Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38293156›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2024

Drivers of Decision-Making for Adult Tracheostomy for Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation: A Qualitative Study.

Anuj B Mehta, Steven Lockhart, Allison V Lange, Daniel D Matlock, Ivor S Douglas, Megan A Morris

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Steven Lockhart
Allison V Lange
Daniel D Matlock
Ivor S Douglas
Megan A Morris

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Decision-making about tracheostomy and prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV) is emotionally complex. Expectations of surrogate decision-makers and physicians rarely align. Little is known about what surrogates need to make goal-concordant decisions. We sought to identify drivers of tracheostomy and PMV decision-making. Methods: Using Grounded Theory, we performed a qualitative study with semi-structured interviews with surrogates of patients receiving mechanical ventilation (MV) being considered for tracheostomy and physicians routinely caring for patients receiving MV. Recruitment was stopped when thematic saturation was reached. Separate codebooks were created for surrogate and physician interviews. Themes and factors affecting decision-making were identified and a theoretical model tracheostomy decision-making was developed. Results: 43 participants (23 surrogates and 20 physicians) completed interviews. A theoretical model of themes and factors driving decision-making emerged for the data. Hope, Lack of Knowledge & Data, and Uncertainty emerged as the three main themes all which were interconnected with one another and, at times, opposed each other. Patient Wishes, Past Activity/Medical History, Short and Long-Term Outcomes, and Meaningful Recovery were key factors upon which surrogates and physicians based decision-making. The themes were the lens through which the factors were viewed and decision-making existed as a balance between surrogate emotions and understanding and physician recommendations. Conclusions: Tracheostomy and prolonged MV decision-making is complex. Hope and Uncertainty were conceptual themes that often battled with one another. Lack of Knowledge & Data plagued both surrogates and physicians. Multiple tangible factors were identified that affected surrogate decision-making and physician recommendations. Implications: Understanding this complex decision-making process has the potential to improve the information provided to surrogates and, potentially, increase the goal concordant care and alignment of surrogate and physician expectations. Highlights: Decision-making for tracheostomy and prolonged mechanical ventilation is a complex interactive process between surrogate decision-makers and providers.Using a Grounded Theory framework, a theoretical model emerged from the data with core themes of Hope, Uncertainty, and Lack of Knowledge & Data that was shared by both providers and surrogates.The core themes were the lenses through which the key decision-making factors of Patient Wishes, Past Activity/Medical History, Short and Long-Term Outcomes, and Meaningful Recovery were viewed.The theoretical model provides a roadmap to design a shared decision-making intervention to improve tracheostomy and prolonged mechanical ventilation decision-making.

Identifiers

PMID38293156
PMCPMC10827243

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.