design, Setting, and Participants This cross-sectional study was performed in Germany and used an exploratory design to analyze responses to an interview conducted by an independent, established commissioned polling institute in March and April 2022. Participants were 16 years or older, with German language fluency and comprehension and living in Germany. Main Outcomes and Measures Knowledge about recommendations for euthanasia and withdrawal of life-prolonging treatment as well as personal attitudes toward (1) euthanasia and withdrawal of life-prolonging treatment and (2) surrogate end-of-life decision-making for newborn infants were assessed. Results The study included 2116 participants (1077 females [50.9%]; mean [SD] age 52.1 [18.7] years). Of the participants, 16.8% (311 of 1851) reported knowing the German recommendations for euthanasia and withdrawal of life-prolonging treatment for neonates. Euthanasia and withdrawal of life-prolonging treatment were supported by 64.7% (1369 of 2116) and 77.9% (1649 of 2116) of respondents, respectively. Shared decision-making between parents and physicians for neonates in end-of-life situations was supported by 65.6% of participants (1388). In situations where shared decision-making was not possible, 73.4% of respondents (1019 of 1388) put the ultimate decision to the parents. The magnitude of the associations was low between sociodemographic factors and views on ethical issues and customary practices involved in end-of-life decisions for neonates. Conclusions and Relevance Results of this cross-sectional study suggested that most respondents were not aware of the national German recommendations for euthanasia and withdrawal of life-prolonging treatment for sick and extremely preterm newborns. When counseling parents of periviable newborns, clinicians may need to exert more effort in explaining the legal and ethical framework; a highly individualized approach is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katja Schneider
- Department of Neonatology, Gemeinnützige Gesellschaft der Franziskanerinnen zu Olpe, Marien-Hospital, Bonn, Germany
- Department of Neonatology, Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Stephanie Roll
- Institute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Tatjana Tissen-Diabaté
- Institute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Christoph Bührer
- Department of Neonatology, Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Lars Garten
- Department of Neonatology, Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Michiels EM, Joren CY, Kars MC, Aris JL, Verhagen AAE. Shared decision-making in pediatric palliative care in the Netherlands. Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care 2024; 54:101549. [PMID: 38172033 DOI: 10.1016/j.cppeds.2023.101549] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2024]
Abstract
Shared decision-making (SDM) is a process in which health care professionals (HCPs) involve parents and children - when appropriate- to decide together on future treatment. These decisions are based on values that are important for the family, goals of care and preferences for future care and treatment. Elucidation of these values and preferences is preferably done early in the disease trajectory via so-called Advance Care Planning (ACP) conversations. In the Netherlands, ACP and SDM are being adopted by most health care professionals. This has happened only recently. Ten years ago, ACP and SDM were unknown concepts for the vast majority of Dutch HCPs. Today, interest in these conversational approaches is booming in both daily practice and in research. This rise has been reinforced by two recent major advancements in Dutch pediatric palliative care: the Individual Care Plan (ICP) and the Dutch Evidence-Based Guideline on Pediatric Palliative Care (DGPPC). Despite this positive evolution, a lot of work is still ahead. ACP and SDM demand a change in mindset from the traditional paternalistic approach by which the HCP 'knows what is best for this child' to a more humble and open approach in which (non-medical) factors that are important to the child and family and may influence the final treatment decision. Such changes in mindset don't happen overnight. In this article we describe the situation of pediatric palliative care in the Netherlands, with focus on the recent evolution of ACP and SDM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E M Michiels
- Princess Máxima Centre for Pediatric Oncology, Heidelberglaan 25, CS, Utrecht 3584, the Netherlands.
| | - C Y Joren
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Beatrix Children's Hospital, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - M C Kars
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Center of Expertise in Palliative Care Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - J l Aris
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Beatrix Children's Hospital, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - A A E Verhagen
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Beatrix Children's Hospital, Groningen, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
de Boer A, van Beek PE, Andriessen P, Groenendaal F, Hogeveen M, Meijer JS, Obermann-Borst SA, Onland W, Scheepers L(HCJ, Vermeulen MJ, Verweij EJT(J, De Proost L, Geurtzen R. Opportunities and Challenges of Prognostic Models for Extremely Preterm Infants. CHILDREN (BASEL, SWITZERLAND) 2023; 10:1712. [PMID: 37892375 PMCID: PMC10605480 DOI: 10.3390/children10101712] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2023] [Revised: 10/06/2023] [Accepted: 10/19/2023] [Indexed: 10/29/2023]
Abstract
Predicting the short- and long-term outcomes of extremely preterm infants remains a challenge. Multivariable prognostic models might be valuable tools for clinicians, parents, and policymakers for providing accurate outcome estimates. In this perspective, we discuss the opportunities and challenges of using prognostic models in extremely preterm infants at population and individual levels. At a population level, these models could support the development of guidelines for decisions about treatment limits and may support policy processes such as benchmarking and resource allocation. At an individual level, these models may enhance prenatal counselling conversations by considering multiple variables and improving transparency about expected outcomes. Furthermore, they may improve consistency in projections shared with parents. For the development of prognostic models, we discuss important considerations such as predictor and outcome measure selection, clinical impact assessment, and generalizability. Lastly, future recommendations for developing and using prognostic models are suggested. Importantly, the purpose of a prognostic model should be clearly defined, and integrating these models into prenatal counselling requires thoughtful consideration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angret de Boer
- Department of Neonatology, Amalia Children’s Hospital, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 32, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands; (P.E.v.B.); (M.H.); (R.G.)
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Leiden University Medical Centre, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands;
| | - Pauline E. van Beek
- Department of Neonatology, Amalia Children’s Hospital, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 32, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands; (P.E.v.B.); (M.H.); (R.G.)
- Department of Neonatology, Máxima Medical Center, 5504 DB Veldhoven, The Netherlands; (P.A.); (J.S.M.)
| | - Peter Andriessen
- Department of Neonatology, Máxima Medical Center, 5504 DB Veldhoven, The Netherlands; (P.A.); (J.S.M.)
| | - Floris Groenendaal
- Department of Neonatology, Wilhelmina Children’s Hospital, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3584 EA Utrecht, The Netherlands;
| | - Marije Hogeveen
- Department of Neonatology, Amalia Children’s Hospital, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 32, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands; (P.E.v.B.); (M.H.); (R.G.)
| | - Julia S. Meijer
- Department of Neonatology, Máxima Medical Center, 5504 DB Veldhoven, The Netherlands; (P.A.); (J.S.M.)
| | - Sylvia A. Obermann-Borst
- Care4Neo, Dutch Neonatal Patient and Parent Advocacy Organization, 3068 JN Rotterdam, The Netherlands; (S.A.O.-B.); (M.J.V.)
| | - Wes Onland
- Department of Neonatology, Emma Children’s Hospital, Amsterdam University Medical Center, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
- Amsterdam Reproduction & Development, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Marijn J. Vermeulen
- Care4Neo, Dutch Neonatal Patient and Parent Advocacy Organization, 3068 JN Rotterdam, The Netherlands; (S.A.O.-B.); (M.J.V.)
- Department of Neonatal and Pediatric Intensive Care, Division of Neonatology, Sophia Children’s Hospital, Erasmus Medical Center, 3015 CN Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E. J. T. (Joanne) Verweij
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Leiden University Medical Centre, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands;
| | - Lien De Proost
- Department of Ethics and Law, Leiden University Medical Centre, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands;
| | - Rosa Geurtzen
- Department of Neonatology, Amalia Children’s Hospital, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 32, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands; (P.E.v.B.); (M.H.); (R.G.)
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
"We Absolutely Had the Impression That It Was Our Decision"-A Qualitative Study with Parents of Critically Ill Infants Who Participated in End-of-Life Decision Making. CHILDREN (BASEL, SWITZERLAND) 2022; 10:children10010046. [PMID: 36670597 PMCID: PMC9856896 DOI: 10.3390/children10010046] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2022] [Revised: 11/08/2022] [Accepted: 12/21/2022] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Guidelines recommend shared decision making (SDM) between neonatologists and parents when a decision has to be made about the continuation of life-sustaining treatment (LST). In a previous study, we found that neonatologists and parents at a German Level-III Neonatal Intensive Care Unit performed SDM to a variable but overall small extent. However, we do not know whether parents in Germany prefer an extent of more or sharing. METHODS We performed a qualitative interview study with parents who participated in our first study. We analyzed the semi-structured interviews with qualitative content analysis according to Kuckartz. RESULTS The participation in medical decision making (MDM) varied across cases. Overall, neonatologists and parents conducted SDM in most cases only to a small extent. All parents appreciated their experience independent of how much they were involved in MDM. The parents who experienced a small extent of sharing were glad that they were protected by neonatologists from having to decide, shielding them from a conflict of interest. The parents who experienced a large extent of sharing especially valued that they were able to fulfil their parental duties even if that meant partaking in a decision to forgo LST. DISCUSSION Other studies have also found a variety of possibilities for parents to partake in end-of-life decision making (EOL-DM). Our results suggest that parents do not have a uniform preference for one specific decision-making approach, but rather different parents appreciate their individual experience regardless of the model for DM. CONCLUSION SDM is apparently not a one-size-fits-all approach. Instead, neonatologists and parents have to adapt the decision-making process to the parents' individual needs and preferences for autonomy and protection. Therefore, SDM should not be prescribed as a uniform standard in medico-ethical guidelines, but rather as a flexible guidance for DM for critically ill patients in neonatology.
Collapse
|