Toward Shared Decision Making at the End of Life in Intensive Care Units: Opportunities for Improvement | Critical Care Medicine | JAMA Internal Medicine | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 34.204.186.91. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Angus  DCBarnato  AELinde-Zwirble  WT  et al.  Use of intensive care at the end of life in the United States.  Crit Care Med 2004;32638- 643PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Prendergast  TJClaessens  MTLuce  JM A national survey of end-of-life care for critically ill patients.  Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998;1581163- 1167PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Cohen  SSprung  CSjokvist  P  et al.  Communication of end-of-life decisions in European intensive care units.  Intensive Care Med 2005;311215- 1221PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Pochard  FDarmon  MFassier  T  et al. FAMIREA Study Group, Symptoms of anxiety and depression in family members of intensive care unit patients before discharge or death: a prospective multicenter study.  J Crit Care 2005;2090- 96Google ScholarCrossref
5.
Schneiderman  LJJecker  NSJonsen  AR Medical futility: its meaning and ethical implications.  Ann Intern Med 1990; ((112)) 949- 954PubMedGoogle Scholar
6.
Abbott  KHSago  JGBreen  CMAbernethy  APTulsky  JA Families looking back: one year after discussion of withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining support.  Crit Care Med 2001;29197- 201PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Breen  CMAbernethy  APAbbott  KHTulsky  JA Conflict associated with decisions to limit life-sustaining treatment in intensive care units.  J Gen Intern Med 2001;16283- 289PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Dowling  JWang  B Impact on family satisfaction: the Critical Care Family Assistance Program.  Chest 2005;128 ((suppl)) 76S- 80SPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Lederer  MAGoode  TDowling  J Origins and development: the Critical Care Family Assistance Program.  Chest 2005;128 ((suppl)) 65S- 75SPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Carlet  JThijs  LGAntonelli  M  et al.  Challenges in end-of-life care in the ICU: statement of the Fifth International Consensus Conference in Critical Care: Brussels, Belgium, April 2003.  Intensive Care Med 2004;30770- 784PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Thompson  BTCox  PNAntonelli  M  et al.  Challenges in end-of-life care in the ICU: statement of the FIFth International Consensus Conference in Critical Care: Brussels, Belgium, April 2003: executive summary.  Crit Care Med 2004;321781- 1784PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Heyland  DKTranmer  JO’Callaghan  CJGafni  A The seriously ill hospitalized patient: preferred role in end-of-life decision making?  J Crit Care 2003;183- 10PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Heyland  DKCook  DJRocker  GM  et al.  Decision-making in the ICU: perspectives of the substitute decision-maker.  Intensive Care Med 2003;2975- 82PubMedGoogle Scholar
14.
Charles  CGafni  AWhelan  T Decision-making in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision–making model.  Soc Sci Med 1999;49651- 661PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Quill  TEBrody  H Physician recommendations and patient autonomy: finding a balance between physician power and patient choice.  Ann Intern Med 1996;125763- 769PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
16.
Braddock  CH  IIIEdwards  KAHasenberg  NMLaidley  TLLevinson  W Informed decision making in outpatient practice: time to get back to basics.  JAMA 1999;2822313- 2320PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
Charles  CWhelan  TGafni  A What do we mean by partnership in making decisions about treatment?  BMJ 1999;319780- 782PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
McDonagh  JRElliott  TBEngelberg  RA  et al.  Family satisfaction with family conferences about end-of-life care in the intensive care unit: increased proportion of family speech is associated with increased satisfaction.  Crit Care Med 2004;321484- 1488PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Weeks  JCCook  EFO’Day  SJ  et al.  Relationship between cancer patients' predictions of prognosis and their treatment preferences.  JAMA 1998;2791709- 1714PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
Schillinger  DPiette  JGrumbach  K  et al.  Closing the loop: physician communication with diabetic patients who have low health literacy.  Arch Intern Med 2003;16383- 90PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
21.
Tilden  VPTolle  SWNelson  CAFields  J Family decision-making to withdraw life-sustaining treatments from hospitalized patients.  Nurs Res 2001;50105- 115PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
Jacob  DA Family members' experience with decision making for incompetent patients in the ICU: a qualitative study.  Am J Crit Care 1998;730- 36Google Scholar
23.
Levinson  WKao  AKuby  AThisted  RA Not all patients want to participate in decision making: a national study of public preferences.  J Gen Intern Med 2005;20531- 535PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
24.
Casarett  DJCrowley  RHirschman  KB Surveys to assess satisfaction with end-of-life care: does timing matter?  J Pain Symptom Manage 2003;25128- 132PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
25.
Krouse  RSRosenfeld  KEGrant  M  et al.  Palliative care research: issues and opportunities.  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004;13337- 339PubMedGoogle Scholar
Original Investigation
March 12, 2007

Toward Shared Decision Making at the End of Life in Intensive Care Units: Opportunities for Improvement

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine and Program in Medical Ethics, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco (Dr White); Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif (Dr Braddock and Ms Bereknyei); and Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Harborview Medical Center, University of Washington, Seattle (Dr Curtis).

Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(5):461-467. doi:10.1001/archinte.167.5.461
Abstract

Background  In North America, families generally wish to be involved in end-of-life decisions when the patient cannot participate, yet little is known about the extent to which shared decision making occurs in intensive care units.

Methods  We audiotaped 51 physician-family conferences about major end-of-life treatment decisions at 4 hospitals from August 1, 2000, to July 31, 2002. We measured shared decision making using a previously validated instrument to assess the following 10 elements: discussing the nature of the decision, describing treatment alternatives, discussing the pros and cons of the choices, discussing uncertainty, assessing family understanding, eliciting patient values and preferences, discussing the family's role in decision making, assessing the need for input from others, exploring the context of the decision, and eliciting the family's opinion about the treatment decision. We used a mixed-effects regression model to determine predictors of shared decision making and to evaluate whether higher levels of shared decision making were associated with greater family satisfaction.

Results  Only 2% (1/51) of decisions met all 10 criteria for shared decision making. The most frequently addressed elements were the nature of the decision (100%) and the context of the decision to be made (92%). The least frequently addressed elements were the family's role in decision making (31%) and an assessment of the family's understanding of the decision (25%). In multivariate analysis, lower family educational level was associated with less shared decision making (partial correlation coefficient, 0.34; standardized β, .3; P = .02). Higher levels of shared decision making were associated with greater family satisfaction with communication (partial correlation coefficient, 0.15; standardized β, .09; P = .03).

Conclusions  Shared decision making about end-of-life treatment choices was often incomplete, especially among less educated families. Higher levels of shared decision making were associated with greater family satisfaction. Shared decision making may be an important area for quality improvement in intensive care units.

×