A Multi-Stakeholder Consensus-Driven Research Agenda for Better Understanding and Supporting the Emotional Impact of Harmful Events on Patients and Families.

BACKGROUND: The nature and consequences of patient and family emotional harm stemming from preventable medical error, such as losing a loved one or surviving serious medical injury, is poorly understood. Patients and families, clinicians, social scientists, lawyers, and foundation/policy leaders were brought together to establish research priorities for this issue. METHODS: A one-day conference of diverse stakeholder groups to establish a consensus-driven research agenda focused on (1) priorities for research on the short-term and long-term emotional impact of harmful events on patients and families, (2) barriers and enablers to conducting such research, and (3) actionable steps toward better supporting harmed patients and families now. RESULTS: Stakeholders discussed patient and family experiences after serious harmful events, including profound isolation, psychological distress, damaging aspects of medical culture, health care aversion, and negative effects on communities. Stakeholder groups reached consensus, defining four research priorities: (1) Establish conceptual framework and patient-centered taxonomy of harm and healing; (2) Describe epidemiology of emotional harm; (3) Determine how to make emotional harm and long-term impacts visible to health care organizations and society at large; and (4) Develop and implement best practices for emotional support of patients and families. The group also created a strategy for overcoming research barriers and actionable "Do Now" approaches to improve the patient and family experience while research is ongoing. CONCLUSION: Emotional and other long-term impacts of harmful events can have profound consequences for patients and families. Stakeholders designed a path forward to inform approaches that better support harmed patients and families, with both immediately actionable and longer-term research strategies.

A Clinician's Guide to Privacy and Communication in the ICU.

OBJECTIVE: To review the legal issues concerning family members' access to information when patients are in the ICU. DATA SOURCES: U.S. Code, U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, and state legislative codes. DATA EXTRACTION: Relevant legal statutes and regulations were identified and reviewed by the two attorney authors (L. F., M. A. V.). STUDY SELECTION: Not applicable. DATA SYNTHESIS: Review by all coauthors. CONCLUSIONS: The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and related laws should not be viewed as barriers to clinicians sharing information with ICU patients and their loved ones. Generally, under Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, personal representatives have the same authority to receive information that patients would otherwise have. Persons involved in the patient's care also may be given information relevant to the episode of care unless the patient objects. ICUs should develop policies for handling the issues we identify about such information sharing, including policies for responding to telephone inquiries and methods for giving patients the opportunity to object to sharing information with individuals involved in their care. ICU clinicians also should be knowledgeable of their state's laws about how to identify patients' personal representatives and the authority of those representatives. Finally, ICU clinicians should be aware of any special restrictions their state places on medical information. In aggregate, these strategies should help ICU managers and clinicians facilitate robust communication with patients and their loved ones.

Preferences of Current and Potential Patients and Family Members Regarding Implementation of Electronic Communication Portals in Intensive Care Units.

RATIONALE: The quality of communication with patients and family members in intensive care units (ICUs) is a focus of current interest for clinical care improvement. Electronic communication portals are commonly used in other healthcare settings to improve communication. We do not know whether patients and family members desire such portals in ICUs, and if so, what functionality they should provide. OBJECTIVES: To define interest in and desired elements of an electronic communication portal among current and potential ICU patients and their family members. METHODS: We surveyed, via an Internet panel, 1,050 English-speaking adults residing in the United States with a personal or family history of an ICU admission within 10 years (cohort A) and 1,050 individuals without a history of such admission (cohort B). We also administered a survey instrument in person to 105 family members of patients currently admitted to ICUs at an academic medical center in Boston (cohort C). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Respondents, especially current ICU family members, supported an electronic communication portal, including access via an electronic tablet. They wanted at least daily updates, one-paragraph summaries of family meetings including a list of key decisions made, and knowledge of the role and experience of treating clinicians. Overall, they preferred detailed rather than "big picture" information. Respondents were generally comfortable sharing information with their family members. Preferences regarding a communication portal varied significantly by age, sex, ethnicity, and prior experience with ICU hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic communication portals appear welcome in contemporary ICUs. Frequent updates, knowledge about the professional qualifications of clinicians, detailed medical information, and documentation of family meetings are particularly desired.