Cargando…

Typologies of Decision-Makers in the ICU: A Qualitative Study of Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and Sepsis and Their Surrogates

To develop hypotheses of patient and surrogate’s rationale for decision-making. DESIGN: We pursued a qualitative study of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome or sepsis and their surrogates. Fourteen patients and 28 surrogates were given semistructured interviews while in the ICU and ag...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lava, Michael S., Dickert, Neal W., Frew, Paula M., Martin, Gregory S., Sevransky, Jonathan E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7063965/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32166257
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000000011
_version_ 1783504791492624384
author Lava, Michael S.
Dickert, Neal W.
Frew, Paula M.
Martin, Gregory S.
Sevransky, Jonathan E.
author_facet Lava, Michael S.
Dickert, Neal W.
Frew, Paula M.
Martin, Gregory S.
Sevransky, Jonathan E.
author_sort Lava, Michael S.
collection PubMed
description To develop hypotheses of patient and surrogate’s rationale for decision-making. DESIGN: We pursued a qualitative study of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome or sepsis and their surrogates. Fourteen patients and 28 surrogates were given semistructured interviews while in the ICU and again 30 days later. The interviews focused on goal outcomes for the ICU stay and why a patient or surrogate would want a specific intervention (e.g., intubation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation). SETTING: ICU of tertiary care academic hospital. PATIENTS: Fourteen acute respiratory distress syndrome or sepsis patients and 28 of their surrogates. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Interviews were analyzed using grounded theory and the constant comparative method on NVivo 10.0 (QSR International, Melbourne, Australia). We identified the following four typologies of decision-making rationale: 1) “Timers”—determined decisions based on the length of time on life support; 2) “Natural Livers”—rejected interventions using a “machine”; 3) “Deferrers”—relied on physician for decision-making and prognosis; and 4) “Believers”—relied on a higher power for guidance. CONCLUSIONS: Our hypothesized typologies need validation in a prospective observational trial. If validated, they may allow for better clinician communication.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7063965
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70639652020-03-12 Typologies of Decision-Makers in the ICU: A Qualitative Study of Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and Sepsis and Their Surrogates Lava, Michael S. Dickert, Neal W. Frew, Paula M. Martin, Gregory S. Sevransky, Jonathan E. Crit Care Explor Observational Study To develop hypotheses of patient and surrogate’s rationale for decision-making. DESIGN: We pursued a qualitative study of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome or sepsis and their surrogates. Fourteen patients and 28 surrogates were given semistructured interviews while in the ICU and again 30 days later. The interviews focused on goal outcomes for the ICU stay and why a patient or surrogate would want a specific intervention (e.g., intubation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation). SETTING: ICU of tertiary care academic hospital. PATIENTS: Fourteen acute respiratory distress syndrome or sepsis patients and 28 of their surrogates. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Interviews were analyzed using grounded theory and the constant comparative method on NVivo 10.0 (QSR International, Melbourne, Australia). We identified the following four typologies of decision-making rationale: 1) “Timers”—determined decisions based on the length of time on life support; 2) “Natural Livers”—rejected interventions using a “machine”; 3) “Deferrers”—relied on physician for decision-making and prognosis; and 4) “Believers”—relied on a higher power for guidance. CONCLUSIONS: Our hypothesized typologies need validation in a prospective observational trial. If validated, they may allow for better clinician communication. Wolters Kluwer Health 2019-05-23 /pmc/articles/PMC7063965/ /pubmed/32166257 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000000011 Text en Copyright (c) 2019 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine. 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) (http://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 Observational Study
Lava, Michael S.
Dickert, Neal W.
Frew, Paula M.
Martin, Gregory S.
Sevransky, Jonathan E.
Typologies of Decision-Makers in the ICU: A Qualitative Study of Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and Sepsis and Their Surrogates
title Typologies of Decision-Makers in the ICU: A Qualitative Study of Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and Sepsis and Their Surrogates
title_full Typologies of Decision-Makers in the ICU: A Qualitative Study of Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and Sepsis and Their Surrogates
title_fullStr Typologies of Decision-Makers in the ICU: A Qualitative Study of Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and Sepsis and Their Surrogates
title_full_unstemmed Typologies of Decision-Makers in the ICU: A Qualitative Study of Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and Sepsis and Their Surrogates
title_short Typologies of Decision-Makers in the ICU: A Qualitative Study of Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and Sepsis and Their Surrogates
title_sort typologies of decision-makers in the icu: a qualitative study of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome and sepsis and their surrogates
topic Observational Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7063965/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32166257
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000000011
work_keys_str_mv AT lavamichaels typologiesofdecisionmakersintheicuaqualitativestudyofpatientswithacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeandsepsisandtheirsurrogates
AT dickertnealw typologiesofdecisionmakersintheicuaqualitativestudyofpatientswithacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeandsepsisandtheirsurrogates
AT frewpaulam typologiesofdecisionmakersintheicuaqualitativestudyofpatientswithacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeandsepsisandtheirsurrogates
AT martingregorys typologiesofdecisionmakersintheicuaqualitativestudyofpatientswithacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeandsepsisandtheirsurrogates
AT sevranskyjonathane typologiesofdecisionmakersintheicuaqualitativestudyofpatientswithacuterespiratorydistresssyndromeandsepsisandtheirsurrogates