Choosing Wisely For Critical Care: The Next Five.

OBJECTIVES: To formulate new "Choosing Wisely" for Critical Care recommendations that identify best practices to avoid waste and promote value while providing critical care. DATA SOURCES: Semistructured narrative literature review and quantitative survey assessments. STUDY SELECTION: English language publications that examined critical care practices in relation to reducing cost or waste. DATA EXTRACTION: Practices assessed to add no value to critical care were grouped by category. Taskforce assessment, modified Delphi consensus building, and quantitative survey analysis identified eight novel recommendations to avoid wasteful critical care practices. These were submitted to the Society of Critical Care Medicine membership for evaluation and ranking. DATA SYNTHESIS: Results from the quantitative Society of Critical Care Medicine membership survey identified the top scoring five of eight recommendations. These five highest ranked recommendations established Society of Critical Care Medicine's Next Five "Choosing" Wisely for Critical Care practices. CONCLUSIONS: Five new recommendations to reduce waste and enhance value in the practice of critical care address invasive devices, proactive liberation from mechanical ventilation, antibiotic stewardship, early mobilization, and providing goal-concordant care. These recommendations supplement the initial critical care recommendations from the "Choosing Wisely" campaign.

Conflict Management in the ICU.

OBJECTIVES: To provide a concise review of data and literature pertaining to the etiologies of conflict in the ICU, as well as current approaches to conflict management. DATA SOURCES: Detailed search strategy using PubMed and OVID Medline for English language articles describing conflict in the ICU as well as prevention and management strategies. STUDY SELECTION: Descriptive and interventional studies addressing conflict, bioethics, clinical ethics consultation, palliative care medicine, conflict management, and conflict mediation in critical care. DATA EXTRACTION: Relevant descriptions or studies were reviewed, and the following aspects of each manuscript were identified, abstracted, and analyzed: setting, study population, aims, methods, results, and relevant implications for critical care practice and training. DATA SYNTHESIS: Conflict frequently erupts in the ICU between patients and families and care teams, as well as within and between care teams. Conflict engenders a host of untoward consequences for patients, families, clinicians, and facilities rendering abrogating conflict a key priority for all. Conflict etiologies are diverse but understood in terms of a framework of triggers. Identifying and de-escalating conflict before it become intractable is a preferred approach. Approaches to conflict management include utilizing clinical ethics consultation, and palliative care medicine clinicians. Conflict Management is a new technique that all ICU clinicians may use to identify and manage conflict. Entrenched conflict appears to benefit from Bioethics Mediation, an approach that uses a neutral, unaligned mediator to guide parties to a mutually acceptable resolution. CONCLUSIONS: Conflict commonly occurs in the ICU around difficult and complex decision-making. Patients, families, clinicians, and institutions suffer undesirable consequences resulting from conflict, establishing conflict prevention and resolution as key priorities. A variety of approaches may successfully identify, manage, and prevent conflict including techniques that are utilizable by all team members in support of clinical excellence.

Mediation Training for the Physician: Expanding the Communication Toolkit to Manage Conflict.

Good communication is critical to the practice of medicine. This is particularly true when outcomes are unpredictable and/or patients lack the capacity to participate in medical decision making. Disputes may develop that cannot be addressed using basic communication skills. Conflict of this nature can burden patients, families, and medical staff and may result in increased suffering for all parties. Many physicians lack the necessary communication tools to handle difficult conversations. Training in bioethics mediation provides physicians with skills that can promote healing by empowering participants to engage in effective discourse and break down barriers to find common ground. Mediation training for physicians can expand their capacity to connect with patients and enhance their ability to identify potential conflict early on, in order to collaborate more effectively. Competency in the processes of negotiation and conflict resolution should therefore be seen as essential elements of medical training.

First-Year Medical Students' Perceptions of Stigma Toward People With Opioid Use Disorder Before and After an Educational Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Stigma among medical trainees toward people with opioid use disorder (OUD) compounds the problems associated with opioid addiction. People with OUD who experience overt and implicit stigma from healthcare providers are less likely to seek and receive treatment, further restricting their access to already limited resources. The objective of our study was to assess an educational strategy to mitigate stigma toward people with OUD among first-year medical students. METHODS: This study assessed perceptions of stigma toward people with OUD among first-year medical students using an adaptation of a brief, validated opioid stigma scale before and after an educational intervention. The intervention consisted primarily of a recorded panel in which people with a history of OUD shared their experiences with stigma followed by small group discussions. RESULTS: After the educational intervention, students were more likely to respond that (1) they believed most people held negative beliefs about people with OUD and (2) they personally disagreed with negative statements about people with OUD. CONCLUSIONS: Educational interventions addressing stigma toward people with OUD are potentially effective and should be integrated into medical curricula. Such interventions are a crucial part of the effort to improve the medical care of people with OUD.

"No Escalation of Treatment" Designations: A Multi-institutional Exploratory Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: No Escalation of Treatment (NoET) designations are used in ICUs internationally to limit treatment for critically ill patients. However, they are the subject of debate in the literature and have not been qualitatively studied. RESEARCH QUESTION: How do physicians understand and perceive NoET designations, especially regarding their usefulness and associated challenges? What mechanisms do hospitals provide to facilitate the use of NoET designations? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Qualitative study at seven US hospitals, employing semistructured interviews with 30 physicians and review of relevant institutional records (eg, hospital policies, screenshots of ordering menus in the electronic health record). RESULTS: At all hospitals, participants reported the use of NoET designations, which were understood to mean that providers should withhold new or higher-intensity interventions ("escalations") but not withdraw ongoing interventions. Three hospitals provided a specific mechanism for designating a patient as NoET (eg, a DNR/Do Not Escalate code status order); at the remaining hospitals, a variety of informal methods (eg, verbal hand-offs) were used. We identified five functions of NoET designations: (1) Defining an intermediate point of treatment limitation, (2) helping physicians navigate prearrest clinical decompensations, (3) helping surrogate decision-makers transition toward comfort care, (4) preventing patient harm from invasive measures, and (5) conserving critical care resources. Across hospitals, participants reported implementation challenges related to the ambiguity in meaning of NoET designations. INTERPRETATION: Despite ongoing debate, NoET designations are used in a varied sample of hospitals and are perceived as having multiple functions, suggesting they may fulfill an important need in the care of critically ill patients, especially at the end of life. The use of NoET designations can be improved through the implementation of a formal mechanism that encourages consistency across providers and clarifies the meaning of "escalation" for each patient.

Variation in the design of Do Not Resuscitate orders and other code status options: a multi-institutional qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: US hospitals typically provide a set of code status options that includes Full Code and Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) but often includes additional options. Although US hospitals differ in the design of code status options, this variation and its impacts have not been empirically studied. DESIGN AND METHODS: Multi-institutional qualitative study at 7 US hospitals selected for variability in geographical location, type of institution and design of code status options. We triangulated across three data sources (policy documents, code status ordering menus and in-depth physician interviews) to characterise the code status options available at each hospital. Using inductive qualitative methods, we investigated design differences in hospital code status options and the perceived impacts of these differences. RESULTS: The code status options at each hospital varied widely with regard to the number of code status options, the names and definitions of code status options, and the formatting and capabilities of code status ordering menus. DNR orders were named and defined differently at each hospital studied. We identified five key design characteristics that impact the function of a code status order. Each hospital's code status options were unique with respect to these characteristics, indicating that code status plays differing roles in each hospital. Physician participants perceived that the design of code status options shapes communication and decision-making practices about resuscitation and life-sustaining treatments, especially at the end of life. We identified four potential mechanisms through which this may occur: framing conversations, prompting decisions, shaping inferences and creating categories. CONCLUSIONS: There are substantive differences in the design of hospital code status options that may contribute to known variability in end-of-life care and treatment intensity among US hospitals. Our framework can be used to design hospital code status options or evaluate their function.

Integrating Advance Care Planning Into Practice.

Advanced respiratory diseases progress over time and often lead to death. As the condition worsens, patients may lose medical decision-making ability. Advance care planning (ACP) is a process in which patients receive information about their diagnosis and prognosis; discuss values, goals, and fears; articulate preferences about life-sustaining treatments and end-of-life care; and appoint a surrogate medical decision maker. This process may result in written documentation of patient preferences or the appointment of a health-care power of attorney (HCPOA). ACP discussions have multiple benefits for patients and their surrogate decision makers, including ensuring that the care provided is aligned with the patient's goals and preferences and decreasing stress, anxiety, and burden in surrogates. Time and provider comfort are often cited barriers to ACP, so it may be necessary for clinicians to gain experience in conversations and identify the patients most likely to benefit from ACP discussions. Two new Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes, 99497 and 99498, have been recognized by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) as of January 1, 2016 and are intended to incentivize clinicians to engage in ACP discussions with their patients earlier and with more frequency. This manuscript reviews the benefits and barriers to ACP in patients with advanced respiratory disease and provides guidance on the use of the new CPT codes for reimbursement of these conversations.

Google Glass Video Capture of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Events: A Pilot Simulation Study.

BACKGROUND: Video recording of resuscitation from fixed camera locations has been used to assess adherence to guidelines and provide feedback on performance. However, inpatient cardiac arrests often happen in unpredictable locations and crowded rooms, making video recording of these events problematic. OBJECTIVE: We sought to understand the feasibility of Google Glass (GG) as a method for recording inpatient cardiac arrests and capturing salient resuscitation factors for post-event review. METHODS: This observational study involved recording simulated cardiac arrest events on inpatient medical wards. Each simulation was reviewed by 3 methods: in-room physician direct observation, stationary video camera (SVC), and GG. Nurse and physician specialists analyzed the videos for global visibility and audibility, as well as recording quality of predefined resuscitation events and behaviors. Resident code leaders were surveyed regarding attitudes toward GG use in the clinical emergency setting. RESULTS: Of 11 simulated cardiac arrest events, 9 were successfully recorded by all observation methods (1 GG failure, 1 SVC failure). GG was judged slightly better than SVC recording for average global visualization (3.95 versus 3.15, P = .0003) and average global audibility (4.77 versus 4.42, P = .002). Of the GG videos, 19% had limitations in overall interpretability compared with 35% of SVC recordings (P = .039). All 10 survey respondents agreed that GG was easy to use; however, 2 found it distracting and 3 were uncomfortable with future use during actual resuscitations. CONCLUSIONS: GG is a feasible and acceptable method for capturing simulated resuscitation events in the inpatient setting.