ArticleCritical care explorations2026
Clinicians' Perspectives on Strengthening Interprofessional Teamwork to Support Surrogate Decision-Makers of Critically Ill Patients in ICUs.
Article in Critical care explorations, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
importanceProfessional societies recommend interprofessional collaboration to support ICU surrogate decision-makers, yet little is known about how to operationalize it.
objectivesDetermine clinicians' perceived acceptability of interprofessional collaboration to support surrogates of ICU patients facing goals-of-care (GOC) decisions and identify barriers/facilitators to implementing a proposed interprofessional collaboration intervention. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsMixed-methods study with ICU clinicians from four hospitals in Pennsylvania and Ohio. Surveys assessed acceptability across three domains: perceived effectiveness, self-efficacy, and attitudes. Clinicians from two ICUs without an interprofessional collaboration program also answered interview questions eliciting barriers/facilitators to implementing a proposed interprofessional collaboration intervention. ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics for survey data and content analysis of interview transcripts.
resultsWe surveyed 56 clinicians: 25 physicians and advanced practice providers (APPs), and 31 other healthcare professionals (22 nurses, 3 social workers, 6 others), and interviewed 24. Ninety-eight percent agreed that enhanced interprofessional collaboration improves surrogate support. Among other healthcare professionals, 61% wanted a larger role in GOC decisions, 97% felt confident providing emotional support, and more than 74% were confident in reinforcing prognostic information and discussing values/preferences and GOC. ICU physicians/APPs were all comfortable with nurses and social workers providing emotional support, and most were comfortable with nurses (> 80%) and social workers (> 60%) reinforcing prognostic information and discussing values/preferences, and GOC. Although more than 95% of nurses and others were confident discussing physician-proposed treatment options, only 33% of social workers were, and less than or equal to 50% ICU physicians/APPs were comfortable with nurses/social workers doing so. 94% of ICU physicians/APPs supported adopting an interprofessional collaboration intervention with shared mental models, defined roles, and training. Barriers included team turnover, time constraints, evolving care plans, and training feasibility. Facilitators included specialized training, clear roles, and knowledge of the evidence base for interprofessional collaboration.
conclusionsMost clinicians across roles found interprofessional collaboration for GOC decisions acceptable, with clear responsibilities, specialized training, workflow fit, and education on its value as key facilitators for implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.