Development and validation of a printed information brochure for families of chronically critically ill patients.

OBJECTIVE: Families and other surrogate decisionmakers for chronically critically ill patients often lack information about patient prognosis or options for care. This study describes an approach to develop and validate a printed information brochure about chronic critical illness aimed at improving comprehension of the disease process and outcomes for patients' families and other surrogate decisionmakers. DESIGN: Investigators reviewed existing literature to identify key domains of informational needs. Content of these domains was incorporated in a draft brochure that included graphics and a glossary of terms. Clinical sensibility, balance, and emotional sensitivity of the draft brochure were tested in a series of evaluations by cohorts of experienced clinicians (n = 49) and clinical content experts (n = 8) with revisions after each review. SUBJECTS: Cognitive testing of the brochure was performed through interviews of ten representative family members of chronically critically ill patients with quantitative and qualitative analysis of responses. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Clinical sensibility and balance were rated in the two most favorable categories on a five-point scale by more than two thirds of clinicians and content experts. After review, family members described the brochure as clear and readable and recommended that the brochure be delivered to family members by clinicians followed by a discussion of its contents. They indicated that the glossary was useful and recommended supplementation by additional lists of local resources. After reading the brochure, their prognostic estimates became more consistent with actual outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed and validated a printed information brochure that may improve family comprehension of chronic critical illness and its outcomes. The structured process that is described can serve as a template for the development of other information aids for use with seriously ill populations.

Deciding in the dark: advance directives and continuation of treatment in chronic critical illness.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic critical illness is a devastating syndrome for which treatment offers limited clinical benefit but imposes heavy burdens on patients, families, clinicians, and the health care system. We studied the availability of advance directives and appropriate surrogates to guide decisions about life-sustaining treatment for the chronically critically ill and the extent and timing of treatment limitation. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Respiratory Care Unit (RCU) in a large, tertiary, urban, university-affiliated, hospital. PATIENTS: Two hundred three chronically critically ill adults transferred to RCU after tracheotomy for failure to wean from mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We interviewed RCU caregivers and reviewed patient records to identify proxy appointments, living wills, or oral statements of treatment preferences, resuscitation directives, and withholding/withdrawal of mechanical ventilation, nutrition, hydration, renal replacement and vasopressors. Forty-three of 203 patients (21.2%) appointed a proxy and 33 (16.2%) expressed preferences in advance directives. Do not resuscitate directives were given for 71 patients (35.0%). Treatment was limited for 39 patients (19.2%). Variables significantly associated with treatment limitation were proxy appointment prior to study entry (time of tracheotomy/RCU transfer) (odds ratio = 6.7, 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-20.0, p = 0.0006) and palliative care consultation in the RCU (OR = 40.9, 95% CI, 13.1-127.4, p < 0.0001). Median (interquartile range) time to first treatment limitation was 39 (31.0-45.0) days after hospital admission and 13 (8.0-29.0) days after RCU admission. For patients dying after treatment limitation, median time from first limitation to death ranged from 3 days for mechanical ventilation and hydration to 7 days for renal replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Most chronically critically ill patients fail to designate a surrogate decision-maker or express preferences regarding life-sustaining treatments. Despite burdensome symptoms and poor outcomes, limitation of such treatments was rare and occurred late, when patients were near death. Opportunities exist to improve communication and decision-making in chronic critical illness.

Communication about chronic critical illness.

BACKGROUND: Despite poor outcomes, life-sustaining treatments including mechanical ventilation are continued for a large and growing population of patients with chronic critical illness. This may be owing in part to a lack of understanding resulting from inadequate communication between clinicians and patients and families. Our objective was to investigate the informational needs of patients with chronic critical illness and their families and the extent to which these needs are met. METHODS: In this prospective observational study conducted at 5 adult intensive care units in a large, university-affiliated hospital in New York, New York, 100 patients with chronic critical illness (within 3-7 days of elective tracheotomy for prolonged mechanical ventilation) or surrogates for incapacitated patients were surveyed using an 18-item questionnaire addressing communication about chronic critical illness. Main outcome measures included ratings of importance and reports of whether information was received about questionnaire items. RESULTS: Among 125 consecutive, eligible patients, 100 (80%) were enrolled; questionnaire respondents included 2 patients and 98 surrogates. For all items, more than 78% of respondents rated the information as important for decision making (>98% for 16 of 18 items). Respondents reported receiving no information for a mean (SD) of 9.0 (3.3) of 18 items, with 95% of respondents reporting not receiving information for approximately one-quarter of the items. Of the subjects rating the item as important, 77 of 96 (80%) and 69 of 74 (93%) reported receiving no information about expected functional status at hospital discharge and prognosis for 1-year survival, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients and their families may lack important information for decision making about continuation of treatment in the chronic phase of critical illness. Strategies for effective communication in this clinical context should be investigated and implemented.

Role of environmental surveillance in determining the risk of hospital-acquired legionellosis: a national surveillance study with clinical correlations.

OBJECTIVE: Hospital-acquired Legionella pneumonia has a fatality rate of 28%, and the source is the water distribution system. Two prevention strategies have been advocated. One approach to prevention is clinical surveillance for disease without routine environmental monitoring. Another approach recommends environmental monitoring even in the absence of known cases of Legionella pneumonia. We determined the Legionella colonization status of water systems in hospitals to establish whether the results of environmental surveillance correlated with discovery of disease. None of these hospitals had previously experienced endemic hospital-acquired Legionella pneumonia. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: Twenty US hospitals in 13 states. INTERVENTIONS: Hospitals performed clinical and environmental surveillance for Legionella from 2000 through 2002. All specimens were shipped to the Special Pathogens Laboratory at the Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Medical Center. RESULTS: Legionella pneumophila and Legionella anisa were isolated from 14 (70%) of 20 hospital water systems. Of 676 environmental samples, 198 (29%) were positive for Legionella species. High-level colonization of the water system (30% or more of the distal outlets were positive for L. pneumophila) was demonstrated for 6 (43%) of the 14 hospitals with positive findings. L. pneumophila serogroup 1 was detected in 5 of these 6 hospitals, whereas 1 hospital was colonized with L. pneumophila serogroup 5. A total of 633 patients were evaluated for Legionella pneumonia from 12 (60%) of the 20 hospitals: 377 by urinary antigen testing and 577 by sputum culture. Hospital-acquired Legionella pneumonia was identified in 4 hospitals, all of which were hospitals with L. pneumophila serogroup 1 found in 30% or more of the distal outlets. No cases of disease due to other serogroups or species (L. anisa) were identified. CONCLUSION: Environmental monitoring followed by clinical surveillance was successful in uncovering previously unrecognized cases of hospital-acquired Legionella pneumonia.

Brain dysfunction: another burden for the chronically critically ill.

BACKGROUND: Chronic critical illness is a devastating syndrome of prolonged respiratory failure and other derangements. To our knowledge, no previous research has addressed brain dysfunction in the chronically critically ill, although this topic is important for medical decision making. METHODS: We studied a prospective cohort of 203 consecutive, chronically critically ill adults transferred to our hospital's respiratory care unit (RCU) after tracheotomy for failure to wean. We measured prevalence and duration of coma and delirium during RCU treatment using the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit with the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale. To assess survivors (at 3 and 6 months after RCU discharge), we used a validated telephone Confusion Assessment Method. RESULTS: Before hospitalization, most (153 [75.4%]) of the 203 patients in the study were at home, completely independent (115 [56.7%]), and cognitively intact (116 [82.0%]). In the RCU, 61 (30.0%) were comatose throughout the stay. Approximately half of patients (66 of 142) who were not in coma were delirious. Patients spent an average of 17.9 days (range, 1-153 days) in coma or delirium (average RCU stay, 25.6 days). Half of survivors (79 of 160) had one of these disturbances at RCU discharge. At 6 months, three fourths (151) of the study patients were dead or institutionalized; of 85 survivors, 58 (68.2%) were too profoundly impaired to respond to telephone cognitive assessment, and 53 (62.4%) were dependent in all activities of daily living. CONCLUSIONS: Severe, prolonged, and permanent brain dysfunction is a prominent feature of chronic critical illness. These data, together with previous reports of symptom distress and rates of mortality and institutionalization, describe burdens for chronically critically ill patients receiving continued life-prolonging treatment and for their families.