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

Author:

Akkermans A. (Aranka)1ORCID,Lamerichs J.M.W.J. (Joyce)2,Schultz M.J. (Marcus)345,Cherpanath T.G.V. (Thomas)3,van Woensel J.B.M. (Job)6,van Heerde M. (Marc)6,van Kaam A.H.L.C. (Anton)7ORCID,van de Loo M.D. (Moniek)7,Stiggelbout A.M. (Anne)8,Smets E.M.A. (Ellen)1,de Vos M.A. (Mirjam)9

Affiliation:

1. Department of Medical Psychology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

2. Faculty of Humanities, Department of Language, Literature and Communication, VU Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

3. Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

4. Mahidol-Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit (MORU), Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand

5. Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

6. Department of Pediatric Intensive Care, Emma Children’s Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

7. Department of Neonatology, Emma Children’s Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

8. Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Science, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands

9. Department of Pediatrics, Emma Children’s Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Abstract

Background: Intensive care doctors have to find the right balance between sharing crucial decisions with families of patients on the one hand and not overburdening them on the other hand. This requires a tailored approach instead of a model based approach. Aim: To explore how doctors involve families in the decision-making process regarding life-sustaining treatment on the neonatal, pediatric, and adult intensive care. Design: Exploratory inductive thematic analysis of 101 audio-recorded conversations. Setting/participants: One hundred four family members (61% female, 39% male) and 71 doctors (60% female, 40% male) of 36 patients (53% female, 47% male) from the neonatal, pediatric, and adult intensive care of a large university medical center participated. Results: We identified eight relevant and distinct communicative behaviors. Doctors’ sequential communicative behaviors either reflected consistent approaches—a shared approach or a physician-driven approach—or reflected vacillating between both approaches. Doctors more often displayed a physician-driven or a vacillating approach than a shared approach, especially in the adult intensive care. Doctors did not verify whether their chosen approach matched the families’ decision-making preferences. Conclusions: Even though tailoring doctors’ communication to families’ preferences is advocated, it does not seem to be integrated into actual practice. To allow for true tailoring, doctors’ awareness regarding the impact of their communicative behaviors is key. Educational initiatives should focus especially on improving doctors’ skills in tactfully exploring families’ decision-making preferences and in mutually sharing knowledge, values, and treatment preferences.

Funder

zonmw

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,General Medicine

Reference56 articles.

1. Ethics and end-of-life care for adults in the intensive care unit

2. Guidelines for Family-Centered Care in the Neonatal, Pediatric, and Adult ICU

3. Shared Decision Making in ICUs

4. Norman G. What few appreciate: the gray zone of medical decisions, https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140324195914-10808081-what-few-appreciate-the-gray-zone-of-medical-decisions (2014, accessed 21 August 2020).

5. The Process and Impact of Stakeholder Engagement in Developing a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit Communication and Decision-Making Intervention

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3