Improving End-of-Life Communication and Decision Making: The Development of a Conceptual Framework and Quality Indicators

AbstractContextThe goal of end-of-life (EOL) communication and decision making is to create a shared understanding about a person’s values and treatment preferences that will lead to a plan of care that is consistent with these values and preferences. Improvements in communication and decision making at the EOL have been identified as a high priority from a patient and family point of view.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to develop quality indicators related to EOL communication and decision making.MethodsWe convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts to develop definitions, a conceptual framework of EOL communication and decision making, and quality indicators using a modified Delphi method. We generated a list of potential items based on literature review and input from panel members. Panel members rated the items using a seven-point Likert scale (1 = very little importance to 7 = extremely important) over four rounds of review until consensus was achieved.ResultsAbout 24 of the 28 panel members participated in all four rounds of the Delphi process. The final list of quality indicators comprised 34 items, divided into the four categories of our conceptual framework: Advance care planning (eight items), Goals of care discussions (13 items), Documentation (five items), and Organization/System aspects (eight items). Eleven items were rated “extremely important” (median score). All items had a median score of five (moderately important) or greater.ConclusionWe have developed definitions, a conceptual framework, and quality indicators that researchers and health care decision makers can use to evaluate and improve the quality of EOL communication and decision making

Experts Consensus Recommendations for the Management of Calcium Channel Blocker Poisoning in Adults

Objective: To provide a management approach for adults with calcium channel blocker poisoning. Data Sources, Study Selection, and Data Extraction: Following the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II instrument, initial voting statements were constructed based on summaries outlining the evidence, risks, and benefits. Data Synthesis: We recommend 1) for asymptomatic patients, observation and consideration of decontamination following a potentially toxic calcium channel blocker ingestion (1D); 2) as first-line therapies (prioritized based on desired effect), IV calcium (1D), high-dose insulin therapy (1D-2D), and norepinephrine and/or epinephrine (1D). We also suggest dobutamine or epinephrine in the presence of cardiogenic shock (2D) and atropine in the presence of symptomatic bradycardia or conduction disturbance (2D); 3) in patients refractory to the first-line treatments, we suggest incremental doses of high-dose insulin therapy if myocardial dysfunction is present (2D), IV lipid-emulsion therapy (2D), and using a pacemaker in the presence of unstable bradycardia or high-grade arteriovenous block without significant alteration in cardiac inotropism (2D); 4) in patients with refractory shock or who are periarrest, we recommend incremental doses of high-dose insulin (1D) and IV lipid-emulsion therapy (1D) if not already tried. We suggest venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, if available, when refractory shock has a significant cardiogenic component (2D), and using pacemaker in the presence of unstable bradycardia or high-grade arteriovenous block in the absence of myocardial dysfunction (2D) if not already tried; 5) in patients with cardiac arrest, we recommend IV calcium in addition to the standard advanced cardiac life-support (1D), lipid-emulsion therapy (1D), and we suggest venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation if available (2D). Conclusion: We offer recommendations for the stepwise management of calcium channel blocker toxicity. For all interventions, the level of evidence was very low

Determinants of Depressive Symptoms at 1 Year Following ICU Discharge in Survivors of $ 7 Days of Mechanical Ventilation : Results From the RECOVER Program, a Secondary Analysis of a Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study

Abstract : Background: Moderate to severe depressive symptoms occur in up to one-third of patients at 1 year following ICU discharge, negatively affecting patient outcomes. This study evaluated patient and caregiver factors associated with the development of these symptoms. Methods: This study used the Rehabilitation and Recovery in Patients after Critical Illness and Their Family Caregivers (RECOVER) Program (Phase 1) cohort of 391 patients from 10 medical/surgical university-affiliated ICUs across Canada. We determined the association between patient depressive symptoms (captured by using the Beck Depression Inventory II [BDI-II]), patient characteristics (age, sex, socioeconomic status, Charlson score, and ICU length of stay [LOS]), functional independence measure (FIM) motor subscale score, and caregiver characteristics (Caregiver Assistance Scale and Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale) by using linear mixed models at time points 3, 6, and 12 months. Results: BDI-II data were available for 246 patients. Median age at ICU admission was 56 years (interquartile range, 45-65 years), 143 (58%) were male, and median ICU LOS was 19 days (interquartile range, 13-32 days). During the 12-month follow-up, 67 of 246 (27.2%) patients had a BDI-II score ≥ 20, indicating moderate to severe depressive symptoms. Mixed models showed worse depressive symptoms in patients with lower FIM motor subscale scores (1.1 BDI-II points per 10 FIM points), lower income status (by 3.7 BDI-II points; P = .007), and incomplete secondary education (by 3.8 BDI-II points; P = .009); a curvilinear relation with age (P = .001) was also reported, with highest BDI-II at ages 45 to 50 years. No associations were found between patient BDI-II and comorbidities (P = .92), sex (P = .25), ICU LOS (P = .51), or caregiver variables (Caregiver Assistance Scale [P = .28] and Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale [P = .74]). Conclusions: Increased functional dependence, lower income, and lower education are associated with increased severity of post-ICU depressive symptoms, whereas age has a curvilinear relation with symptom severity. Knowledge of risk factors may inform surveillance and targeted mental health follow-up. Early mobilization and rehabilitation aiming to improve function may serve to modify mood disorders

Safety and efficacy of noninvasive ventilation in patients with blunt chest trauma: a systematic review

Abstract Introduction This systematic review looks at the use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV), inclusive of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) and continuous positive pressure ventilation (CPAP), in patients with chest trauma to determine its safety and clinical efficacy in patients with blunt chest trauma who are at high risk of acute lung injury (ALI) and respiratory failure. Methods We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases. Pairs of reviewers abstracted relevant clinical data and assessed the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using the Cochrane domain and observational studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results Nine studies were included (three RCTs, two retrospective cohort studies and four observational studies without a comparison group). There was significant heterogeneity among the included studies regarding the severity of injuries, degree of hypoxemia and timing of enrollment. One RCT of moderate quality assessed the use of NPPV early in the disease process before the development of respiratory distress. All others evaluated the use of NPPV and CPAP in patients with blunt chest trauma after the development of respiratory distress. Overall, up to 18% of patients enrolled in the NIV group needed intubation. The duration of NIV use was highly variable, but NIV use itself was not associated with significant morbidity or mortality. Four low-quality observational studies compared NIV to invasive mechanical ventilation in patients with respiratory distress and showed decreased ICU stay (5.3 to 16 days vs 9.5 to 15 days), complications (0% to 18% vs 38% to 49%) and mortality (0% to 9% vs 6% to 50%) in the NIV group. Conclusions Early use of NIV in appropriately identified patients with chest trauma and without respiratory distress may prevent intubation and decrease complications and ICU length of stay. Use of NIV to prevent intubation in patients with chest trauma who have ALI associated with respiratory distress remains controversial because of the lack of good-quality data

A mixed-methods systematic review protocol to examine the use of physical restraint with critically ill adults and strategies for minimizing their use

Abstract Background Critically ill patients frequently experience severe agitation placing them at risk of harm. Physical restraint is common in intensive care units (ICUs) for clinician concerns about safety. However, physical restraint may not prevent medical device removal and has been associated with negative physical and psychological consequences. While professional society guidelines, legislation, and accreditation standards recommend physical restraint minimization, guidelines for critically ill patients are over a decade old, with recommendations that are non-specific. Our systematic review will synthesize evidence on physical restraint in critically ill adults with the primary objective of identifying effective minimization strategies. Methods Two authors will independently search from inception to July 2016 the following: Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PROSPERO, Joanna Briggs Institute, grey literature, professional society websites, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We will include quantitative and qualitative study designs, clinical practice guidelines, policy documents, and professional society recommendations relevant to physical restraint of critically ill adults. Authors will independently perform data extraction in duplicate and complete risk of bias and quality assessment using recommended tools. We will assess evidence quality for quantitative studies using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and for qualitative studies using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQual) guidelines. Outcomes of interest include (1) efficacy/effectiveness of physical restraint minimization strategies; (2) adverse events (unintentional device removal, psychological impact, physical injury) and associated benefits including harm prevention; (3) ICU outcomes (ventilation duration, length of stay, and mortality); (4) prevalence, incidence, patterns of use including patient and treatment characteristics and chemical restraint; (5) barriers and facilitators to minimization; (6) patient, family, and healthcare professional perspectives; (7) professional society-endorsed recommendations; and (8) evidence gaps and research priorities. Discussion We will use our systematic review findings to produce updated guidelines on physical restraint use for critically ill adults and to develop a professional society-endorsed position statement. This will foster patient and clinician safety by providing clinicians, administrators, and policy makers with a tool to promote minimal and safe use of physical restraint for critically ill adults. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD4201502786

A mixed-methods systematic review protocol to examine the use of physical restraint with critically ill adults and strategies for minimizing their use

Abstract Background Critically ill patients frequently experience severe agitation placing them at risk of harm. Physical restraint is common in intensive care units (ICUs) for clinician concerns about safety. However, physical restraint may not prevent medical device removal and has been associated with negative physical and psychological consequences. While professional society guidelines, legislation, and accreditation standards recommend physical restraint minimization, guidelines for critically ill patients are over a decade old, with recommendations that are non-specific. Our systematic review will synthesize evidence on physical restraint in critically ill adults with the primary objective of identifying effective minimization strategies. Methods Two authors will independently search from inception to July 2016 the following: Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PROSPERO, Joanna Briggs Institute, grey literature, professional society websites, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We will include quantitative and qualitative study designs, clinical practice guidelines, policy documents, and professional society recommendations relevant to physical restraint of critically ill adults. Authors will independently perform data extraction in duplicate and complete risk of bias and quality assessment using recommended tools. We will assess evidence quality for quantitative studies using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and for qualitative studies using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQual) guidelines. Outcomes of interest include (1) efficacy/effectiveness of physical restraint minimization strategies; (2) adverse events (unintentional device removal, psychological impact, physical injury) and associated benefits including harm prevention; (3) ICU outcomes (ventilation duration, length of stay, and mortality); (4) prevalence, incidence, patterns of use including patient and treatment characteristics and chemical restraint; (5) barriers and facilitators to minimization; (6) patient, family, and healthcare professional perspectives; (7) professional society-endorsed recommendations; and (8) evidence gaps and research priorities. Discussion We will use our systematic review findings to produce updated guidelines on physical restraint use for critically ill adults and to develop a professional society-endorsed position statement. This will foster patient and clinician safety by providing clinicians, administrators, and policy makers with a tool to promote minimal and safe use of physical restraint for critically ill adults. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD4201502786