Recognizing the Need for Goals of Care Conversations Among Critically Ill Surgical Patients

IF 1.7 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY Journal of Surgical Research Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jss.2024.12.033
Nicole Meredyth MD , Yangzi Liu MD , Diane Haddad MD, MPH , Shariq Raza MD , Jose Pascual MD, PhD , Niels D. Martin MD
{"title":"Recognizing the Need for Goals of Care Conversations Among Critically Ill Surgical Patients","authors":"Nicole Meredyth MD ,&nbsp;Yangzi Liu MD ,&nbsp;Diane Haddad MD, MPH ,&nbsp;Shariq Raza MD ,&nbsp;Jose Pascual MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Niels D. Martin MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jss.2024.12.033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Recognizing the need for end-of-life care is a critical aspect of health care. Delayed recognition leads to undue patient suffering and nonvaluable health-care expenditures. Care of patients with surgical diseases is often focused on curative intent despite the presence of significant comorbidities and discrepant patient and family wishes. We hypothesized that surgical patients with clear end-of-life needs may not receive goals of care (GoC) conversations, with variations in frequency by provider level and specialty.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Providers caring for critically ill patients at an urban, academic, quaternary care center reviewed five case vignettes of critically ill surgical patients. The blinded providers were asked to list at least three care priorities for the patients. Responses were analyzed using Stata/BE 17.0 for inclusion of GoC.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 123 participants responded to at least one scenario (24.1% response rate). In total, 95 participants (77.2%) prioritized GoC at least once for any scenario, and GoC prioritization ranged from 9.7% (scenario 1) to 73.7% (scenario 5) for individual scenarios. Surgical providers prioritized GoC more often than nonsurgical providers (83.1% <em>versus</em> 67.4%, <em>P</em> = 0.044). Critical care specialty training was not found to increase prioritization of GoC (83.3% <em>versus</em> 71.4%, <em>P</em> = 0.12). Increasing post-graduate year (PGY) levels were correlated with increased likelihood of prioritizing GoC; 60.9% of PGY1-4’s prioritized GoC as compared to 90.9% of PGY5-9’s (<em>P</em> = 0.007).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Providers demonstrated ranging abilities to identify GoC as a priority. For housestaff, increasing PGY level correlates with prioritizing GoC. Surgical providers more often prioritized GoC as compared to nonsurgical providers, suggesting familiarity with surgical pathologies may result in increased prioritization.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":17030,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Surgical Research","volume":"306 ","pages":"Pages 554-560"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Surgical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022480424008308","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Recognizing the need for end-of-life care is a critical aspect of health care. Delayed recognition leads to undue patient suffering and nonvaluable health-care expenditures. Care of patients with surgical diseases is often focused on curative intent despite the presence of significant comorbidities and discrepant patient and family wishes. We hypothesized that surgical patients with clear end-of-life needs may not receive goals of care (GoC) conversations, with variations in frequency by provider level and specialty.

Methods

Providers caring for critically ill patients at an urban, academic, quaternary care center reviewed five case vignettes of critically ill surgical patients. The blinded providers were asked to list at least three care priorities for the patients. Responses were analyzed using Stata/BE 17.0 for inclusion of GoC.

Results

A total of 123 participants responded to at least one scenario (24.1% response rate). In total, 95 participants (77.2%) prioritized GoC at least once for any scenario, and GoC prioritization ranged from 9.7% (scenario 1) to 73.7% (scenario 5) for individual scenarios. Surgical providers prioritized GoC more often than nonsurgical providers (83.1% versus 67.4%, P = 0.044). Critical care specialty training was not found to increase prioritization of GoC (83.3% versus 71.4%, P = 0.12). Increasing post-graduate year (PGY) levels were correlated with increased likelihood of prioritizing GoC; 60.9% of PGY1-4’s prioritized GoC as compared to 90.9% of PGY5-9’s (P = 0.007).

Conclusions

Providers demonstrated ranging abilities to identify GoC as a priority. For housestaff, increasing PGY level correlates with prioritizing GoC. Surgical providers more often prioritized GoC as compared to nonsurgical providers, suggesting familiarity with surgical pathologies may result in increased prioritization.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
认识到危重外科患者护理对话目标的必要性。
引言:认识到临终关怀的需要是卫生保健的一个关键方面。延迟识别导致患者遭受不应有的痛苦和没有价值的保健支出。外科疾病患者的护理往往侧重于治疗意图,尽管存在显著的合并症和不同的患者和家属的愿望。我们假设,有明确临终需求的手术患者可能不会接受护理目标(GoC)对话,其频率因提供者水平和专业而异。方法:在一个城市,学术,四级护理中心护理危重病人的提供者回顾了5例危重外科病人的病例。盲法提供者被要求为患者列出至少三个护理优先事项。使用Stata/BE 17.0对应答进行分析,以纳入GoC。结果:共有123名参与者对至少一个场景有反应(24.1%的反应率)。总共有95名参与者(77.2%)在任何场景中至少优先考虑一次GoC,对于单个场景,GoC优先度从9.7%(场景1)到73.7%(场景5)不等。手术提供者比非手术提供者更优先考虑GoC(83.1%比67.4%,P = 0.044)。重症专科培训未发现增加GoC优先级(83.3%对71.4%,P = 0.12)。研究生一年(PGY)水平的增加与优先考虑GoC的可能性增加相关;60.9%的PGY1-4优先考虑GoC,而90.9%的PGY5-9优先考虑GoC (P = 0.007)。结论:提供者展示了将GoC识别为优先事项的范围能力。对于家政人员来说,增加PGY水平与优先考虑GoC相关。与非手术提供者相比,外科提供者通常更优先考虑GoC,这表明对外科病理的熟悉可能会导致优先考虑的增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
4.50%
发文量
627
审稿时长
138 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Surgical Research: Clinical and Laboratory Investigation publishes original articles concerned with clinical and laboratory investigations relevant to surgical practice and teaching. The journal emphasizes reports of clinical investigations or fundamental research bearing directly on surgical management that will be of general interest to a broad range of surgeons and surgical researchers. The articles presented need not have been the products of surgeons or of surgical laboratories. The Journal of Surgical Research also features review articles and special articles relating to educational, research, or social issues of interest to the academic surgical community.
期刊最新文献
Partial Duodenal Obstructions: A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Pediatric Analysis of Clinical Factors. Alcohol Use is Associated with Unplanned Hospital Events in Trauma Patients. Coaching for Personal and Professional Development in Academic Surgery: A Conceptual Framework. Neoadjuvant Radiation is Causally Linked to Increased Operative Time and Perioperative Blood Transfusion in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma. Not All Black and White: Is Routine Chest Radiography Following Rib Fractures Beneficial?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1