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}
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).
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.