Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36797793›Full record

ArticleCritical care (London, England)2023

Prevalence of long-term decision regret and associated risk factors in a large cohort of ICU surrogate decision makers.

Sarah K Andersen, Rachel A Butler, Chung-Chou H Chang, Robert Arnold, Derek C Angus, Douglas B White

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sarah K AndersenProgram on Ethics and Decision Making, The Clinical Research, Investigation, and Systems Modeling of Acute Illness (CRISMA) Center, Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, 3550 Terrace St. Scaife Hall, Room 608, HPU010604, Pittsburgh, 15261, PA, USA. andersensk@pitt.edu.
Rachel A ButlerProgram on Ethics and Decision Making, The Clinical Research, Investigation, and Systems Modeling of Acute Illness (CRISMA) Center, Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, 3550 Terrace St. Scaife Hall, Room 608, HPU010604, Pittsburgh, 15261, PA, USA.
Chung-Chou H ChangThe CRISMA Center, Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Robert ArnoldDivision of General Internal Medicine, Section of Palliative Care and Medical Ethics, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Derek C AngusThe CRISMA Center, Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Douglas B WhiteProgram on Ethics and Decision Making, The Clinical Research, Investigation, and Systems Modeling of Acute Illness (CRISMA) Center, Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, 3550 Terrace St. Scaife Hall, Room 608, HPU010604, Pittsburgh, 15261, PA, USA.
University of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

Multidisciplinary Training in Critical Care Outcomes ResearchT32HL007820 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Timothy D Girard, Jeremy M Kahn · 1996 to 2026
$6.4M
Randomized Trial of Specialty Palliative Care Integrated with Critical Care for Critically Ill Older Adults at High Risk of Death or Severe DisabilityR01AG068567 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI SCHENKER, YAEL, WHITE, DOUGLAS B · 2020 to 2024
$3.4M
Randomized Trial of a Scalable, Interactive Tool to Support Surrogate Decision-makers of Elderly Critically Ill PatientsR01AG066731 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI WHITE, DOUGLAS B · 2020 to 2024
$3.3M
Stepped Wedge Trial of an Intervention to Support Proxy Decision Makers in ICUsR01NR014663 · NINR · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI WHITE, DOUGLAS B · 2014 to 2018
$2.9M
Mentored Patient Oriented Research in Improving Surrogate Decision Making for Patients with Advanced Respiratory FailureK24HL148314 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Douglas B White · 2019 to 2026
$944k
NHLBI NIH HHS K24 HL148314NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007820NIA NIH HHS R01 AG066731NIH HHS R01NR014663NIH HHS T32HL007820NINR NIH HHS R01 NR014663
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhether surrogate decision makers regret decisions about the use of life support for incapacitated, critically ill patients remain uncertain. We sought to determine the prevalence of decision regret among surrogates of adult ICU patients and identify factors that influence regret.

methodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of data from the PARTNER 2 trial, which tested a family support intervention for surrogates of critically ill adults. At 6-month follow-up, surrogates rated their regret about life support decisions using the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), scored from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more regret. We used multiple linear regression to identify covariates associated with decision regret based on a psychological construct of regret. We constructed two models using the full cohort; model 1 included patient outcomes; model 2 focused on covariates known at the time of ICU decision-making. Subgroup analyses were also conducted based on patient survival status at hospital discharge and 6-month follow-up.

results748 of 848 surrogates had complete DRS data. The median (IQR) DRS score was 15 (0, 25). Overall, 54% reported mild regret (DRS 5-25), 19% moderate-strong regret (DRS 30-100), and 27% no regret (DRS 0). Poor patient outcome at 6 months (death or severe functional dependence) was associated with more regret in model 1 (β 10.1; 95% C.I. 3.2, 17.0). In model 2, palliative care consultation (3.0; 0.1, 5.9), limitations in life support (LS) prior to death (6.3; 3.1, 9.4) and surrogate black race (6.3; 0.3, 12.3) were associated with more regret. Other modulators of regret in subgroup analyses included surrogate age and education level, surrogate-patient relationship, death in hospital (compared to the post-discharge period), and code status at time of ICU admission.

conclusionsOne in five ICU surrogate decision makers experience moderate to strong regret about life support decisions in ICU. Poor patient outcomes are linked to more regret. Decisions to limit life support prior to patient death may also increase regret. Future studies are needed to understand how regret relates to decision quality and how to lessen lasting regret.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessDecision MakingAdultAftercareHumansIntensive Care UnitsPatient DischargePrevalenceIntensive carePatient-centered carePsychological outcomesSurrogate decision-making

Identifiers

PMID36797793
PMCPMC9933411
OpenAlexW4321092877

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.