Older Adults' Perspectives on Screening for Cognitive Impairment Following Critical Illness: Pre-Implementation Qualitative Study.

Alek Keegan, Ashley Strahley, Stephanie P Taylor, Taniya M Wilson, Meehir D Shah, Jeff Williamson, Jessica A Palakshappa
{"title":"Older Adults' Perspectives on Screening for Cognitive Impairment Following Critical Illness: Pre-Implementation Qualitative Study.","authors":"Alek Keegan,&nbsp;Ashley Strahley,&nbsp;Stephanie P Taylor,&nbsp;Taniya M Wilson,&nbsp;Meehir D Shah,&nbsp;Jeff Williamson,&nbsp;Jessica A Palakshappa","doi":"10.1097/CCE.0000000000000920","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Screening for cognitive impairment following ICU discharge is recommended but not part of routine care. We sought to understand older adults' perspectives on screening for cognitive impairment following an ICU admission to inform the design and delivery of a cognitive screening intervention.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>Adults 60 years and older within 3 months of discharge from an ICU in an academic health system.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Interviews were conducted via telephone, audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. All transcripts were coded in duplicate. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Codes were organized into themes and subthemes inductively.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>We completed 22 interviews. The mean age of participants was 71 ± 6 years, 14 (63.6%) were men, 16 (72.7%) were White, and 6 (27.3%) were Black. Thematic analysis was organized around four themes: 1) receptivity to screening, 2) communication preferences, 3) information needs, and 4) provider involvement. Most participants were receptive to cognitive screening; this was influenced by trust in their providers and prior experience with cognitive screening and impairment. Participants preferred simple, direct, compassionate communication. They wanted to understand the screening procedure, the rationale for screening, and expectations for recovery. Participants desired input from their primary care provider to have their cognitive screening results placed in the context of their overall health, because they had a trusted relationship, and for convenience.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Participants demonstrated limited understanding of and exposure to cognitive screening but see it as potentially beneficial following an ICU stay. Providers should use simple, straightforward language and place emphasis on expectations. Resources may be needed to assist primary care providers with capacity to provide cognitive screening and interpret results for ICU survivors. Implementation strategies can include educational materials for clinicians and patients on rationale for screening and recovery expectations.</p>","PeriodicalId":10759,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care Explorations","volume":"5 5","pages":"e0920"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/e4/fb/cc9-5-e0920.PMC10184981.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care Explorations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000000920","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Screening for cognitive impairment following ICU discharge is recommended but not part of routine care. We sought to understand older adults' perspectives on screening for cognitive impairment following an ICU admission to inform the design and delivery of a cognitive screening intervention.

Design: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews.

Subjects: Adults 60 years and older within 3 months of discharge from an ICU in an academic health system.

Interventions: Interviews were conducted via telephone, audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. All transcripts were coded in duplicate. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Codes were organized into themes and subthemes inductively.

Measurements and main results: We completed 22 interviews. The mean age of participants was 71 ± 6 years, 14 (63.6%) were men, 16 (72.7%) were White, and 6 (27.3%) were Black. Thematic analysis was organized around four themes: 1) receptivity to screening, 2) communication preferences, 3) information needs, and 4) provider involvement. Most participants were receptive to cognitive screening; this was influenced by trust in their providers and prior experience with cognitive screening and impairment. Participants preferred simple, direct, compassionate communication. They wanted to understand the screening procedure, the rationale for screening, and expectations for recovery. Participants desired input from their primary care provider to have their cognitive screening results placed in the context of their overall health, because they had a trusted relationship, and for convenience.

Conclusions: Participants demonstrated limited understanding of and exposure to cognitive screening but see it as potentially beneficial following an ICU stay. Providers should use simple, straightforward language and place emphasis on expectations. Resources may be needed to assist primary care providers with capacity to provide cognitive screening and interpret results for ICU survivors. Implementation strategies can include educational materials for clinicians and patients on rationale for screening and recovery expectations.

Abstract Image

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
老年人对危重疾病后认知障碍筛查的看法:实施前定性研究。
推荐在ICU出院后进行认知障碍筛查,但不作为常规护理的一部分。我们试图了解老年人在ICU入院后对认知障碍筛查的看法,为认知筛查干预的设计和实施提供信息。设计:采用半结构化访谈的定性研究。研究对象:60岁及以上的成人,出院后3个月内从学术卫生系统重症监护病房出院。干预措施:访谈通过电话、录音和逐字转录进行。所有的抄本一式两份。分歧经协商一致解决。代码被归纳成主题和副主题。测量方法和主要结果:我们完成了22个访谈。参与者的平均年龄为71±6岁,男性14人(63.6%),白人16人(72.7%),黑人6人(27.3%)。主题分析围绕四个主题进行:1)对筛选的接受程度,2)沟通偏好,3)信息需求,4)提供者参与。大多数参与者接受认知筛选;这受到对他们的提供者的信任和先前的认知筛查和损伤经验的影响。参与者更喜欢简单、直接、富有同情心的交流。他们想了解筛查的程序,筛查的基本原理,以及对康复的期望。参与者希望从他们的初级保健提供者那里得到输入,将他们的认知筛查结果放在他们整体健康的背景下,因为他们有一个值得信任的关系,并且为了方便。结论:参与者对认知筛查的理解和接触程度有限,但认为在ICU住院后认知筛查可能有益。提供者应该使用简单、直接的语言,并强调期望。可能需要资源来帮助初级保健提供者有能力为ICU幸存者提供认知筛查和解释结果。实施策略可以包括为临床医生和患者提供关于筛查的基本原理和康复预期的教育材料。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A New Dosing Frontier: Retrospective Assessment of Effluent Flow Rates and Residual Renal Function Among Critically Ill Patients Receiving Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy Hemodynamic Determinants of Cardiac Surgery-Associated Acute Kidney Injury Racial Differences in Accuracy of Predictive Models for High-Flow Nasal Cannula Failure in COVID-19 Knowledge and Practice Gaps in Pediatric Neurocritical Care Nursing: Lessons Learned From a Specialized Educational Boot Camp Unifying Fluid Responsiveness and Tolerance With Physiology: A Dynamic Interpretation of the Diamond–Forrester Classification
×
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:481959085
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