These guidelines identify the evidence base for best practices for family-centered care in the ICU. All recommendations were weak, highlighting the relative nascency of this field of research and the importance of future research to identify the most effective interventions to improve this important aspect of ICU care.

No abstract

Among critically ill patients and their surrogates, a family-support intervention delivered by the interprofessional ICU team did not significantly affect the surrogates' burden of psychological symptoms, but the surrogates' ratings of the quality of communication and the patient- and family-centeredness of care were better and the length of stay in the ICU was shorter with the intervention than with usual care. (Funded by the UPMC Health System and the Greenwall Foundation; PARTNER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01844492 .).

A public health emergency such as an influenza pandemic will lead to shortages of mechanical ventilators, critical care beds, and other potentially life saving treatments. This will raise difficult decisions about who will and will not receive these scarce resources. Existing recommendations reflect a narrow utilitarian perspective in which allocation decisions are based primarily on patients' chances of survival to hospital discharge. Certain patient groups, such as the elderly and those with functional impairment, are denied access to potentially life saving treatments based on selective application of additional allocation criteria. We analyze the ethical principles that could guide allocation and propose an allocation strategy that incorporates and balances multiple morally relevant considerations, including saving the most lives, maximizing the number of "life-years" saved, and prioritizing those who have had the least chance to live through life's stages. We also argue that these principles are relevant to all patients and that justice requires that these principles be applied evenly, rather than selectively to the aged, functionally impaired, and those with certain chronic conditions. We discuss strategies to genuinely engage the public in setting the priorities that will guide allocation of scarce life sustaining treatments during a public health emergency.

Using a consensus-based definition, the prevalence, hospital mortality, and costs of chronic critical illness are substantial. Chronic critical illness is particularly common in the elderly although in very old patients the prevalence declines, in part because of an increase in early mortality among potentially eligible patients.

Because most critically ill patients lack decision-making capacity, physicians often ask family members to act as surrogates for the patient in discussions about the goals of care. Therefore, clinician-family communication is a central component of medical decision making in the ICU, and the quality of this communication has direct bearing on decisions made regarding care for critically ill patients. In addition, studies suggest that clinician-family communication can also have profound effects on the experiences and long-term mental health of family members. The purpose of this narrative review is to provide a context and rationale for improving the quality of communication with family members and to provide practical, evidence-based guidance on how to conduct this communication in the ICU setting. We emphasize the importance of discussing prognosis effectively, the key role of the integrated interdisciplinary team in this communication, and the importance of assessing spiritual needs and addressing barriers that can be raised by cross-cultural communication.We also discuss the potential value of protocols to encourage communication and the potential role of quality improvement for enhancing communication with family members. Last, we review issues regarding physician reimbursement for communication with family members within the context of the US health-care system. Communication with family members in the ICU setting is complex, and high-quality communication requires training and collaboration of a well-functioning interdisciplinary team. This communication also requires a balance between adhering to processes of care that are associated with improved outcomes and individualizing communication to the unique needs of the family. Keywords communication; critical care; end-of-life care; family; medical decision making; palliative careBecause most critically ill patients do not have decision-making capacity, family members frequently become involved with clinicians in discussions about the goals of care and often must represent patients' values and treatment preferences in these discussions. 1 Therefore, clinician-family communication is a central component of good medical decision making in the ICU. Prior studies 2 suggest that family members view clinicians' communication skills as more important than our clinical skills. However, clinician-family communication in the ICU is often inadequate. One study 3 found that only half of families of ICU patients sufficiently understand basic information about patients' diagnoses, prognoses, or treatments after a In the ICU setting, there is an additional reason to focus on the needs of the family. Since family members are often serving as surrogate decision makers, decisions about the care of the patient depend in part on the family. To the extent that family members' distress affects their ability to provide substituted judgment, these burdens of family members can interfere with patient care. Therefore, effective communication with family members that minimiz...

The multisociety statement on responding to requests for potentially inappropriate treatments in intensive care units provides guidance for clinicians to prevent and manage disputes in patients with advanced critical illness.

Background: In North America, families generally wish to be involved in end-of-life decisions when the patient cannot participate, yet little is known about the extent to which shared decision making occurs in intensive care units. Methods: We audiotaped 51 physician-family conferences about major end-of-life treatment decisions at 4 hospitals from August 1, 2000, to July 31, 2002. We measured shared decision making using a previously validated instrument to assess the following 10 elements: discussing the nature of the decision, describing treatment alternatives, discussing the pros and cons of the choices, discussing uncertainty, assessing family understanding, eliciting patient values and preferences, discussing the family's role in decision making, assessing the need for input from others, exploring the context of the decision, and eliciting the family's opinion about the treatment decision. We used a mixed-effects regression model to determine predictors of shared decision making and to evaluate whether higher levels of shared decision making were associated with greater family satisfaction. Results: Only 2% (1/51) of decisions met all 10 criteria for shared decision making. The most frequently addressed elements were the nature of the decision (100%) and the context of the decision to be made (92%). The least frequently addressed elements were the family's role in decision making (31%) and an assessment of the family's understanding of the decision (25%). In multivariate analysis, lower family educational level was associated with less shared decision making (partial correlation coefficient, 0.34; standardized ␤, .3; P =.02). Higher levels of shared decision making were associated with greater family satisfaction with communication (partial correlation coefficient, 0.15; standardized ␤, .09; P=.03). Conclusions: Shared decision making about end-oflife treatment choices was often incomplete, especially among less educated families. Higher levels of shared decision making were associated with greater family satisfaction. Shared decision making may be an important area for quality improvement in intensive care units.