Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26860461›Full record

ArticleBMC anesthesiology2016

The value of uncertainty in critical illness? An ethnographic study of patterns and conflicts in care and decision-making trajectories.

I J Higginson, C Rumble, C Shipman, J Koffman, K E Sleeman, M Morgan, P Hopkins, J Noble, W Bernal, S Leonard and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Characteristics and Outcomes of Ethics Consultations on a Comprehensive Cancer Center's Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology Service.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2018
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

I J HigginsonKing's College London, Cicely Saunders Institute, Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Bessemer Road, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 9PJ, UK. irene.higginson@kcl.ac.uk.
C RumbleKing's College London, Cicely Saunders Institute, Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Bessemer Road, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 9PJ, UK.
C ShipmanKing's College London, Cicely Saunders Institute, Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Bessemer Road, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 9PJ, UK.
J KoffmanKing's College London, Cicely Saunders Institute, Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Bessemer Road, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 9PJ, UK.
K E SleemanKing's College London, Cicely Saunders Institute, Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Bessemer Road, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 9PJ, UK.
M MorganKing's College London, Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences, Capital House, London Bridge, London, UK.
P HopkinsKing's College Hospital, King's Critical Care, Denmark Hill, London, UK.
J NobleKing's College Hospital, King's Critical Care, Denmark Hill, London, UK.
W BernalKing's College Hospital, King's Critical Care, Denmark Hill, London, UK.
S LeonardKing's College Hospital, King's Critical Care, Denmark Hill, London, UK.
O DampierKing's College Hospital, King's Critical Care, Denmark Hill, London, UK.
W PrenticeKing's College London, Cicely Saunders Institute, Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Bessemer Road, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 9PJ, UK.
R BurmanKing's College London, Cicely Saunders Institute, Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Bessemer Road, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 9PJ, UK.
M CostantiniPalliative Care Unit, IRCCS Arcispedale S. Maria Nuova, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
King's College London · GBKing's College Hospital · GBCicely Saunders International · GB

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-0107-12109
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith increasingly intensive treatments and population ageing, more people face complex treatment and care decisions. We explored patterns of the decision-making processes during critical care, and sources of conflict and resolution.

methodsEthnographic study in two Intensive Care Units (ICUs) in an inner city hospital comprising: non-participant observation of general care and decisions, followed by case studies where treatment limitation decisions, comfort care and/or end of life discussions were occurring. These involved: semi-structured interviews with consenting families, where possible, patients; direct observations of care; and review of medical records.

resultsInitial non-participant observation included daytime, evenings, nights and weekends. The cases were 16 patients with varied diagnoses, aged 19-87 years; 19 family members were interviewed, aged 30-73 years. Cases were observed for <1 to 156 days (median 22), depending on length of ICU admission. Decisions were made serially over the whole trajectory, usually several days or weeks. We identified four trajectories with distinct patterns: curative care from admission; oscillating curative and comfort care; shift to comfort care; comfort care from admission. Some families considered decision-making a negative concept and preferred uncertainty. Conflict occurred most commonly in the trajectories with oscillating curative and comfort care. Conflict also occurred inside clinical teams. Families were most often involved in decision-making regarding care outcomes and seemed to find it easier when patients switched definitively from curative to comfort care. We found eight categories of decision-making; three related to the care outcomes (aim, place, response to needs) and five to the care processes (resuscitation, decision support, medications/fluids, monitoring/interventions, other specialty involvement).

conclusionsDecision-making in critical illness involves a web of discussions regarding the potential outcomes and processes of care, across the whole disease trajectory. When measures oscillate between curative and comfort there is greatest conflict. This suggests a need to support early communication, especially around values and preferred care outcomes, from which other decisions follow, including DNAR. Offering further support, possibly with expert palliative care, communication, and discussion of 'trial of treatment' may be beneficial at this time, rather than waiting until the 'end of life'.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingUncertaintyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnthropology, CulturalCase-Control StudiesCritical CareCritical IllnessFemaleHumansIntensive Care UnitsMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID26860461
PMCPMC4746769
OpenAlexW2269326463

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.