针对重症监护病房代理决策者的 "四项支持 "干预随机试验。

IF 19.3 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine Pub Date : 2025-03-01 DOI:10.1164/rccm.202405-0931OC
Rachel A Butler, Jennifer B Seaman, Kristyn Felman, Wendy Stonehouse, Rachel San Pedro, Jennifer Q Morse, Chung-Chou H Chang, Taylor Lincoln, Charles F Reynolds, Seth Landefeld, Mary Beth Happ, Mi-Kyung Song, Derek C Angus, Robert M Arnold, Douglas B White
{"title":"针对重症监护病房代理决策者的 \"四项支持 \"干预随机试验。","authors":"Rachel A Butler, Jennifer B Seaman, Kristyn Felman, Wendy Stonehouse, Rachel San Pedro, Jennifer Q Morse, Chung-Chou H Chang, Taylor Lincoln, Charles F Reynolds, Seth Landefeld, Mary Beth Happ, Mi-Kyung Song, Derek C Angus, Robert M Arnold, Douglas B White","doi":"10.1164/rccm.202405-0931OC","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Rationale:</b> Individuals acting as surrogate decision-makers for critically ill patients frequently struggle in this role and experience high levels of long-term psychological distress. Prior interventions that were designed solely to improve information sharing between clinicians and family members have been ineffective. <b>Objectives:</b> We sought to examine the impact of a multicomponent family support intervention on patient and family outcomes. <b>Methods:</b> We conducted a patient-level randomized clinical trial at six ICUs in a healthcare system in Pennsylvania. An external interventionist interacted daily with surrogate decision-makers for incapacitated, critically ill patients at high risk of death or severe long-term functional impairment to deliver four types of protocolized support during the ICU stay: emotional support; communication support; decisional support; and, if indicated, anticipatory grief support. The control condition involved usual care plus two brief education sessions about critical illness. <b>Measurements and Main Results:</b> Primary outcome was the surrogates' scores on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at 6 months (range = 0-42). A total of 444 surrogates of 291 patients were enrolled (233 surrogates in intervention and 211 in control). The Four Supports intervention was delivered with high fidelity (frequency of per protocol delivery of key intervention elements, 97.1%; quality rating of intervention delivery, 2.9 ± 0.2 on a scale ranging from 1 to 3, with higher scores indicating higher quality of intervention delivery). There was no intervention effect on the primary outcome, surrogates' Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale total scores at 6-month follow-up (β = 0.06; 95% confidence interval, -0.07 to 0.19; <i>P</i> = 0.35), or the prespecified secondary outcomes. <b>Conclusions:</b> Among critically ill patients at high risk of death or functional impairment, a family support intervention delivered by an external interventionist did not reduce surrogates' long-term psychological symptom burden.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01982877).</p>","PeriodicalId":7664,"journal":{"name":"American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine","volume":" ","pages":"370-380"},"PeriodicalIF":19.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Randomized Clinical Trial of the Four Supports Intervention for Surrogate Decision-Makers in Intensive Care Units.\",\"authors\":\"Rachel A Butler, Jennifer B Seaman, Kristyn Felman, Wendy Stonehouse, Rachel San Pedro, Jennifer Q Morse, Chung-Chou H Chang, Taylor Lincoln, Charles F Reynolds, Seth Landefeld, Mary Beth Happ, Mi-Kyung Song, Derek C Angus, Robert M Arnold, Douglas B White\",\"doi\":\"10.1164/rccm.202405-0931OC\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Rationale:</b> Individuals acting as surrogate decision-makers for critically ill patients frequently struggle in this role and experience high levels of long-term psychological distress. Prior interventions that were designed solely to improve information sharing between clinicians and family members have been ineffective. <b>Objectives:</b> We sought to examine the impact of a multicomponent family support intervention on patient and family outcomes. <b>Methods:</b> We conducted a patient-level randomized clinical trial at six ICUs in a healthcare system in Pennsylvania. An external interventionist interacted daily with surrogate decision-makers for incapacitated, critically ill patients at high risk of death or severe long-term functional impairment to deliver four types of protocolized support during the ICU stay: emotional support; communication support; decisional support; and, if indicated, anticipatory grief support. The control condition involved usual care plus two brief education sessions about critical illness. <b>Measurements and Main Results:</b> Primary outcome was the surrogates' scores on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at 6 months (range = 0-42). A total of 444 surrogates of 291 patients were enrolled (233 surrogates in intervention and 211 in control). The Four Supports intervention was delivered with high fidelity (frequency of per protocol delivery of key intervention elements, 97.1%; quality rating of intervention delivery, 2.9 ± 0.2 on a scale ranging from 1 to 3, with higher scores indicating higher quality of intervention delivery). There was no intervention effect on the primary outcome, surrogates' Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale total scores at 6-month follow-up (β = 0.06; 95% confidence interval, -0.07 to 0.19; <i>P</i> = 0.35), or the prespecified secondary outcomes. <b>Conclusions:</b> Among critically ill patients at high risk of death or functional impairment, a family support intervention delivered by an external interventionist did not reduce surrogates' long-term psychological symptom burden.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01982877).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7664,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"370-380\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":19.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.202405-0931OC\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.202405-0931OC","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

理由:作为危重病人代理决策者的个人经常在这一角色上挣扎,并长期承受着严重的心理压力。之前仅为改善临床医生和家属之间的信息共享而设计的干预措施效果不佳:研究多成分家庭支持干预对患者和家属预后的影响:在宾夕法尼亚州医疗系统的 6 个重症监护病房(ICU)进行患者层面的随机临床试验。一名外部干预人员每天与无行为能力、死亡风险高或长期功能严重受损的重症患者的代理决策者进行互动,在重症监护病房住院期间提供四种协议支持--情感支持、沟通支持、决策支持,以及(如有必要)预期悲伤支持。对照组为常规护理加两节关于危重病的简短教育课:主要结果:代治者在 6 个月时的医院焦虑和抑郁量表(HADS)得分(范围 0-42)。共有 291 名患者的 444 名代理人参加(干预组 233 名,对照组 211 名)。四支持 "干预措施的实施具有很高的可信度(按协议实施关键干预要素的频率为 97.1%;干预实施的质量评分为 2.9 ± 0.2(1-3 分),分数越高表明干预实施的质量越高)。干预对主要结果--6个月随访时的代用HADS总分(β=0.06;CI:-0.07-0.19;P=0.35)以及预设的次要结果均无影响:结论:在死亡或功能障碍风险较高的重症患者中,由外部干预人员提供的家庭支持干预并未减轻代治者的长期心理症状负担。临床试验注册请访问 www.Clinicaltrials: gov,ID:NCT01982877。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Randomized Clinical Trial of the Four Supports Intervention for Surrogate Decision-Makers in Intensive Care Units.

Rationale: Individuals acting as surrogate decision-makers for critically ill patients frequently struggle in this role and experience high levels of long-term psychological distress. Prior interventions that were designed solely to improve information sharing between clinicians and family members have been ineffective. Objectives: We sought to examine the impact of a multicomponent family support intervention on patient and family outcomes. Methods: We conducted a patient-level randomized clinical trial at six ICUs in a healthcare system in Pennsylvania. An external interventionist interacted daily with surrogate decision-makers for incapacitated, critically ill patients at high risk of death or severe long-term functional impairment to deliver four types of protocolized support during the ICU stay: emotional support; communication support; decisional support; and, if indicated, anticipatory grief support. The control condition involved usual care plus two brief education sessions about critical illness. Measurements and Main Results: Primary outcome was the surrogates' scores on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at 6 months (range = 0-42). A total of 444 surrogates of 291 patients were enrolled (233 surrogates in intervention and 211 in control). The Four Supports intervention was delivered with high fidelity (frequency of per protocol delivery of key intervention elements, 97.1%; quality rating of intervention delivery, 2.9 ± 0.2 on a scale ranging from 1 to 3, with higher scores indicating higher quality of intervention delivery). There was no intervention effect on the primary outcome, surrogates' Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale total scores at 6-month follow-up (β = 0.06; 95% confidence interval, -0.07 to 0.19; P = 0.35), or the prespecified secondary outcomes. Conclusions: Among critically ill patients at high risk of death or functional impairment, a family support intervention delivered by an external interventionist did not reduce surrogates' long-term psychological symptom burden.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01982877).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
27.30
自引率
4.50%
发文量
1313
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine focuses on human biology and disease, as well as animal studies that contribute to the understanding of pathophysiology and treatment of diseases that affect the respiratory system and critically ill patients. Papers that are solely or predominantly based in cell and molecular biology are published in the companion journal, the American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology. The Journal also seeks to publish clinical trials and outstanding review articles on areas of interest in several forms. The State-of-the-Art review is a treatise usually covering a broad field that brings bench research to the bedside. Shorter reviews are published as Critical Care Perspectives or Pulmonary Perspectives. These are generally focused on a more limited area and advance a concerted opinion about care for a specific process. Concise Clinical Reviews provide an evidence-based synthesis of the literature pertaining to topics of fundamental importance to the practice of pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. Images providing advances or unusual contributions to the field are published as Images in Pulmonary, Critical Care, Sleep Medicine and the Sciences. A recent trend and future direction of the Journal has been to include debates of a topical nature on issues of importance in pulmonary and critical care medicine and to the membership of the American Thoracic Society. Other recent changes have included encompassing works from the field of critical care medicine and the extension of the editorial governing of journal policy to colleagues outside of the United States of America. The focus and direction of the Journal is to establish an international forum for state-of-the-art respiratory and critical care medicine.
期刊最新文献
Patient Dignity in Long-Term Recovery among Survivors of Acute Respiratory Failure: A Prospective Cohort Study. Camlipixant in Refractory Chronic Cough: A Phase 2b, Randomized, Placebo-controlled Trial (SOOTHE). Continuous On-Demand Diaphragm Neurostimulation to Prevent Diaphragm Inactivity During Mechanical Ventilation: A Phase 1 Clinical Trial (STIMULUS). Select Airway Specialized Pro-Resolving Mediators Are Associated with Recovery from Non-Viral COPD Exacerbations. Camlipixant in Refractory Chronic Cough: A Phase 2a, Randomized, Controlled Trial (RELIEF).
×
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