Book contents
- Neurocritical Care
- Neurocritical Care
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Intracranial Pressure Monitoring and Management
- 3 Disorders of Temperature Regulation
- 4 Approach to Neuroimaging of the Brain, Vessels, and Cerebral Edema
- 5 Airway and Ventilator Management of the Neurologically Critically Ill Patient
- 6 Neurocritical Care Pharmacology
- 7 Intracerebral Hemorrhage
- 8 Correction of Coagulopathy
- 9 Subarachnoid Hemorrhage
- 10 Subdural Hematoma
- 11 Critical Care Management of Neurotrauma
- 12 Critical Care Management before and after Open and Intravascular Procedures
- 13 Shared Decision-Making in the Neuro-ICU
- 14 Status Epilepticus and EEG Monitoring
- 15 Evaluation of the Comatose Patient and Overview of the Brain Death Examination
- Index
- References
13 - Shared Decision-Making in the Neuro-ICU
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 May 2022
Edited by
Book contents
- Neurocritical Care
- Neurocritical Care
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Intracranial Pressure Monitoring and Management
- 3 Disorders of Temperature Regulation
- 4 Approach to Neuroimaging of the Brain, Vessels, and Cerebral Edema
- 5 Airway and Ventilator Management of the Neurologically Critically Ill Patient
- 6 Neurocritical Care Pharmacology
- 7 Intracerebral Hemorrhage
- 8 Correction of Coagulopathy
- 9 Subarachnoid Hemorrhage
- 10 Subdural Hematoma
- 11 Critical Care Management of Neurotrauma
- 12 Critical Care Management before and after Open and Intravascular Procedures
- 13 Shared Decision-Making in the Neuro-ICU
- 14 Status Epilepticus and EEG Monitoring
- 15 Evaluation of the Comatose Patient and Overview of the Brain Death Examination
- Index
- References
Summary
Shared decision-making (SDM) is a process involving clinicians, patients, and surrogates that is grounded in making treatment decisions based on the best available scientific evidence and patient’s values, goals, and preferences. This collaborative style of decision-making is urgently needed in the Neuro-ICU to meet the existing deficiencies in clinician–family communication and decision-making. SDM conceptual models include the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF) and Interprofessional Shared Decision-Making Model (IP-SDM) and form the basis of decision aids (DAs), which are SDM tools. The goal of SDM is to increase patient-value congruent decision-making, improve the quality of communication between clinicians and patient/surrogates, reduce decisional conflict and passivity, increase knowledge of decisions, and promote realistic expectations of treatments and outcomes. Further research is needed and currently underway to establish the efficacy of SDM in the Neuro-ICU on family, clinician, patient, and healthcare utilization outcomes.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Neurocritical Care , pp. 252 - 270Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Kon, AA, et al. Shared decision making in ICUs: an American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society policy statement. Crit Care Med. 2016;44(1):188–201.Google Scholar
Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America, in Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2001.Google Scholar
Patient Protection and affordable care act. H.R. 3590. Public Law 111–148. 111th Congress. 2010.Google Scholar
Khan, MW, Muehlschlegel, S. Shared decision making in neurocritical care. Neurol Clin. 2017;35(4):825–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cox, CE, et al. Effects of a personalized web-based decision aid for surrogate decision makers of patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170(5):285–97.Google Scholar
Cox, CE, et al. Development and pilot testing of a decision aid for surrogates of patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(8):2327–34.Google Scholar
O’Connor, A. Ottawa decision support framework to address decisional conflict. 2006 [February 18, 2020]. Available from: https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/odsf.html.Google Scholar
Legare, F, Stacey, D, IP Team. IP-SDM model. 2010 [February 18, 2020]. Available from: https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/ip-sdm.html.Google Scholar
Legare, F, et al. Validating a conceptual model for an inter-professional approach to shared decision making: a mixed methods study. J Eval Clin Pract. 2011;17(4):554–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goostrey, K, et al. Adaptation of a traumatic brain injury goals-of-care decision aid for surrogate decision-makers to hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke with acceptability and usability testing. Portland, OR: Society for Medical Decision Making; 2019.Google Scholar
Elwyn, G, et al. Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process. BMJ. 2006;333(7565):417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stacey, D, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014(1):CD001431.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
White, DB, et al. Toward shared decision making at the end of life in intensive care units: opportunities for improvement. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(5):461–67.Google Scholar
Zier, LS, et al. Surrogate decision makers’ interpretation of prognostic information: a mixed-methods study. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156(5):360–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee Char, SJ, et al. A randomized trial of two methods to disclose prognosis to surrogate decision makers in intensive care units. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2010;182(7):905–09.Google Scholar
Muehlschlegel, S. Goals-of-care decision aid for critically ill TBI patients: development and feasibility testing. Neurology. 2020;95(2):e179–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buckman, R. How to break bad news: a guide for health care professionals, 1st ed. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press; 1992.Google Scholar
White, DB, Curtis, JR. Establishing an evidence base for physician-family communication and shared decision making in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(9):2500–1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fogarty, LA, et al. Can 40 seconds of compassion reduce patient anxiety? J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(1):371–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Selph, RB, et al. Empathy and life support decisions in intensive care units. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(9):1311–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed