Family surrogate decision-makers' perspectives in decision-making of patients with disorders of consciousness

To explore and describe the experience of decision-making for patients with disorders of consciousness (DOC) from the perspectives of family surrogate decision-makers. A total of 21 face-to-face interviews with family surrogate decision-makers from a tertiary hospital in Shanghai, China were conducted from January 2021 to February 2021. Thematic analysis was used for data analysis. Four main themes were identified and were included in this study: (1) a tough choice between life and dignity, (2) a major responsibility for patient's voice, (3) complex considerations between ethics and morals, and (4) the importance of realistic basis. The surrogate decision-making of DOC patients in China has been affected by the Chinese cultural context and several practical roots. And the family surrogate decision-makers shared their experiences of trade-offs during the decision-making process. Moreover, family surrogate decision-makers realized their serious responsibility to make a decision that would be in the best interest of DOC patients.

(Re)Conceptualising 'good' proxy decision-making for research: the implications for proxy consent decision quality

People who are unable to make decisions about participating in research rely on proxies to make a decision based on their wishes and preferences. However, patients rarely discuss their preferences about research and proxies find it challenging to determine what their wishes would be. While the process of informed consent has traditionally been the focus of research to improve consent decisions, the more conceptually complex area of what constitutes 'good' proxy decision-making for research has remained unexplored. Interventions are needed to improve and support proxy decision-making for research but are hampered by a lack of understanding about what constitutes decision quality in this context. A global increase in conditions associated with cognitive impairment such as dementia has led to an urgent need for more research into these conditions. The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent necessity to conduct research with large numbers of critically ill patients has made this need even more pressing. Much of the empirical research centres on the desire to improve decision accuracy, despite growing evidence that authenticity is more reflective of the aim of proxy decisions and concerns about the methodological flaws in authenticity-focused studies. Such studies also fail to take account of the impact of decision-making on proxies, or the considerable body of research on improving the quality of healthcare decisions. This paper reports a concept synthesis of the literature that was conducted to develop the first conceptualisation of 'good' proxy decisions about research participation. Elements of decision quality were identified across three stages of decision-making: proxy preparedness for decision-making which includes knowledge and understanding, and values clarification and preference elicitation; the role of uncertainty, decisional conflict, satisfaction and regret in the decision-making process; and preference linked outcomes and their effect. This conceptualisation provides an essential first step towards the future development of interventions to enhance the quality of proxy decision-making and ensure proxy decisions represent patients' values and preferences.

Factors predicting collaborative willingness of surrogates making medical decisions on the Physician Order for Scope of Treatment (POST)

Objective: The Physician's Order for Scope of Treatment (POST) indicates patient preferences regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), levels of care, and fluids/nutrition provision decisions. When patients become incapacitated, 'surrogates' often collaborate with physicians on POST decisions. Surrogates may vary in their willingness to collaborate, which can be problematic when physicians expect shared decision-making. No research has yet investigated collaborative decision-making among surrogates on the POST. This study investigated how six psychological variables predicted participants' desires for collaboration when completing an online decision-making task.Methods: Participants served as hypothetical surrogates and made decisions for another person on the three sections of the West Virginia POST. One-hundred-and-seventy-two adults were recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk.Results: The six variables contributed significantly to the prediction of collaborative willingness, F (6, 163) = 5.29, p < .001, R²= 0.19. Two variables uniquely contributed: confidence and consideration of future consequences. The model most strongly predicted collaborative willingness for the CPR decision.Conclusion: This study provides a novel examination of under-researched areas: surrogate collaborative willingness and the POST. Differing risks associated with the three POST decisions may influence how surrogates value collaboration. Ways to enhance collaborative willingness when making POST decisions are discussed.

Accuracy in Surrogate End-of-Life Medical Decision-Making: A Critical Review

BACKGROUND

Increasing age is accompanied by a greater need for medical decisions, due in part to age-related increases in chronic disease and disability. In later life, medical decisions about end-of-life care in particular are likely. However, a significant percentage of these decisions are made by surrogate decision-makers. "Surrogates" are most often instructed to use the substituted judgment standard and make decisions that patients would choose if they were able. Whether surrogates make decisions that adequately match patients' preferences is a concern. Surrogates are generally poor predictors of patient preferences (Shalowitz et al., 2006). However, no critical review of this literature has yet been published.

METHOD

A critical review was conducted to summarise and provide a methodological critique of 25 studies.

RESULTS

These studies generally concur that patient-surrogate agreement on medical decisions is poor. However, this conclusion is qualified by inconsistencies in methodological quality and the potentially limited generalisability of these findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical research incorporating standardised hypothetical decision-making protocols, as well as triangulated data collection methods, would bolster confidence in future findings. Investigations prioritising the surrogate decision-making process, rather than solely the decisional outcome, could better identify ways to improve the decision-making process for incapacitated patients.

A mixed methods investigation of end-of-life surrogate decisions among older adults

Background

A large number of end-of-life decisions are made by a next-of-kin for a patient who has lost their decision-making capacity. This has given rise to investigations into how surrogates make these decisions. The experimental perspective has focused on examining how the decisions we make for others differ from our own, whereas the qualitative perspective has explored surrogate insights into making these decisions.

Methods

We conducted a mixed methods study to bring these two perspectives together. This is crucial to comparing decision outcomes to the decision process. We asked older adult partners to make end-of-life decisions for each other. They then took part in a semi-structured interview about their decision process. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results

24 participants took part in the study. Surrogates were more likely to take a life-saving treatment at the risk of a diminished quality of life for their partner than for themselves. This was consistent with their transcripts which showed that they wanted to give their partner a better chance of living. Although there was evidence of surrogate inaccuracy in the decision task, participants overwhelmingly reported their intention to make a decision which aligns with the substituted judgment standard. However, uncertainty about their wishes pushed them to consider other factors.

Conclusions

Taking a mixed methods approach allowed us to make novel comparisons between decision outcome and process. We found that the intentions of surrogates broadly align with the expectations of the substituted judgment standard and that previous discussions with their partner helps them to make a decision.

Decisions from experience: Competitive search and choice in kind and wicked environments

Information search is key to making decision from experience: exploration permits people to learn about the statistical properties of choice options and thus to become aware of rare but potentially momentous decision consequences. This registered report investigates whether and how people differ when making decisions from experience in isolation versus under competitive pressure, which may have important implications for choice performance in different types of choice environments: in “kind” environments without any rare and extreme events, frugal search is sufficient to identify advantageous options. Conversely, in “wicked” environments with skewed outcome distributions, rare but important events will tend to be missed in frugal search. One theoretical view is that competitive pressure encourages efficiency and may thereby boost adaptive search in different environments. An alternative and more pessimistic view is that competitive pressure triggers agency-related concerns, leading to minimal search irrespective of the choice environment, and hence to inferior choice performance. Using a sampling game, the present study (N = 277) found that solitary search was not adaptive to different choice environments (M = 14 samples), leading to a high choice performance in a kind and in a moderately wicked environment, but somewhat lower performance in an extremely wicked environment. Competitive pressure substantially reduced search irrespective of the choice environment (M = 4 samples), thus negatively affecting overall choice performance. Yet, from the perspective of a cost-benefit framework, frugal search may be efficient under competitive pressure. In sum, this report extends research on decisions from experience by adopting an ecological perspective (i.e., systematically varying different choice environments) and by introducing a cost-benefit framework to evaluate solitary and competitive search — with the latter constituting a challenging problem for people in an increasingly connected world.

[The impact of support from medical professionals on families' decision-making during end-of-life care]

Families are involved in decision-making regarding end-of-life (EOL) care in Japan. However, how support from medical professionals toward families' decision-making affects families' satisfaction with EOL care has not been adequately studied. We aimed to examine the impact of support from medical professionals considering the care recipients' preferences on families' overall satisfaction with EOL care and the mediating effect of fulfilling care recipients' preferences.We administered self-report questionnaires through home-nursing providers to bereaved families (n=753), who lost loved ones between April 2015 and March 2016. Analyses were conducted with 237 of these bereaved families whose loved ones had been ≥65 years old, and had no missing values in key variables. We asked whether the families had received any support from medical professionals in determining the care recipients' EOL preferences, in discussing how to honor the care recipients' own interests, and in supporting the families' decision-making. We also collected data measuring the overall satisfaction with EOL care, families' perceptions that the care recipients' preferences were honored during EOL care, and demographic characteristics of care recipients and caregivers.Data from 58 male and 179 female family members were analyzed. The average age was 65.8 (standard deviation [SD]=11.9) years. Care recipients were 113 men and 124 women, and their average age was 83.0 (SD=9.1) years old at the time of death. A path analysis revealed that support for families from medical professionals was related to families' satisfaction with EOL care through the mediating factor of fulfilling care recipients' preferences.Support from medical professionals considering care recipients' preferences will help families' involvement in EOL decision-making.

Shared responsibility in collective decisions

Research investigating collective decision-making has focused primarily on the improvement of accuracy in collective decisions and less on the motives that drive individuals to make these decisions. We argue that a strong but neglected motive for making collective decisions is minimizing the material and psychological burden of an individual's responsibility. Making difficult decisions with others shields individuals from the consequences of negative outcomes by reducing regret, punishment and stress. Considering shared responsibility as a another key motivation to join groups helps understand behaviours with societal implications such as political voting, committing norm violations, predicting natural disasters and making health-related decisions.

Exploring How Accountability Affects the Medical Decisions We Make for Other People

In the event that a patient has lost their decision-making capacity due to illness or injury, a surrogate is often appointed to do so on their behalf. Research has shown that people take less risk when making treatment decisions for other people than they do for themselves. This has been discussed as surrogates employing greater caution for others given the accountability they are faced with. We tested the prediction that making accountability salient reduces risk-taking for others relative to the self by manipulating the information shown to participants while they made treatment choices. One group was asked to focus on the consequences for the recipient’s family, another on the legal implications of their decisions, and another was not given additional information. Participants reduced their risk-taking for others compared to themselves, irrespective of the condition they were in. Although participants in each condition reported thinking about these factors to different extents, there were no clear differences in risk-taking between groups. However, we did find that, across all participants, thinking about legal consequences reduces risk-taking. We suggest that future research investigates how the effect of thinking about accountability on surrogate choices is mediated by feelings of accountability, in order to further examine the explanations suggested in the literature.

Development and Pilot Testing of a Simulation to Study How Physicians Facilitate Surrogate Decision Making Based on Critically Ill Patients' Values and Preferences

CONTEXT

There are no evidence-based programs to train physicians to facilitate shared decision making based on incapacitated intensive care unit patients' values and preferences.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to develop a high-fidelity simulation to fill this gap.

METHODS

Case development involved six steps: 1) drafting a case about an elderly patient receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation; 2) engaging an expert advisory board to optimize case content; 3) revising the case based on advisory board input; 4) training actors to portray the case patient's daughter; 5) obtaining physician feedback on the simulation; and 6) revising the case based on their feedback. We conducted a cross-sectional pilot study with 50 physicians to assess feasibility and acceptability, defined a priori as an enrollment rate >40 physicians/year, study procedures <75 minutes/participant, >95% actor adherence to standardization rules, and high physician ratings of realism and acceptability.

RESULTS

Advisory panel feedback yielded two modifications: 1) refocusing the case on decision making about tracheostomy and percutaneous gastrostomy and 2) making the patient's values more authentic. Physician feedback yielded two additional modifications: 1) reducing how readily the actor divulged the patient's values and 2) making her more emotional. All 50 physicians enrolled in the pilot study over 11 months completed study procedures in <75 minutes. Actor adherence to standardization rules was 95.8%. Physicians' mean ratings of realism and acceptability were 8.4 and 9.1, respectively, on a 10-point scale.

CONCLUSION

Simulation is feasible, is acceptable, and can be adequately standardized to study physicians' skills for facilitating surrogate decision making based on an incapacitated intensive care unit patient's values and preferences.

Protocol and Fidelity Monitoring Plan for Four Supports. A Multicenter Trial of an Intervention to Support Surrogate Decision Makers in Intensive Care Units

Individuals acting as surrogate decision makers for critically ill patients frequently struggle in this role and experience high levels of long-term psychological distress. Prior interventions designed to improve the sharing of information by the clinical team with surrogate decision makers have demonstrated little effect on surrogates' outcomes or clinical decisions. In this report, we describe the study protocol and corresponding intervention fidelity monitoring plan for a multicenter randomized clinical trial testing the impact of a multifaceted surrogate support intervention (Four Supports) on surrogates' psychological distress, the quality of decisions about goals of care, and healthcare use. We will randomize the surrogates of 300 incapacitated critically ill patients at high risk of death and/or severe long-term functional impairment to receive the Four Supports intervention or an education control. The Four Supports intervention adds to the intensive care unit (ICU) team a trained interventionist (family support specialist) who delivers four types of protocolized support-emotional support; communication support; decisional support; and, if indicated, anticipatory grief support-to surrogates through daily interactions during the ICU stay. The primary outcome is surrogates' symptoms of anxiety and depression at 6-month follow-up, measured with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Prespecified secondary outcome measures are the Patient Perception of Patient Centeredness Scale (modified for use with surrogates) and Impact of Event Scale scores at 3- and 6-month follow-up, respectively, together with ICU and hospital lengths of stay and total hospital cost among decedents. The fidelity monitoring plan entails establishing and measuring adherence to the intervention using multiple measurement methods, including daily checklists and coding of audiorecorded encounters. This approach to intervention fidelity may benefit others designing and testing behavioral interventions in the ICU setting. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01982877).

Deciding on behalf of others: a population survey on procedural preferences for surrogate decision-making

OBJECTIVES

To assess people's procedural preferences for making medical surrogate decisions, from the perspectives of both a potential surrogate and an incapacitated patient.

DESIGN

Computer-assisted telephone interviews. Respondents were randomly assigned either the role of an incapacitated patient or that of a potential surrogate for an incapacitated family member. They were asked to rate six approaches to making a surrogate decision: patient-designated surrogate, discussion among family members, majority vote of family members' individual judgements, legally assigned surrogate, population-based treatment indicator and delegating the decision to a physician.

SETTING

Germany and German-speaking and French-speaking parts of Switzerland.

PARTICIPANTS

2010 respondents were quota sampled from a panel (representative for the German and German-speaking and French-speaking Swiss populations, respectively, in terms of age, sex and regions).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Endorsement of each approach (rated on a scale from 1 to 10). Degree to which preferences overlap between the perspective of potential surrogates and potential patients.

RESULTS

Respondents' endorsement of the six different approaches varied markedly (from Mdn=9.3 to Mdn=2.6). Yet the preferences of respondents taking the perspective of incapacitated patients corresponded closely with those of respondents taking the perspective of a potential surrogate (absolute differences ranging from 0.1 to 1.3). The preferred approaches were a patient-designated surrogate (Mdn=9.3) and all family members making a collective decision by means of group discussion (Mdn=9.3). The two least-preferred approaches were relying on a statistical prediction rule (Mdn=3.0) and delegating the decision to a physician (Mdn=2.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Although respondents taking the perspective of an incapacitated patient preferred a patient-designated surrogate, few people have designated such a surrogate in practice. Policy-makers may thus consider implementing active choice, that is, identifying institutional settings in which many people can be reached (eg, when obtaining a driver's licence) and requesting them to complete advance directives and to designate a specific surrogate. Moreover, potential patients and surrogates alike highly valued shared surrogate decisions among family members. Policy-makers may consider acknowledging this possibility explicitly in future legislation, and caregivers and physicians may consider promoting shared surrogate decisions in practice.

When to consider boosting: some rules for policy-makers

In recent years, public officials have shown a growing interest in using evidence from the behavioural sciences to promote policy goals. Much of the discussion of behaviourally informed approaches has focused on ‘nudges’; that is, non-fiscal and non-regulatory interventions that steer (nudge) people in a specific direction while preserving choice. Less attention has been paid to boosts, an alternative evidence-based class of non-fiscal and non-regulatory intervention. The goal of boosts is to make it easier for people to exercise their own agency in making choices. For instance, when people are at risk of making poor health, medical or financial choices, the policy-maker – rather than steering behaviour through nudging – can take action to foster or boost individuals’ own decision-making competences. Boosts range from interventions that require little time and cognitive effort on the individual's part to ones that require substantial amounts of training, effort and motivation. This article outlines six rules that policy-makers can apply in order to determine under which conditions boosts, relative to nudges, are the preferable form of non-fiscal and non-regulatory intervention. The objective is not to argue that boosts are better than nudges or vice versa, but to begin to spell out the two approaches’ respective conditions for success.

Capacity and consent: Knowledge and practice of legal and healthcare standards

INTRODUCTION:

Healthcare practitioners have a legal, ethical and professional obligation to obtain patient consent for all healthcare treatments. There is increasing evidence which suggests dissonance and variation in practice in assessment of decision-making capacity and consent processes.

AIMS:

This study explores healthcare practitioners' knowledge and practices of assessing decision-making capacity and obtaining patient consent to treatment in the acute generalist setting.

METHODS:

An exploratory descriptive cross-sectional survey design, using an online questionnaire, method was employed with all professional groups invited via email to participate. Data were collected over 3 months from July to September 2015. Survey content and format was reviewed by the liaison psychiatry team and subsequently contained five sections (demographics, general knowledge and practice, delirium context, legal aspects and education/training). Descriptive, univariate and bivariate analysis of quantitative data and qualitative content analysis of qualitative data were undertaken.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS:

The study was approved by the institutional Human Research and Ethics Committee and informed consent was taken to be provided by participants upon completion and submission of the de-identified survey.

RESULTS:

In total, 86 participants engaged the survey with n = 24, exiting at the first consent question. Almost two-thirds of respondents indicated that all treatments required patient consent. Knowledge of consent and decision-making capacity as legal constructs was deficient. Decision-making capacity was primarily assessed using professional judgement and perceived predominantly as the responsibility of medical and psychology staff. A range of patient psychological and behavioural symptoms were identified as indicators requiring assessment of decision-making capacity. Despite this, many patients with delirium have their decision-making capacity assessed and documented only sometimes. Uncertain knowledge and inconsistent application of legislative frameworks are evident. Many participants were unsure of the legal mechanisms for obtaining substitute consent in patients with impaired decision-making capacity and refusing treatment.

CONCLUSION:

The legal context of decision-making capacity and consent to treatment appears complex for healthcare practitioners. Professional, ethical and legal standards of care in this context can benefit from structured education programmes and supportive governance processes. An understanding of why 'duty of care' is being used as a framework within the context of impaired decision-making capacity is warranted, alongside a review of the context of Duty of Care within health policy, guidance and faculty teaching.

Financial Surrogate Decision Making: Lessons from Applied Experimental Philosophy

An estimated 1 in 4 elderly Americans need a surrogate to make decisions at least once in their lives. With an aging population, that number is almost certainly going to increase. This paper focuses on financial surrogate decision making. To illustrate some of the empirical and moral implications associated with financial surrogate decision making, two experiments suggest that default choice settings can predictably influence some surrogate financial decision making. Experiment 1 suggested that when making hypothetical financial decisions, surrogates tended to stay with default settings (OR = 4.37, 95% CI 1.52, 12.48). Experiment 2 replicated and extended this finding suggesting that in a different context (OR = 2.27, 95% CI 1.1, 4.65). Experiment 2 also suggested that those who were more numerate were less likely to be influenced by default settings than the less numerate, but only when the decision is whether to "opt in" (p = .05). These data highlight the importance of a recent debate about "nudging." Defaults are common methods to nudge people to make desirable choices while allowing the liberty to choose otherwise. Some of the ethics of using default settings to nudge surrogate decision makers are discussed.

Development of a decision guide to support the elderly in decision making about location of care: an iterative, user-centered design

PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY

For the elderly to get the care and services they need, they may need to make the difficult decision about staying in their home or moving to another home. Many other people may be involved in their care too (friends, family and healthcare providers), and can support them in making the decision. We asked informal caregivers of elderly people to help us develop a decision guide to support them and their loved ones in making this decision. This guide will be used by health providers in home care who are trained to help people make decisions. The guide is in French and English. To design and test this decision guide we involved elderly people, their caregivers and health administrators. We first asked them what they needed for making the decision, and then designed a first version of the guide. Then we asked them to look at it and give feedback, which was used to make the final version. We then used scientific criteria to check its content and the language used. The final decision guide was acceptable to the caregivers, their elderly loved ones, and the health administrators. The guide is currently being evaluated in a large research project with home care teams in the province of Quebec.

ABSTRACT

Background As they grow older, many elderly people are faced with the difficult and preference-sensitive decision about staying in their home or moving to a residence better adapted to their evolving care needs. We aimed to develop an English and French decision aid (DA) for elderly people facing this decision, and to involve end-users in all phases of the development process. Methods A three-cycle design with involvement of end-users in Quebec. End-users were elderly people (n = 4) caregivers of the elderly (n = 5), health administrators involved in home-care service delivery or policy (n = 6) and an interprofessional research team (n = 19). Cycle 1: Decisional needs assessment and development of the first prototype based on existing tools and input from end-users; overview of reviews examining the impact of location of care on elderly people's health outcomes. Cycle 2: Usability testing with end-users, adaptation of prototype. Cycle 3: Refinement of the prototype with a linguist, graphic designer and end-users. The final prototype underwent readability testing and an International Patient Decision Aids (IPDAS) criteria compatibility assessment to verify minimal requirements for decision aids and was tested for usability by the elderly. ResultsCycle 1: We used the Ottawa Personal Decision Guide to design a first prototype. As the overview of reviews did not find definitive evidence regarding optimal locations of care for elderly people, we were not able to add evidence-based advantages and disadvantages to the guide. Cycle 2: Overall, the caregivers and health administrators who evaluated the prototype (n = 10) were positive. In response to their suggestions, we deleted some elements (overview of pros, cons, and consequences of the options) that were necessary to qualify the tool as a DA and renamed it a "decision guide". Cycle 3: We developed French and English versions of the guide, readable at a primary school level. The elderly judged the guide as acceptable. Conclusion We developed a decision guide to support elderly people and their caregivers in decision making about location of care. This paper is one of few to report on a fully collaborative approach to decision guide development that involves end-users at every stage (caregivers and health administrators early on, the frail elderly in the final stages). The guide is currently being evaluated in a cluster randomized trial. Trial registration: NCT02244359.

Doctors' decisions when faced with contradictory patient advance directives and health care proxy opinion: a randomized vignette-based study

CONTEXT

Sometimes a written advance directive contradicts the opinion of a health care proxy. How this affects doctors' decision making is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the influence of contradictory instructions on doctors' decisions.

METHODS

All the generalists and internists in French-speaking Switzerland were mailed the questionnaire. Respondents (43.5%) evaluated three vignettes that described medical decisions for incapacitated patients. Each vignette was produced in four versions: one with an advance directive, one with a proxy opinion, one with both, and one with neither (control). In the first vignette, the directive and proxy agreed on the recommendation to forgo a medical intervention; in the second, the advance directive opposed, but the proxy favored the intervention; and in the third, the roles were reversed. Each doctor received one version of each vignette, attributed at random. The outcome variables were the doctor's decision to forgo the medical intervention and the rating of the decision as difficult.

RESULTS

Written advance directives and proxy opinions significantly influenced doctors' decision making. When both were available and concordant, they reinforced each other (odds ratio [OR] of forgoing intervention 35.7, P < 0.001 compared with no instruction). When the directive and proxy disagreed, the resulting effect was to forgo the intervention (ORs 2.1 and 2.2 for the two discordant vignettes, both P < 0.001). Discordance between instructions was associated with increased odds of doctors rating the decision as difficult (both ORs 2.0, P ≤ 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Contradictions between advance directives and proxy opinions result in a weak preference for abstention from treatment and increase the difficulty of the decision.