Family-clinician shared decision making in intensive care units : cluster randomized trial in China
| Autor: | Jie Xu, Gerald Michael Humphris, Yaxin Yan, Siyu Xiao, Nie Jing, Shaohua Huang, Yudong Zhang, Jin Yan, Qingyan Wang, Mingshi Yang, Ailian Lv, Peigen Gui, Aijing Luo, Guobao Wu, Xinchun Liu |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | University of St Andrews. School of Medicine, University of St Andrews. Sir James Mackenzie Institute for Early Diagnosis, University of St Andrews. WHO Collaborating Centre for International Child & Adolescent Health Policy, University of St Andrews. Population and Behavioural Science Division, University of St Andrews. Health Psychology |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2022 |
| Předmět: |
medicine.medical_specialty
Critical Illness media_common.quotation_subject Family meeting Decision Making NDAS R Medicine (General) law.invention Promotion (rank) Quality of life (healthcare) Randomized controlled trial Professional-Family Relations law Intervention (counseling) Intensive care Humans Medicine Family Cluster randomised controlled trial Depression (differential diagnoses) Shared decision-making media_common MCC business.industry General Medicine NIS R1 Intensive Care Units Distress Quality of Life Physical therapy Critically ill patient Randomized trial business Decision Making Shared |
| Popis: | We thank the China Medical Board, which financially supported our study. Objective To investigate if a Family-Clinician Shared Decision-Making (FCSDM) intervention benefits patients, families and intensive care units (ICUs) clinicians. Methods Six ICUs in China were allocated to intervention or usual care. 548 patients with critical illness, 548 family members and 387 ICU clinicians were included into the study. Structured FCSDM family meetings were held in the intervention group. Scales of SSDM, HADS, QoL2 and CSACD were used to assess families’ satisfaction and distress, patients’ quality of life, and clinicians’ collaboration respectively. Results Comparing the intervention group with the control group at post-intervention, there were significant differences in the families’ satisfaction (P =0.0001), depression level (P =0.005), and patients’ quality of life (P =0.0007). The clinicians’ mean CSCAD score was more positive in the intervention group than controls (P < 0.05). There was no significant between-group differences on ICU daily medical cost, but the intervention group demonstrated shorter number of days’ stay in ICU (P=0.0004). Conclusion The FCSDM intervention improved families’ satisfaction and depression, shortened patients’ duration of ICU stay, and enhanced ICU clinicians’ collaboration. Practice implications Further improvement and promotion of the FCSDM model are needed to provide more evidence to this field in China. Publisher PDF |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|