Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

A comparison of the opinions of intensive care unit staff and family members of the treatment intensity received by patients admitted to an intensive care unit: A multicentre survey

dc.contributor.authorAnstey, Matthew
dc.contributor.authorLitton, Edward
dc.contributor.authorJha, Nihar
dc.contributor.authorTrevenen, Michelle L.
dc.contributor.authorWebb, Steve
dc.contributor.authorMitchell, Imogen
dc.date.accessioned2020-04-28T02:39:41Z
dc.date.issued2018-09
dc.date.updated2019-11-25T07:57:49Z
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Achieving shared decision-making in the intensive care unit (ICU) is challenging because of limited patient capacity, leading to a reliance on surrogate decision-makers. Prior research shows that ICU staff members often perceive that patients receive inappropriate or futile treatments while some surrogate decision-makers of patients admitted to the ICU report inadequate communication with physicians. Therefore, understanding the perceptions of both ICU staff and surrogate decision-makers around wishes for ICU treatments is an essential component to improve these situations. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to compare perceptions of ICU staff with surrogate decision-makers about the intensity and appropriateness of treatments received by patients and analyse the causes of any incongruence. METHODS: A multicentred, single-day survey of staff and surrogate decision-makers of ICU inpatients was conducted across four Australian ICUs in 2014. Patients were linked to a larger prospective observational study, allowing comparison of patient outcomes. RESULTS: Twelve of 32 patients were identified as having a mismatch between staff and surrogate decision-maker perceptions. For these 12 patients, all 12 surrogate decision-makers believed that the treatment intensity the patient was receiving was of the appropriate intensity and duration. Mismatched patients were more likely to be emergency admissions to ICU compared with nonmismatched patients (0.0% vs 42.1%, p = 0.012) and have longer ICU admissions (7.5 vs 3, p = 0.022). There were no significant differences in perceived communication (p = 0.61). CONCLUSIONS: Family members did not share the same perceptions of treatment with ICU staff. This may result from difficulty in prognostication; challenges in conveying poor prognoses to surrogate decision-makers; and the accuracy of surrogate decision-makersen_AU
dc.format.extent5 pagesen_AU
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen_AU
dc.identifier.issn1036-7314en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1885/203434
dc.language.isoen_AUen_AU
dc.publisherCambridge Mediaen_AU
dc.rights© 2018 Australian College of Critical Care Nurses Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd.en_AU
dc.sourceAustralian Critical Careen_AU
dc.subjectMedical futility, Decision making, Communication, Family, Surveys and questionnaires, Intensive care unitsen_AU
dc.titleA comparison of the opinions of intensive care unit staff and family members of the treatment intensity received by patients admitted to an intensive care unit: A multicentre surveyen_AU
dc.typeJournal articleen_AU
dcterms.dateAccepted2018-08-31
local.bibliographicCitation.issue5en_AU
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage382en_AU
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage378en_AU
local.contributor.affiliationAnstey, Matthew , Intensive Care Unit, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospitalen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationLitton, Edward, Fiona Stanley Hospitalen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationJha, Nihar, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospitalen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationTrevenen, Michelle L., University of Western Australiaen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationWebb, Steve, St John of God Hospitalen_AU
local.contributor.affiliationMitchell, Imogen, College of Health and Medicine, The Australian National Universityen_AU
local.contributor.authoruidMitchell, Imogen, u4549604en_AU
local.description.embargo2037-12-31
local.description.notesImported from ARIESen_AU
local.identifier.absfor110310 - Intensive Careen_AU
local.identifier.absfor111707 - Family Careen_AU
local.identifier.absseo920211 - Palliative Careen_AU
local.identifier.ariespublicationu5234101xPUB274en_AU
local.identifier.citationvolume32en_AU
local.identifier.doi10.1016/j.aucc.2018.08.008en_AU
local.identifier.scopusID2-s2.0-85056350049
local.publisher.urlhttps://www.elsevier.com/en_AU
local.type.statusPublished Versionen_AU

Downloads

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
01_Anstey_A_comparison_of_the_opinions_2018.pdf
Size:
248.13 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format