1. |
- Bassford, Christopher R., et al.
(författare)
-
U.K. Intensivists' Preferences for Patient Admission to ICU : Evidence From a Choice Experiment
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Critical Care Medicine. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0090-3493 .- 1530-0293. ; 47:11, s. 1522-1530
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVES: Deciding whether to admit a patient to the ICU requires considering several clinical and nonclinical factors. Studies have investigated factors associated with the decision but have not explored the relative importance of different factors, nor the interaction between factors on decision-making. We examined how ICU consultants prioritize specific factors when deciding whether to admit a patient to ICU.DESIGN: Informed by a literature review and data from observation and interviews with ICU clinicians, we designed a choice experiment. Senior intensive care doctors (consultants) were presented with pairs of patient profiles and asked to prioritize one of the patients in each task for admission to ICU. A multinomial logit and a latent class logit model was used for the data analyses.SETTING: Online survey across U.K. intensive care.SUBJECTS: Intensive care consultants working in NHS hospitals.MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the factors investigated, patient's age had the largest impact at admission followed by the views of their family, and severity of their main comorbidity. Physiologic measures indicating severity of illness had less impact than the gestalt assessment by the ICU registrar. We identified four distinct decision-making patterns, defined by the relative importance given to different factors.CONCLUSIONS: ICU consultants vary in the importance they give to different factors in deciding who to prioritize for ICU admission. Transparency regarding which factors have been considered in the decision-making process could reduce variability and potential inequity for patients.
|
|
2. |
- Heidenreich, Kaja, 1973-, et al.
(författare)
-
UK consultants’ experiences of the decision-making process around referral to intensive care : an interview study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 2044-6055. ; 11:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: The decision whether to initiate intensivecare for the critically ill patient involves ethical questions regarding what is good and right for the patient. It isnot clear how referring doctors negotiate these issuesin practice. The aim of this study was to describe and understand consultants’ experiences of the decision- making process around referral to intensive care.Design: Qualitative interviews were analysed according to a phenomenological hermeneutical method.Setting and participants: Consultant doctors (n=27) from departments regularly referring patients to intensive care in six UK hospitals.Results: In the precarious and uncertain situation of critical illness, trust in the decision-making process is needed and can be enhanced through the way in which the process unfolds. When there are no obvious right or wrong answers as to what ought to be done, how the decision is made and how the process unfolds is morally important. Through acknowledging the burdensome doubts in the process, contributing to an emerging, joint understanding of the patient’s situation, and respondingto mutual moral duties of the doctors involved, trust in the decision-making process can be enhanced and a shared moral responsibility between the stake holding doctors can be assumed.Conclusion: The findings highlight the importance of trust in the decision-making process and how the relationships between the stakeholding doctors are crucial to support their moral responsibility for the patient. Poor interpersonal relationships can damage trust and negatively impact decisions made on behalf of a critically ill patient. Forthis reason, active attempts must be made to foster good relationships between doctors. This is not only important to create a positive working environment, but a mechanism to improve patient outcomes.
|
|
3. |
|
|