Cargando…
Older Adults’ Perspectives on Screening for Cognitive Impairment Following Critical Illness: Pre-Implementation Qualitative Study
Screening for cognitive impairment following ICU discharge is recommended but not part of routine care. We sought to understand older adults’ perspectives on screening for cognitive impairment following an ICU admission to inform the design and delivery of a cognitive screening intervention. DESIGN:...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10184981/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37197588 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000000920 |
_version_ | 1785042253083836416 |
---|---|
author | Keegan, Alek Strahley, Ashley Taylor, Stephanie P. Wilson, Taniya M. Shah, Meehir D. Williamson, Jeff Palakshappa, Jessica A. |
author_facet | Keegan, Alek Strahley, Ashley Taylor, Stephanie P. Wilson, Taniya M. Shah, Meehir D. Williamson, Jeff Palakshappa, Jessica A. |
author_sort | Keegan, Alek |
collection | PubMed |
description | Screening for cognitive impairment following ICU discharge is recommended but not part of routine care. We sought to understand older adults’ perspectives on screening for cognitive impairment following an ICU admission to inform the design and delivery of a cognitive screening intervention. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. SUBJECTS: Adults 60 years and older within 3 months of discharge from an ICU in an academic health system. INTERVENTIONS: Interviews were conducted via telephone, audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. All transcripts were coded in duplicate. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Codes were organized into themes and subthemes inductively. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We completed 22 interviews. The mean age of participants was 71 ± 6 years, 14 (63.6%) were men, 16 (72.7%) were White, and 6 (27.3%) were Black. Thematic analysis was organized around four themes: 1) receptivity to screening, 2) communication preferences, 3) information needs, and 4) provider involvement. Most participants were receptive to cognitive screening; this was influenced by trust in their providers and prior experience with cognitive screening and impairment. Participants preferred simple, direct, compassionate communication. They wanted to understand the screening procedure, the rationale for screening, and expectations for recovery. Participants desired input from their primary care provider to have their cognitive screening results placed in the context of their overall health, because they had a trusted relationship, and for convenience. CONCLUSIONS: Participants demonstrated limited understanding of and exposure to cognitive screening but see it as potentially beneficial following an ICU stay. Providers should use simple, straightforward language and place emphasis on expectations. Resources may be needed to assist primary care providers with capacity to provide cognitive screening and interpret results for ICU survivors. Implementation strategies can include educational materials for clinicians and patients on rationale for screening and recovery expectations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10184981 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101849812023-05-16 Older Adults’ Perspectives on Screening for Cognitive Impairment Following Critical Illness: Pre-Implementation Qualitative Study Keegan, Alek Strahley, Ashley Taylor, Stephanie P. Wilson, Taniya M. Shah, Meehir D. Williamson, Jeff Palakshappa, Jessica A. Crit Care Explor Original Clinical Report Screening for cognitive impairment following ICU discharge is recommended but not part of routine care. We sought to understand older adults’ perspectives on screening for cognitive impairment following an ICU admission to inform the design and delivery of a cognitive screening intervention. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. SUBJECTS: Adults 60 years and older within 3 months of discharge from an ICU in an academic health system. INTERVENTIONS: Interviews were conducted via telephone, audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. All transcripts were coded in duplicate. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Codes were organized into themes and subthemes inductively. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We completed 22 interviews. The mean age of participants was 71 ± 6 years, 14 (63.6%) were men, 16 (72.7%) were White, and 6 (27.3%) were Black. Thematic analysis was organized around four themes: 1) receptivity to screening, 2) communication preferences, 3) information needs, and 4) provider involvement. Most participants were receptive to cognitive screening; this was influenced by trust in their providers and prior experience with cognitive screening and impairment. Participants preferred simple, direct, compassionate communication. They wanted to understand the screening procedure, the rationale for screening, and expectations for recovery. Participants desired input from their primary care provider to have their cognitive screening results placed in the context of their overall health, because they had a trusted relationship, and for convenience. CONCLUSIONS: Participants demonstrated limited understanding of and exposure to cognitive screening but see it as potentially beneficial following an ICU stay. Providers should use simple, straightforward language and place emphasis on expectations. Resources may be needed to assist primary care providers with capacity to provide cognitive screening and interpret results for ICU survivors. Implementation strategies can include educational materials for clinicians and patients on rationale for screening and recovery expectations. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2023-05-12 /pmc/articles/PMC10184981/ /pubmed/37197588 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000000920 Text en Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. |
spellingShingle | Original Clinical Report Keegan, Alek Strahley, Ashley Taylor, Stephanie P. Wilson, Taniya M. Shah, Meehir D. Williamson, Jeff Palakshappa, Jessica A. Older Adults’ Perspectives on Screening for Cognitive Impairment Following Critical Illness: Pre-Implementation Qualitative Study |
title | Older Adults’ Perspectives on Screening for Cognitive Impairment Following Critical Illness: Pre-Implementation Qualitative Study |
title_full | Older Adults’ Perspectives on Screening for Cognitive Impairment Following Critical Illness: Pre-Implementation Qualitative Study |
title_fullStr | Older Adults’ Perspectives on Screening for Cognitive Impairment Following Critical Illness: Pre-Implementation Qualitative Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Older Adults’ Perspectives on Screening for Cognitive Impairment Following Critical Illness: Pre-Implementation Qualitative Study |
title_short | Older Adults’ Perspectives on Screening for Cognitive Impairment Following Critical Illness: Pre-Implementation Qualitative Study |
title_sort | older adults’ perspectives on screening for cognitive impairment following critical illness: pre-implementation qualitative study |
topic | Original Clinical Report |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10184981/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37197588 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000000920 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT keeganalek olderadultsperspectivesonscreeningforcognitiveimpairmentfollowingcriticalillnesspreimplementationqualitativestudy AT strahleyashley olderadultsperspectivesonscreeningforcognitiveimpairmentfollowingcriticalillnesspreimplementationqualitativestudy AT taylorstephaniep olderadultsperspectivesonscreeningforcognitiveimpairmentfollowingcriticalillnesspreimplementationqualitativestudy AT wilsontaniyam olderadultsperspectivesonscreeningforcognitiveimpairmentfollowingcriticalillnesspreimplementationqualitativestudy AT shahmeehird olderadultsperspectivesonscreeningforcognitiveimpairmentfollowingcriticalillnesspreimplementationqualitativestudy AT williamsonjeff olderadultsperspectivesonscreeningforcognitiveimpairmentfollowingcriticalillnesspreimplementationqualitativestudy AT palakshappajessicaa olderadultsperspectivesonscreeningforcognitiveimpairmentfollowingcriticalillnesspreimplementationqualitativestudy |