Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30654741›Full record

ArticleBMC emergency medicine2019

Ceilings of treatment: a qualitative study in the emergency department.

Nathan Walzl, Jessica Jameson, John Kinsella, David J Lowe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

4 authors.

Nathan WalzlSchool of Medicine, University of Glasgow, Wolfson Medical School Building, University Avenue, Glasgow, G128QQ, UK. 2060454w@student.gla.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-5678-4858
Jessica JamesonEmergency Department, Monklands Hospital, Airdrie, UK.
John KinsellaSchool of Medicine, University of Glasgow, Wolfson Medical School Building, University Avenue, Glasgow, G128QQ, UK.
David J LoweSchool of Medicine, University of Glasgow, Wolfson Medical School Building, University Avenue, Glasgow, G128QQ, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDecision-making concerning the limitation of potentially life-prolonging treatments is often challenging, particularly in the Emergency Department (ED). Current literature in this area of Emergency Medicine is limited and heterogeneous. We seek to determine the factors that influence ceiling of treatment institution in the ED.

methodsWe conducted a phenomenological qualitative study employing semi-structured interviews. Emergency Medicine Consultants were recruited via a sample of convenience from 5 hospitals in the West of Scotland. Data saturation was achieved after 15 interviews. Interviews were recorded, anonymised, transcribed, coded, and an iterative thematic analysis was carried out.

resultsA model was created to illustrate the identified themes. Patient wishes are central to decision-making. Acute clinical factors and patient-specific factors lay the foundations of ceiling of treatment decisions. This is heavily contextualised by family input, collateral information, anticipated outcome, and whether the patient is accepted for higher care. This decision-making process flows through a 'filter' of cultural and environmental factors. The overarching nature of patient benefit was found to be of key importance, framing all aspects of ceiling of treatment institution. Ultimately, all ceiling of treatment decisions result in one of three common patient pathways: full escalation, limited escalation, and maintenance of current care with the option of palliative care initiation.

conclusionsWe present a conceptual model composed of 10 major thematic factors that influence Consultant ceiling of treatment decision-making in the ED. Clinicians should be cognizant of influential factors and associated biases when making these important and challenging decisions.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingEmergency Service, HospitalPatient CarePatient PreferenceClinical CompetenceFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleQualitative ResearchRisk AssessmentCeiling of treatmentDecision makingEmergency medicineQualitative research

Identifiers

PMID30654741
PMCPMC6335704

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.