An Observational Study of Decision Making by Medical Intensivists.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
The ICU is a place of frequent, high-stakes decision making. However, the number and types of decisions made by intensivists have not been well characterized. We sought to describe intensivist decision making and determine how the number and types of decisions are affected by patient, provider, and systems factors.Design
Direct observation of intensivist decision making during patient rounds.Setting
Twenty-four-bed academic medical ICU.Subjects
Medical intensivists leading patient care rounds.Intervention
None.Measurements and main results
During 920 observed patient rounds on 374 unique patients, intensivists made 8,174 critical care decisions (mean, 8.9 decisions per patient daily, 102.2 total decisions daily) over a mean of 3.7 hours. Patient factors associated with increased numbers of decisions included a shorter time since ICU admission and an earlier slot in rounding order (both p < 0.05). Intensivist identity explained the greatest proportion of variance in number of decisions per patient even when controlling for all other factors significant in bivariable regression. A given intensivist made more decisions per patient during days later in the 14-day rotation (p < 0.05). Female intensivists made significantly more decisions than male intensivists (p < 0.05).Conclusions
Intensivists made over 100 daily critical care decisions during rounds. The number of decisions was influenced by a variety of patient- and system-related factors and was highly variable among intensivists. Future work is needed to explore effects of the decision-making burden on providers' choices and on patient outcomes.
SUBMITTER: McKenzie MS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8120648 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundBoth patients and surrogate decision-makers experience decisional conflict when making a major medical treatment decision with life or death implications. The relationship between health literacy and decisional conflict while making a major medical treatment decision is not understood.ObjectiveTo identify the prevalence of individuals making major medical treatment decisions for themselves or someone else and to explore the relationships between decisional conflict and circumstances of the decision as well as the decision-maker.DesignTwo-phase survey study: in phase 1, we screened for who made a major treatment decision; in phase 2, we asked eligible respondents about their experience making the decision.ParticipantsAddress-based random sample of 4000 Wisconsin residents; 1072 completed phase 1 and 464 completed phase 2.Main measuresWe asked respondents about types of decisions made, the most difficult decision made, and characteristics of the decision-maker and the decision. We included the Decisional Conflict Scale and four domains of the Health Literacy Questionnaire. Open-ended questions also allowed respondents to describe their experiences.Key resultsAbout 43% of respondents reported making a major medical treatment decision. Decisions about major surgery and life support were regarded as the most difficult decisions. Respondents who made the decision for a spouse/partner (β = 6.65, p = 0.012), parent (β = 9.27, p < 0.001), or someone else (β = 10.7, p < 0.001) had higher decisional conflict. Respondents who reported higher ability to actively engage with healthcare providers (β = - 5.24, p = 0.002) and to understand health information well enough to know what to do (β = - 6.12, p = 0.001) had lower decisional conflict.ConclusionsThe need to make major treatment decisions is likely to increase and making decisions on someone else's behalf appeared to be especially difficult. Improving communication to encourage patient and family engagement in the decision-making conversation, particularly for individuals with limited health literacy, may be helpful.
| S-EPMC7431116 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA growing number of reproductive-age women in the U.S. have chronic medical conditions, increasing their risk of perinatal morbidity and mortality. Still, they experience unintended pregnancies at similar rates to low-risk mothers. We have limited understanding of how these individuals consider decisions about pregnancy and contraceptive use. The purpose of this study was to understand factors that influence reproductive decision-making among pregnant women with chronic medical conditions.MethodsWe conducted 28 semi-structured interviews with pregnant women with pre-existing medical conditions admitted to a tertiary maternal hospital to examine factors influencing reproductive decision making. Maternal demographic characteristics, medical history, and pregnancy outcome data were obtained through participant surveys and abstraction from electronic health records. Interview transcripts were coded and analyzed using Dedoose® with both deductive and inductive content analysis.ResultsOut of 33 eligible participants, 30 consented to participate and 28 completed interviews. The majority of participants identified as black, Christian, made less than $23,000 yearly, and had a variety of preexisting medical conditions. Overarching themes included: 1) Perceived risks-benefits of pregnancy, 2) Perceived risks-benefits of birth control, 3) Determinants of contraceptive utilization, and 4) Perceived reproductive self-agency. Contraception was viewed as acceptable, but with concerning physical and psychological side effects. Although some considered pregnancy as a health threat, more experienced pregnancy as positive and empowering. Few planned their pregnancies.ConclusionsPreexisting health conditions did not significantly influence reproductive decision-making. Barriers to birth control use were generally based in patient value-systems instead of external factors. Interventions to improve uptake and use of birth control in this cohort should focus on improving care for chronic health conditions and influencing patient knowledge and attitudes toward contraception.
| S-EPMC10712035 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDual processing theory of human cognition postulates that reasoning and decision-making can be described as a function of both an intuitive, experiential, affective system (system I) and/or an analytical, deliberative (system II) processing system. To date no formal descriptive model of medical decision-making based on dual processing theory has been developed. Here we postulate such a model and apply it to a common clinical situation: whether treatment should be administered to the patient who may or may not have a disease.MethodsWe developed a mathematical model in which we linked a recently proposed descriptive psychological model of cognition with the threshold model of medical decision-making and show how this approach can be used to better understand decision-making at the bedside and explain the widespread variation in treatments observed in clinical practice.ResultsWe show that physician's beliefs about whether to treat at higher (lower) probability levels compared to the prescriptive therapeutic thresholds obtained via system II processing is moderated by system I and the ratio of benefit and harms as evaluated by both system I and II. Under some conditions, the system I decision maker's threshold may dramatically drop below the expected utility threshold derived by system II. This can explain the overtreatment often seen in the contemporary practice. The opposite can also occur as in the situations where empirical evidence is considered unreliable, or when cognitive processes of decision-makers are biased through recent experience: the threshold will increase relative to the normative threshold value derived via system II using expected utility threshold. This inclination for the higher diagnostic certainty may, in turn, explain undertreatment that is also documented in the current medical practice.ConclusionsWe have developed the first dual processing model of medical decision-making that has potential to enrich the current medical decision-making field, which is still to the large extent dominated by expected utility theory. The model also provides a platform for reconciling two groups of competing dual processing theories (parallel competitive with default-interventionalist theories).
| S-EPMC3471048 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aims and objectivesThe aim was to explore and describe the child's active participation in daily healthcare practice at children's hospital units in Sweden.Objectives(a) Identify everyday situations in medical and nursing care that illustrate children's active participation in decision-making, (b) identify various ways of active participation, actual and optimal in situations involving decision-making and (c) explore factors in nursing and medical care that influence children's active participation in decision-making.BackgroundDespite active participation being a fundamental right for children, they are not always involved in decision-making processes during their health care. There still remains uncertainty on how to support children to actively participate in decisions concerning their health care.DesignA qualitative study with overt, nonparticipant observations fulfilling the COREQ checklist criteria.MethodsObservations of interactions between children aged 2 and 17 years with both acute and chronic conditions, their parents, and healthcare professionals were conducted at three paediatric hospitals in Sweden. The Scale of Degrees of Self Determination was used to grade identified situations. The scale describes five levels of active participation, with level one being the least and level five being the most active level of participation. Normative judgements were also made.ResultsChildren's active participation was assessed as being generally at levels four and five. Children demonstrated both verbal and nonverbal ways of communication during decision-making. Findings indicated that children's, parents' and healthcare professional's actions influenced children's active participation in decision-making processes involving healthcare.ConclusionsHealthcare professionals specialised in paediatrics need to embrace both a child perspective and a child's perspective, plan care incorporating key elements of a child-centred care approach, to ensure children's active participation at a level of their choosing.Relevance to clinical practiceThere is a need for awareness creation to help healthcare professionals facilitate children's active participation in their care and decision-making.
| S-EPMC7328781 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo explore what information sources medical specialists currently use to inform their medical decision-making.DesignQualitative, semistructured interviews.Setting and participantsA total of 20 semistructured interviews were conducted with 10 surgeons and 10 internal medicine specialists who work in academic and/or regional hospitals in the Netherlands.ResultsMedical specialists reported that they primarily rely on their general knowledge and experience, rather than actively using information sources. The sources they use to update their knowledge can be categorised into 'scientific publications', 'guidelines or protocols', and 'presentations and meetings'. When medical specialists feel their general knowledge and experience are insufficient, they use three different approaches to find answers in response to clinical questions: consulting a colleague, actively searching the literature and asking someone else to search the literature.ConclusionMedical specialists use information sources to update their general knowledge and to find answers to specific clinical questions when they feel their general knowledge and experience are insufficient. An important finding is that medical specialists prefer accessible information sources (eg, consulting colleagues) over existing evidence-based medicine tools.
| S-EPMC10565272 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Clinical signs of urinary tract disease in dogs often lead to prescription of antibiotics. Appropriate diagnostic work-up could optimize treatment and reduce the risk of inappropriate use of antibiotics.To describe and evaluate the impact of diagnostic work-up on decision to treat (DTT) and choice of antibiotic treatment (COT) for dogs presenting with clinical signs of urinary tract disease.One hundred and fifty-one dogs presenting to 52 Danish veterinary practices.Prospective, observational study. Clinical signs, diagnostic work-up, and prescriptions were recorded. Urine samples were submitted to a reference laboratory for quantitative bacterial culture (QBC) and susceptibility testing. The laboratory results were used as reference for assessing the appropriateness of DTT and COT.In the majority of dogs, veterinarians performed dipstick (99%), microscopic examination of urine (80%) and bacterial culture (56%). Fifty-one percent of dogs had urinary tract infection (UTI) based on reference QBC. Appropriate DTT was made for 62% of the dogs, while 36% were over-prescribed and 2% under-prescribed. Inappropriate use of second-line agents was found in 57% of the UTI cases. Performing microscopy-but not culture-significantly impacted DTT (P?=?0.039) while no difference was seen in COT (P?=?0.67). The accuracy of in-house microscopy and culture were 64.5 and 77%, respectively.Over-prescription of antibiotics was common among dogs with suspected UTI, regardless of the diagnostic work-up performed. Test inaccuracy under practice conditions and incoherence between diagnostic test results and decision-making both explained inappropriate and unnecessary use of antibiotics.
| S-EPMC5867017 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate longitudinal change in the medical decision-making capacity (MDC) of patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI) under different consent standards.MethodsEighty-eight healthy older controls and 116 patients with MCI were administered the Capacity to Consent to Treatment Instrument at baseline and at 1 to 3 (mean = 1.7) annual follow-up visits thereafter. Covariate-adjusted random coefficient regressions were used to examine differences in MDC trajectories across MCI and control participants, as well as to investigate the impact of conversion to Alzheimer disease on MCI patients' MDC trajectories.ResultsAt baseline, MCI patients performed significantly below controls only on the three clinically relevant standards of appreciation, reasoning, and understanding. Compared with controls, MCI patients experienced significant declines over time on understanding but not on any other consent standard. Conversion affected both the elevation (a decrease in performance) and slope (acceleration in subsequent rate of decline) of MCI patients' MDC trajectories on understanding. A trend emerged for conversion to be associated with a performance decrease on reasoning in the MCI group.ConclusionsMedical decision-making capacity (MDC) decline in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is a relatively slow but detectable process. Over a 3-year period, patients with amnestic MCI show progressive decline in the ability to understand consent information. This decline accelerates after conversion to Alzheimer disease (AD), reflecting increasing vulnerability to decisional impairment. Clinicians and researchers working with MCI patients should give particular attention to the informed consent process when conversion to AD is suspected or confirmed.
| S-EPMC2676965 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveCaregivers of children with medical complexity (CMC) face decisions about life-sustaining treatments (LST) like tracheostomy. We sought to develop a clinically relevant and realistic model for decision-making about tracheostomy placement that might apply to other LST in CMC.DesignThis qualitative study, conducted between 2013 and 2015, consisted of 41 interviews with 56 caregivers of CMC who had received tracheostomies and 5 focus groups of 33 healthcare providers (HCPs) at a tertiary-care children's hospital in North Carolina. Participants were asked about their perspectives on the tracheostomy decision-making process. Data were transcribed, and coded. Using thematic content analysis, we inductively developed a tracheostomy decision-making framework and process.ResultsMany factors influenced caregivers' decisions, including children's well-being and caregivers' values, faith, knowledge, experience, emotional state, and social factors; preserving the child's life was the most important. HCPs consider many clinical and nonclinical factors; recommending tracheostomy for children with limited survival, perceived poor functioning and quality of life, and progressive conditions is ethically difficult. The framework of tracheostomy decision-making has inter-related caregiver- and HCP-level factors that influence the process. The framework contains elements not captured in a shared decision-making model, but better fits a collaborative decision-making (CDM) model. The tracheostomy CDM process that emerged from the data has two nonsequential components that HCPs could use: (1) gaining understanding and (2) holding decision-making conversations.ConclusionsCDM could be a useful model for clinicians guiding families about tracheostomy for CMC. The applicability of CDM for decision-making about other LSTs needs further exploration.
| S-EPMC9825978 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Evidence from well-designed clinical trials may guide clinicians, reduce regional variation, and lead to improved outcomes. Many physicians choose to ignore evidence-based practice guidelines. Using unproven therapies outside of a randomized trial slows recruitment in clinical trials that could yield information on clinical and economic efficacy. Using acute stroke therapy as an illustration, we present an ethical hierarchy for therapeutic decision making during medical emergencies. First, physicians should offer standard care. If no standard care option exists, the physician should consider enrollment in a randomized clinical trial. If no trial is appropriate, the physician should consider a nonrandomized registry, or consensus-based guidelines. Finally, only after considering the first 3 options, the physician should use best judgment based on previous personal experience and any published case series or anecdotes. Given the paucity of quality randomized clinical trial data for most medical decisions, the "best judgment" option will be used most frequently. Nevertheless, such a hierarchy is needed because of the limited time during medical emergencies for consideration of general principles of clinical decision making. There should be general agreement in advance as to the hierarchy to follow in selecting treatment for critically ill patients. Were more clinicians to follow this hierarchy, and choose to participate in clinical trials, the generation of new knowledge would accelerate, yielding rigorous data supporting or refuting the efficacy and safety of new interventions more quickly, thus benefiting far more patients over time.
| S-EPMC2875330 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivePatients with malignant glioma (MG) must make ongoing medical treatment decisions concerning a progressive disease that erodes cognition. We prospectively assessed medical decision-making capacity (MDC) in patients with MG using a standardized psychometric instrument.MethodsParticipants were 22 healthy controls and 26 patients with histologically verified MG. Group performance was compared on the Capacity to Consent to Treatment Instrument (CCTI), a psychometric measure of MDC incorporating 4 standards (choice, understanding, reasoning, and appreciation), and on neuropsychological and demographic variables. Capacity outcomes (capable, marginally capable, or incapable) on the CCTI standards were identified for the MG group. Within the MG group, scores on demographic, clinical, and neuropsychological variables were correlated with scores on each CCTI standard, and significant bivariate correlates were subsequently entered into exploratory stepwise regression analyses to identify multivariate cognitive predictors of the CCTI standards.ResultsPatients with MG performed significantly below controls on consent standards of understanding and reasoning, and showed a trend on appreciation. Relative to controls, more than 50% of the patients with MG demonstrated capacity compromise (marginally capable or incapable outcomes) in MDC. In the MG group, cognitive measures of verbal acquisition/recall and, to a lesser extent, semantic fluency predicted performance on the appreciation, reasoning, and understanding standards. Karnofsky score was also associated with CCTI performance.ConclusionsSoon after diagnosis, patients with malignant glioma (MG) have impaired capacity to make treatment decisions relative to controls. Medical decision-making capacity (MDC) impairment in MG seems to be primarily related to the effects of short-term verbal memory deficits. Ongoing assessment of MDC in patients with MG is strongly recommended.
| S-EPMC2833103 | biostudies-literature