Prognostic Discordance Among Parents and Physicians Caring for Infants with Neurologic Conditions.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency, degree, and nature of prognostic discordance between parents and physicians caring for infants with neurologic conditions. STUDY DESIGN: In this observational cohort study, we enrolled parents and physicians caring for infants with neurologic conditions in advance of a family conference. Parent-physician dyads completed a postconference survey targeting expected neurologic outcomes across 3 domains (motor, speech, and cognition) using a 6-point scale. Prognostic discordance was defined as a difference of ≥2 response options and was considered moderate (difference of 2-3 response options) or high (difference of 4-5 response options). Responses were categorized as differences in belief and/or differences in understanding using an existing paradigm. RESULTS: Forty parent-physician dyads of 28 infants completed surveys. Parent-physician discordance about prognosis occurred in ≥1 domain in the majority of dyads (n = 28/40, 70%). Discordance was generally moderate in degree (n = 23/28, 82%) and occurred with similar frequency across all domains. Of parent-physician dyads with discordance, the majority contained a difference in understanding in at least 1 domain (n = 25/28, 89%), while a minority contained a difference of belief (n = 6/28, 21%). When discordance was present, parents were typically more optimistic in their predictions compared with physicians (n = 25/28, 89%). CONCLUSIONS: Differing perceptions about the prognosis of critically ill infants are common and due to differences in both understanding and belief. These findings can be used to develop targeted interventions to improve prognostic communication.

Characterizing the Language Used to Discuss Death in Family Meetings for Critically Ill Infants.

Importance: Communication during conversations about death is critical; however, little is known about the language clinicians and families use to discuss death. Objective: To characterize (1) the way death is discussed in family meetings between parents of critically ill infants and the clinical team and (2) how discussion of death differs between clinicians and family members. Design, Setting, and Participants: This longitudinal qualitative study took place at a single academic hospital in the southeast US. Patients were enrolled from September 2018 to September 2020, and infants were followed up longitudinally throughout their hospitalization. Participants included families of infants with neurologic conditions who were hospitalized in the intensive care unit and had a planned family meeting to discuss neurologic prognosis or starting, not starting, or discontinuing life-sustaining treatment. Family meetings were recorded, transcribed, and deidentified before being screened for discussion of death. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the language used to reference death during family meetings between parents and clinicians. Conventional content analysis was used to analyze data. Results: A total of 68 family meetings involving 36 parents of 24 infants were screened; 33 family meetings (49%) involving 20 parents (56%) and 13 infants (54%) included discussion of death. Most parents involved in discussion of death identified as the infant's mother (13 [65%]) and as Black (12 [60%]). Death was referenced 406 times throughout the family meetings (275 times by clinicians and 131 times by family members); the words die, death, dying, or stillborn were used 5% of the time by clinicians (13 of 275 references) and 15% of the time by family members (19 of 131 references). Four types of euphemisms used in place of die, death, dying, or stillborn were identified: (1) survival framing (eg, not live), (2) colloquialisms (eg, pass away), (3) medical jargon, including obscure technical terms (eg, code event) or talking around death with physiologic terms (eg, irrecoverable heart rate drop), and (4) pronouns without an antecedent (eg, it). The most common type of euphemism used by clinicians was medical jargon (118 of 275 references [43%]). The most common type of euphemism used by family members was colloquialism (44 of 131 references [34%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study, the words die, death, dying, or stillborn were rarely used to refer to death in family meetings with clinicians. Families most often used colloquialisms to reference death, and clinicians most often used medical jargon. Future work should evaluate the effects of euphemisms on mutual understanding, shared decision-making, and clinician-family relationships.

Antibiotic-resistant organisms establish reservoirs in new hospital built environments and are related to patient blood infection isolates.

Background: Healthcare-associated infections due to antibiotic-resistant organisms pose an acute and rising threat to critically ill and immunocompromised patients. To evaluate reservoirs of antibiotic-resistant organisms as a source of transmission to patients, we interrogated isolates from environmental surfaces, patient feces, and patient blood infections from an established and a newly built intensive care unit. Methods: We used selective culture to recover 829 antibiotic-resistant organisms from 1594 environmental and 72 patient fecal samples, in addition to 81 isolates from blood cultures. We conducted antibiotic susceptibility testing and short- and long-read whole genome sequencing on recovered isolates. Results: Antibiotic-resistant organism burden is highest in sink drains compared to other surfaces. Pseudomonas aeruginosa is the most frequently cultured organism from surfaces in both intensive care units. From whole genome sequencing, different lineages of P. aeruginosa dominate in each unit; one P. aeruginosa lineage of ST1894 is found in multiple sink drains in the new intensive care unit and 3.7% of blood isolates analyzed, suggesting movement of this clone between the environment and patients. Conclusions: These results highlight antibiotic-resistant organism reservoirs in hospital built environments as an important target for infection prevention in hospitalized patients.

Decisional Satisfaction, Regret, and Conflict Among Parents of Infants with Neurologic Conditions.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize decisional satisfaction, regret, and conflict among parents of critically ill infants with neurologic conditions. STUDY DESIGN: In this prospective cohort study, we enrolled parents of infants with neurologic conditions in the intensive care unit (ICU). Hospital discharge surveys included the validated Family Satisfaction with the ICU (FS-ICU) decision making subscale, Decision Regret Scale (DRS), and Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). We defined high satisfaction with decision making as an FS-ICU score ≥75, high decisional regret/conflict as DRS/DCS score >25, and within-couple disagreement as a difference of at least 25 points between scores. RESULTS: We enrolled 61 parents of 40 infants (n = 40 mothers, n = 21 fathers); 35 mothers and 15 fathers completed surveys. Most mothers reported high satisfaction with decision making (27 of 35; 77%) and low decision regret (28 of 35; 80%); 40% (14 of 35) reported high decisional conflict. Mothers and fathers reported higher decisional conflict in the domains of uncertainty and values clarity compared with the domain of effective decision making (Bonferroni-corrected P < .05). There were no differences in decision outcomes between paired mothers and fathers; however, within any given couple, there were numerous instances of disagreement (7 of 15 for decision regret and 5 of 15 for decisional conflict). CONCLUSIONS: Many parents experience decisional conflict even if they ultimately have high satisfaction and low regret, underscoring the need for decision aids targeting uncertainty and values clarity. Couples frequently experience different levels of decisional regret and conflict.