Clinician-Family Communication About Patients' Values and Preferences in Intensive Care Units

Evidence-Based Communication with Critically Ill Older Adults

Communication is a critical component of patient-centered care. Critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients are unable to speak and this condition is frightening, frustrating, and stressful. Impaired communication in the intensive care unit (ICU) contributes to poor symptom identification and restricts effective patient engagement. Older adults are at higher risk for communication impairments in the ICU because of pre-illness communication disorders and cognitive dysfunction that often accompanies or precedes critical illness. Assessing communication disorders and developing patient-centered strategies to enhance communication can lessen communication difficulty and increase patient satisfaction.

Ethical, legal, and communication challenges in managing goals-of-care discussions in chronically critically ill patients

Clinicians should expect controversial goals of care discussions in the surgical intensive care from time to time. Differing opinions about the likelihood of meaningful recovery in patients with chronic critical illness often exist between intensive care unit providers of different disciplines. Outcome predictions presented by health-care providers are often reflections of their own point of view that is influenced by provider experience, profession, and personal values, rather than the consequence of reliable scientific evaluation. In addition, family members of intensive care unit patients often develop acute cognitive, psychologic, and physical challenges. Providers in the surgical intensive care unit should approach goals-of-care discussions in a structured and interprofessional manner. This best practice paper highlights medical, legal and ethical implications of changing goals of care from prioritizing cure to prioritizing comfort and provides tools that help physicians become effective leaders in the multi-disciplinary management of patients with challenging prognostication.

Evaluation of a program using a physician assistant and an electronic patient-provider communication tool to facilitate discussions about goals of care in older adults in hospital: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Many patients receive unwanted, low-value, high-intensity care at the end of life because of poor communication with health care providers. Our aim was to evaluate the feasibility of using a physician assistant and an electronic tool to facilitate discussions about goals of care.

METHOD

We conducted a pilot study for the intervention (physician assistant-led discussion using an electronic tool) from Apr. 1 to Aug. 31, 2019. Patients aged 79 years or older admitted to the Royal Victoria Hospital (Barrie, Ontario) with either (i) no documented resuscitation preferences or (ii) a request for life-sustaining treatments in the event of a life-threatening illness were eligible for the intervention. The goal of this study was to complete more than 30 interventions. The primary outcomes included the proportion of consenting eligible patients, the time required and the proportion of patients changing their resuscitation preferences.

RESULTS

A total of 763 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 337 eligible for the intervention. Of these, 49 cases were contacted for consent, and 37 interventions were completed (75.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 61.1%-86.6%). On average, the intervention required 50 minutes (standard deviation 21) to complete. Overall, 31 interventions resulted in a change in resuscitation preferences (83.7%, 95% CI 68.0%-93.8%), with 22 patients choosing to forgo any access to life-sustaining treatments in the event of a life-threatening illness (59.4%, 95% CI 42.1%-75.2%).

INTERPRETATION

In this pilot study, the intervention was completed in a minority of eligible patients and required substantial time; however, it led to many changes in resuscitation preferences. Before designing a study to evaluate its impact, the intervention needs to be revised to make it more efficient to administer.

Prehospital Frailty and Screening Criteria for Palliative Care Services in Critically Ill Older Adults: An Observational Cohort Study

Background: The use of formalized criteria (or triggers) for palliative care services (PCSs) has been associated with increased use of PCSs in the intensive care unit (ICU). Objective: To explore the utility/validity of frailty as a trigger for providing PCSs. Design: This is a prospective cohort study. Setting/Subjects: Older adults (age ≥50 years) admitted to ICUs were enrolled. Measurements: We measured frailty using the Clinical Frailty Scale. We reviewed electronic health records for the presence/absence of six evidence-based triggers, the use and quality of specialty palliative care (SPC), and markers of primary palliative care (PPC). We used descriptive statistics to describe the differences in PPC, SPC, and six-month mortality by frailty and by the presence/absence of triggers. Results: In a study population of 302 older adults, mean (standard deviation) age 67.2 years (10.5), 151 (50%) were frail and 105 (34.8%) had ≥1 trigger for PCSs. Of the 151 (55.6%) frail patients, 84 had no triggers for PCSs, despite a 46.4% six-month mortality in this group. Patients with ≥1 trigger had higher rates of SPC than those without (39.1% vs. 18.3%, p < 0.001); frail patients also had higher SPC than nonfrail patients (32.5% vs. 18.5%, p = 0.006). Patients with ≥1 trigger had higher rates of PPC than those without (66.7% vs. 44.2%, p < 0.001); no statistically significant difference in PPC was found by frailty (56.3% vs. 47.7%, p = 0.134). Conclusion: The rates of PCSs and six-month mortality by frailty are consistent with frailty being a valid trigger for PCSs in ICUs; the high prevalence of frailty relative to triggers suggests that ways to increase PCSs would be needed.

Palliative Care and End-of-Life Considerations for the Frail Patient

Patients with frailty experience substantial physical and emotional distress related to their condition and face increased morbidity and mortality compared with their nonfrail peers. Palliative care is an interdisciplinary medical specialty focused on improving quality of life for patients with serious illness, including those with frailty, throughout their disease course. Anesthesiology providers will frequently encounter frail patients in the perioperative period and in the intensive care unit (ICU) and can contribute to improving the quality of life for these patients through the provision of palliative care. We highlight the opportunities to incorporate primary palliative care, including basic symptom management and straightforward goals-of-care discussions, provided by the primary clinicians, and when necessary, timely consultation by a specialty palliative care team to assist with complex symptom management and goals-of-care discussions in the face of team and/or family conflict. In this review, we apply the principles of palliative care to patients with frailty and synthesize the evidence regarding methods to integrate palliative care into the perioperative and ICU settings.

Appraisal of Health States Worse Than Death in Patients With Acute Stroke

Objective

To identify health states that patients with acute stroke deem worse than death and to explore potential predictors for these ratings.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study involving patients admitted to an urban comprehensive stroke center with acute stroke. Participants were asked to rate 10 possible health states/functional outcomes as better or worse than death using a 5-point Likert scale. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to reduce clusters of correlated ratings to summary components (factors). These components were then analyzed using linear regression to identify possible predictive variables.

Results

Eighty patients participated. The states deemed equal to or worse than death by the majority of participants were relying on a breathing machine (66%) or feeding tube (66%), persistent confusion (62%), inability to communicate with others (58%), and bowel/bladder incontinence (50%). PCA revealed 2 factors of correlated variables: factor 1 composed primarily of relying on a feeding tube or breathing machine, incontinence, chronic pain, and persistent confusion, and factor 2 composed primarily of using a wheelchair, being bedbound, living in a nursing home, and requiring help for activities of daily living. The only significant predictor found was race for factor 1, with black participants finding these states more preferable to death than white participants.

Discussion

A substantial number of patients found multiple common outcomes of stroke to be the same as or worse than death. This highlights the importance of realistic discussions about expected functional outcomes with patients and/or their surrogate decision makers when considering goals of care after stroke.

Physician Self-assessment of Shared Decision-making in Simulated Intensive Care Unit Family Meetings

IMPORTANCE

Professional guidelines have identified key communication skills for shared decision-making for critically ill patients, but it is unclear how intensivists interpret and implement them.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the self-evaluations of intensivists reviewing transcripts of their own simulated intensive care unit family meetings with the evaluations of trained expert colleagues.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A posttrial web-based survey of intensivists was conducted between January and March 2019. Intensivists reviewed transcripts of simulated intensive care unit family meetings in which they participated in a previous trial from October 2016 to November 2017. In the follow-up survey, participants identified if and how they performed key elements of shared decision-making for an intensive care unit patient at high risk of death. Transcript texts that intensivists self-identified as examples of key communication skills recommended by their professional society's policy on shared decision-making were categorized.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Comparison of the evaluations of 2 blinded nonparticipant intensivist colleagues with the self-reported responses of the intensivists.

RESULTS

Of 116 eligible intensivists, 76 (66%) completed the follow-up survey (mean [SD] respondent age was 43.1 [8.1] years; 72% were male). Sixty-one of 76 intensivists reported conveying prognosis; however, blinded colleagues who reviewed the deidentified transcripts were less likely to report that prognosis had been conveyed than intensivists reviewing their own transcripts (42 of 61; odds ratio, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.01-0.44; P < .001). When reviewing their own transcript, intensivists reported presenting many choices, with the most common choice being code status. They also provided a variety of recommendations, with the most common being to continue the current treatment plan. Thirty-three participants (43%) reported that they offered care focused on comfort, but blinded colleagues rated only 1 (4%) as explaining this option in a clear manner.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, guidelines for shared decision-making and end of life care were interpreted by intensivists in disparate ways. In the absence of training or personalized feedback, self-assessment of communication skills may not be interpreted consistently.

Strategies to effect change in the ICU

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an update on implementation efforts in the care of critically ill patients, with a focus on work published in the last 2 years.

RECENT FINDINGS

Only half of surveyed members of the multidisciplinary care team in the ICU were aware of the Choosing Wisely campaign, and of those that were, approximately one-third reported no implementation of the recommendations. Barriers to implementation of the ABCDE bundle extend to beyond patient-level domains, and include clinician-related, protocol-related, and other domains. Prospective audit and feedback approaches have demonstrated moderate success for improving the quality of antibiotic prescription practices in the ICU.

SUMMARY

Clinical research in intensive care has moved beyond simple discovery and dissemination. Best practices must be applied to effect change in ICU care, requiring the application of principles from implementation science. Future work should move beyond simple before-after evaluations to provide a stronger case for causal inference following implementation efforts.

The Critical Care Nurse Communicator Program: An Integrated Primary Palliative Care Intervention

Twenty percent of Americans die in an intensive care unit (ICU), often incapacitated or requiring assisted decision making. Surrogates are often required to make urgent, complex, high-stakes decisions. Communication among patients, families, and clinicians is often delayed and inefficient with frequent missed opportunities to support the emotional and psychological needs of surrogates, particularly at the end of life. The Critical Care Nurse Communicator program is a nurse-led, primary palliative care intervention designed to improve the quality and consistency of communication in the ICU and address the informational, psychological, and emotional needs of surrogate decision-makers through the shared decision-making process.

Understanding the public's role in reducing low-value care: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Low-value care initiatives are rapidly growing; however, it is not clear how members of the public should be involved. The objective of this scoping review was to systematically examine the literature describing public involvement in initatives to reduce low-value care.

METHODS

Evidence sources included MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases from inception to November 26, 2019, grey literature (CADTH Tool), reference lists of included articles, and expert consultation. Citations were screened in duplicate and included if they referred to the public's perception and/or involvement in reducing low-value care. Public included patients or citizens without any advanced healthcare knowledge. Low-value care included medical tests or treatments that lack efficacy, have risks that exceed benefit, or are not cost-effective. Extracted data pertained to study characteristics, low-value practice, clinical setting, and level of public involvement (i.e., patient-clinician interaction, research, or policy-making).

RESULTS

The 218 included citations were predominantly original research (n = 138, 63%), published since 2010 (n = 192, 88%), originating from North America (n = 146, 67%). Most citations focused on patient engagement within the patient-clinician interaction (n = 156, 72%), using tools that included shared decision-making (n = 66, 42%) and patient-targeted educational materials (n = 72, 46%), and reported both reductions in low-value care and improved patient perceptions regarding low-value care. Fewer citations examined public involvement in low-value care policy-making (n = 33, 15%). Among citations that examined perspectives regarding public involvement in initiatives to reduce low-value care (n = 10, 5%), there was consistent support for the utility of tools applied within the patient-clinician interaction and less consistent support for involvement in policy-making.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts examining public involvement in low-value care concentrate within the patient-clinician interaction, wherein patient-oriented educational materials and shared decision-making tools have been commonly studied and are associated with reductions in low-value care. This contrasts with inclusion of the public in low-value care policy decisions wherein tools to promote engagement are less well-developed and involvement not consistently viewed as valuable.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/6fsxm).

A novel decision aid to help plan for serious illness: a multisite randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have shown substantial deficiencies in the quality or quantity (or both) of communication and decision-making during serious illness. We evaluated the efficacy of a novel decision support intervention, the Plan Well Guide, in increasing completion of a standard medical order form for advance medical care planning and improving decisional outcomes in nonacademic primary care settings.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized trial in 3 primary care practices in Lethbridge, Alberta in 2017-2018. We recruited "patients at high risk" referred by the primary care doctor who required establishment or review of their Goals of Care Designation (GCD). Enrolled patients were randomly allocated to receive the Plan Well Guide, delivered by a trained facilitator, or usual care. Eight to 12 weeks after the intervention, a research assistant blinded to intervention assignment contacted the patients in both groups by telephone to do a final outcome assessment. The primary outcome was completion of GCD forms; secondary outcomes included decisional conflict scores and ratings of satisfaction.

RESULTS

A total of 123 patients (59 women [48.0%]; mean age 73.9 yr) were enrolled, 66 in the intervention arm and 57 in the usualcare arm; 119 patients completed the trial. After the intervention, GCD completion rates in the intervention and usual-care groups were 95.3% and 90.9%, respectively (risk difference [RD] 4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -14% to 22%), and the rate of concordance between medical orders and expressed preferences on follow-up was 78% and 66%, respectively (RD 12%, 95% CI -7% to 30%). Significantly fewer patients in the intervention group than in the usual-care group had written medical orders for intensive care unit care and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (22 [34%] v. 33 [60%], RD -26%, 95% CI -42% to -8%). Patients in the intervention group had lower decisional conflict scores than those in the usual-care group (mean 30.9 v. 43.1, adjusted mean difference -12.0, 95% CI -23.2 to -0.8). Physicians considered patients in the intervention group to have lower decisional conflict than those in the usual-care group, although not significantly so (mean score 10.4 v. 14.9, adjusted mean difference -4.7, 95% CI -9.9 to 0.4) and spent less time with the former (mean 9.7 v. 13.2 min, adjusted mean difference -3.5, 95% CI -5.5 to -1.5 min).

INTERPRETATION

The decision-support intervention did not increase GCD completion rates but did seem to improve some aspects of decisional quality while reducing the physician's time to accomplish GCD decisions. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT01297946.

Use of the Serious Illness Conversation Guide to Improve Communication with Surrogates of Critically Ill Patients. A Pilot Study

Background: International family-centered critical care guidelines recommend formal, structured communication to ensure that clinical decision making is informed by a shared understanding of diagnosis and prognosis and patient goals and preferences. Tools to facilitate these recommendations are limited.

Objective: To examine the feasibility, acceptability, and utility of a standardized serious illness conversation (SIC) to guide communication between nonpalliative care trained providers and surrogates of critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients.

Methods: After providers received training, including simulation, we implemented SIC in October 2018. A total of 11 hospitalist providers were eligible to perform SICs over the study interval. Providers met in person with surrogates of adult, mechanically ventilated patients in the medical intensive care unit within 48 hours of intubation. To determine acceptability, surrogates were surveyed 2 months after SIC completion, and providers were surveyed between June and July 2018. To determine feasibility and utility, two independent investigators reviewed SIC documentation and coded responses into categories.

Results: Of 72 eligible patients, advanced care planning documentation was completed in 50 patients, including 36 SICs, for an advance care planning completion rate of 69% and an SIC completion rate of 50%. The average SIC was completed in 30 minutes, 3 days after intubation. Of the 19 surrogates surveyed, 95% found the SIC to be mostly or extremely worthwhile. Nine of 11 hospitalist providers completed the follow-up survey. Each of the nine providers who completed the survey found the guide valuable to patient care and easy to administer. The conversation yielded valuable information in terms of goals, fears, and worries; sources of strength; abilities critical to the patient; and understanding how much the patient would be willing to go through for the possibility of gaining more time.

Conclusion: We found that implementation of a structured communication tool in the intensive care unit was feasible and acceptable to surrogates and providers; yet, fidelity to the timing and completion was modest. The tool appeared to yield valuable information for understanding the goals, fears, and care preferences of mechanically ventilated patients. Steps to increase fidelity, in accordance with family-centered care guidelines, are warranted.

"Connection": The Integration of a Person-Centered Narrative Intervention into the Electronic Health Record: An Implementation Study

Background: Incorporating patient narratives into the electronic health record (EHR) is an opportunity to integrate patients' values and beliefs into their care and improve patient-clinician communication. Objective: The study's aims were to (1) identify barriers and facilitators influencing the implementation of a cocreated patient narrative intervention and (2) assess the acceptability/usability of the patient's narrative from the perspective of key stakeholders-the patient and acute care bedside nurse. Design: We used an implementation design using mixed methods. Setting/Subjects: Twenty patients and 18 nurses were enrolled from five units in an acute care hospital. Results: For patients, the narrative intervention provided an avenue to discuss and share how illness has impacted their life in psychological, social, and spiritual belief domains. For nurses, the ability to read the patient's narrative provided benefits that fostered improved communication and more connection with their patients. Despite successfully meeting recruitment targets, time was the largest barrier for patient and nurse participants. Overall, the nurse participants gave high ratings on most of the items on the System Usability Scale with one exception-EHR integration. The lack of EHR integration on the System Usability Survey corresponds with the nurses' stated desire for a prominent location of patient narratives in the EHR. Conclusions: The patient narrative intervention was acceptable and usable for hospitalized patients and nurse participants. Our study demonstrates that a cocreated patient narrative intervention provides avenues for patients and nurses to connect despite being in hectic acute care settings. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03391115.

Ethical considerations about artificial intelligence for prognostication in intensive care

Background

Prognosticating the course of diseases to inform decision-making is a key component of intensive care medicine. For several applications in medicine, new methods from the field of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning have already outperformed conventional prediction models. Due to their technical characteristics, these methods will present new ethical challenges to the intensivist.

Results

In addition to the standards of data stewardship in medicine, the selection of datasets and algorithms to create AI prognostication models must involve extensive scrutiny to avoid biases and, consequently, injustice against individuals or groups of patients. Assessment of these models for compliance with the ethical principles of beneficence and non-maleficence should also include quantification of predictive uncertainty. Respect for patients’ autonomy during decision-making requires transparency of the data processing by AI models to explain the predictions derived from these models. Moreover, a system of continuous oversight can help to maintain public trust in this technology. Based on these considerations as well as recent guidelines, we propose a pathway to an ethical implementation of AI-based prognostication. It includes a checklist for new AI models that deals with medical and technical topics as well as patient- and system-centered issues.

Conclusion

AI models for prognostication will become valuable tools in intensive care. However, they require technical refinement and a careful implementation according to the standards of medical ethics.

A National VA Palliative Care Quality Improvement Project for Improving Intensive Care Unit Family Meetings (ICU-FMs)

BACKGROUND

We sought to increase intensive care unit-family meeting (ICU-FM) documentation in the electronic health record in Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals.

MEASURES

Primary outcomes were proportion of VA decedents with ICU-FM and Bereaved Family Survey-Performance Measure (BFS-PM) scores of "excellent."

INTERVENTION

Quality improvement (QI) project, clinical champion, and ICU-FM templates were implemented in nine participating VA facilities. ICU-FMs and BFS-PM were determined in decedents between 2011 and 2018.

OUTCOMES

ICU-FM increased from 3% to 28% in participating vs. 5% to 6% in nonparticipating facilities over time. Participating facilities were five-fold more likely to have ICU-FMs among ICU decedents (OR = 5.69, [4.45-7.28]). Facility-wide excellent BFS-PM scores increased by 19% in participating vs. nonparticipating facilities at the end of the observation period (OR = 1.19, [1.10-1.30]), but no difference between groups was observed in patients who died in the ICU.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing ICU-FMs is necessary but not sufficient to improve family-reported satisfaction after an ICU death.

Estimating the Impact of Words Used by Physicians in Advance Care Planning Discussions: The "Do You Want Everything Done?" Effect

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

To estimate the probability of a substitute decision maker choosing to withdraw life-sustaining therapy after hearing an affirmative patient response to the phrase “Do you want everything done?”

Fidelity is fundamental: intervention predictors in advance care plans in terminal cancer

OBJECTIVES

Assessing whether interventions are implemented as intended (fidelity) is critical to establishing efficacy in clinical research yet rarely applied in advance care planning (ACP) interventions. We aimed to develop and implement a fidelity audit tool for an ACP intervention.

METHODS

We developed a fidelity audit tool assessing: (A) content; (B) quality (general communication, eliciting EOL preferences and prognostic communication); and (C) family/caregiver involvement. We audited (double-coded) 55 audio-recordings of ACP discussions delivered to advanced cancer patients and caregivers, within a clinical trial.

RESULTS

Fidelity to content was high: mean=9.38/11 but lower for the quality of general communication (mean=12.47/20), discussion of patient preferences (mean=4.67/7), prognosis (mean=3.9/6) and family/caregiver involvement (mean=2.67/4). Older patient age and caregiver religiosity were associated with higher fidelity. Higher fidelity to content was associated with the trial primary outcome of family caregiver report of patient wishes being discussed and met.

CONCLUSIONS

Fidelity to content, but not quality, of the ACP intervention is strong. Communication skills training is critical for ACP interventionists. Adherence was higher with older patients and religious carers, factors that may influence acceptance of death and readiness to undertake ACP, making the discussion easier.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12613001288718.