Caregiver perceptions on intensive care: A qualitative study from southern India.

BACKGROUND: Admission of a patient to an intensive care unit (ICU) can result in tremendous stress to family caregivers not only because of the need to provide physical and emotional support to the sick relative, but also due to the burden of decision-making on behalf of the critically ill person. We enquired about family caregivers' perspectives on intensive care, the challenges they faced with decision-making and their perceptions on the nature of their interactions with healthcare providers. METHODS: We used maximum variation sampling and enrolled 20 consenting caregivers for semi-structured interviews. Each interview, based on an interview guide, took 30-40 minutes and was conducted in a private place within the hospital premises. All interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and entered into a qualitative software (NVivo) for analysis. RESULTS: The three emergent themes of analysis were (i) understanding about ICU, (ii) decision-making concerning ongoing treatment; and (iii) relationship with healthcare-providers. Some respondents saw the intensive care as an expensive facility for seriously ill patients while others were not so clear. The family's relationship with the patient and their financial status were seen as important deciding factors in continuing treatment. Decision-making was a complex and emotional issue and doctors were held in awe and seen as the main deciding authority. The importance of doctors being compassionate and communicative was stressed. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the problems faced by family caregivers and of the need to improve their satisfaction through clear and simple communication strategies.

Cost-utility in medical intensive care patients. Rationalizing ongoing care and timing of discharge from intensive care.

RATIONALE: Intensive care unit (ICU) treatment costs pose special challenges in developing countries. OBJECTIVES: To determine the prognostic value of the "utility" score and evaluate the relationship of willingness to pay assessment to utility score during ICU admission. METHODS: We performed a prospective study spanning 12 months in a 24-bed medical ICU in India. Treatment cost was estimated by direct measurement. Global utility score was assessed daily by healthcare providers on a Likert scale (0-1 in increments of 0.1, with 0 indicating death/severe disability and 1 indicating cure/perfect health). The sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios of utility in predicting ICU mortality was calculated. Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated to compare Day 2 utility with APACHE II. The caregiver's willingness to pay for treatment was assessed on alternate days using the bidding method by presenting a cost bid. Based on the response ("yes" or "no"), bids were increased or decreased in a prespecified manner until a final bid value was reached. Simultaneously, treating doctors were asked how much institutional funds they would be willing to spend for treatment. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary diagnosis in 499 patients included infection (26%) and poisoning (21%). The mean (SD) APACHE II score was 13.9 (5.8); 86% were ventilated. ICU stay was 7.8 (5.5) days. ICU mortality was 23.9% (95% confidence interval, 20.3-27.8). Survival without disability was 8.3% (2/24) for Day 2 utility score ≤0.3 and 95.8% (53/56) for Day 5 score >0.8 (P < 0.001). The likelihood ratio to predict mortality increased as utility values decreased and was highest (5.85) for utility 0.2. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for utility and APACHE II were similar. Willingness to pay by the caregiver was 53% of treatment cost and was not influenced by utility. Willingness to pay by ICU doctors showed an inverted U-shaped relationship with utility. CONCLUSIONS: Utility scores help prognosticate, with Day 2 score ≤0.3 associated with poor outcome and ≥0.8 Day 5 score with survival. The caregiver's willingness to pay was inadequate to meet treatment cost. ICU doctors were willing to spend more for moderate utility scores than for very high or low utility values. Further prospective studies are needed to optimize the utilization of scarce ICU resources by identifying patients for appropriate step-down care using utility and willingness to pay.