Development and Pilot Testing of a Simulation to Study How Physicians Facilitate Surrogate Decision Making Based on Critically Ill Patients' Values and Preferences.

CONTEXT: There are no evidence-based programs to train physicians to facilitate shared decision making based on incapacitated intensive care unit patients' values and preferences. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to develop a high-fidelity simulation to fill this gap. METHODS: Case development involved six steps: 1) drafting a case about an elderly patient receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation; 2) engaging an expert advisory board to optimize case content; 3) revising the case based on advisory board input; 4) training actors to portray the case patient's daughter; 5) obtaining physician feedback on the simulation; and 6) revising the case based on their feedback. We conducted a cross-sectional pilot study with 50 physicians to assess feasibility and acceptability, defined a priori as an enrollment rate >40 physicians/year, study procedures <75 minutes/participant, >95% actor adherence to standardization rules, and high physician ratings of realism and acceptability. RESULTS: Advisory panel feedback yielded two modifications: 1) refocusing the case on decision making about tracheostomy and percutaneous gastrostomy and 2) making the patient's values more authentic. Physician feedback yielded two additional modifications: 1) reducing how readily the actor divulged the patient's values and 2) making her more emotional. All 50 physicians enrolled in the pilot study over 11 months completed study procedures in <75 minutes. Actor adherence to standardization rules was 95.8%. Physicians' mean ratings of realism and acceptability were 8.4 and 9.1, respectively, on a 10-point scale. CONCLUSION: Simulation is feasible, is acceptable, and can be adequately standardized to study physicians' skills for facilitating surrogate decision making based on an incapacitated intensive care unit patient's values and preferences.