Newswise, July 8, 2016 — Among families of patients with
chronic critical illness, the use of palliative care-led informational and
emotional support meetings compared with usual care did not reduce anxiety or
depression symptoms, according to a study appearing in the July 5 issue of
JAMA.
Patients are considered to have developed chronic critical
illness when they experience acute illness requiring prolonged mechanical
ventilation or other life-sustaining therapies but neither recover nor die
within days to weeks.
It is estimated that chronic critical illness affected 380,000
patients in the United States in 2009. Family members of patients in the
intensive care unit (ICU) experience emotional distress including anxiety,
depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
Palliative care specialists are trained to provide emotional
support, share information, and engage patients and surrogate decision makers
in discussions of patient values and goals of care.
Shannon S. Carson, M.D., of the University of North Carolina
School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, N.C., Judith E. Nelson, M.D., J.D., of the
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, and colleagues randomly
assigned adult patients requiring 7 days of mechanical ventilation and their
family surrogate decision makers to at least 2 structured family meetings led
by palliative care specialists and provision of an informational brochure
(intervention), or provision of an informational brochure and routine family
meetings conducted by ICU teams (control).
There were 130 patients with 184 family surrogate decision
makers in the intervention group and 126 patients with 181 family surrogate
decision makers in the control group. The study was conducted at 4 medical
ICUs.
Among 365 family surrogate decision makers, 312 completed the
study. At 3 months, there was no significant difference in anxiety and
depression symptoms between surrogate decision makers in the intervention group
and the control group.
Posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms were higher in the
intervention group compared with the control group. There was no difference
between groups regarding the discussion of patient preferences. The median
number of hospital days for patients in the intervention vs the control group
and 90-day survival were not significantly different.
Potential explanations for this lack of benefit may relate to
the high perceptions of quality of communication, emotional support, and family
satisfaction in the usual care control.
“When informational support provided by the primary team is
sufficient, additional focus on prognosis may not help and could further upset
a distressed family, even when emotional support is concurrently provided,” the
authors write.
“Alternatively, the intervention may have been insufficient to
overcome the high levels of family stress associated with having a relative
with chronic critical illness.”
“These findings do not support routine or mandatory palliative
care-led discussion of goals of care for all families of patients with chronic
critical illness.”
No comments:
Post a Comment