Exploring the impact of a context-adapted decision aid and online training about shared decision making about goals of care with elderly patients in the intensive care unit: a mixed-methods study
Authors: Plaisance Ariane , Turgeon Julien , Souza Lucas Gomes , Légaré CQ France , Turcotte Stéphane , Germain Nathalie , Jean Tommy , Dionne Maude , Fortier Félix Antoine , Plante Patrick , Tapp Diane , Gélinas Véronique , Bélanger Emmanuelle , Ebell Mark H , Chabot Christian , de Belt Tom van , Turgeon Alexis F , Archambault Patrick M 
Published: September 2024

AbstractPurposeTo explore the impact of a context-adapted decision aid and an online training about shared decision-making (SDM) about goals of care on the level of involvement of elderly patients by intensivists in SDM about goals of care and quality of goals of care discussions (GCD) in an intensive care unit.MethodsThis was a three-phase before-after mixed-methods implementation study conducted in an ICU in Lévis, Quebec, Canada. We followed the StaRI and COREQ reporting guidelines. We recruited patients aged ≥ 65 and their attending intensivists. We video-recorded GCD in three phases: Phase I: GCD without a decision aid; Phase II: GCD with a decision aid about goals of care but no online training; and Phase III: GCD with both a decision aid about goals of care following online training about SDM. All GCD recordings were transcribed verbatim. We measured the level of patient engagement by intensivists in SDM about goals of care through the OPTION scale and evaluated GCD quality using the Audit of Communication, Care Planning, and Documentation (ACCEPT) indicators. A qualitative thematic analysis of the encounters transcriptions was also performed.ResultsOut of 359 eligible patients, the study included 21 patients (71% males; median age, 77 years; 57% without high school diploma) and 5 intensivists (80% male; median age, 35). Despite completing online training, the decision aid was never used in recorded encounters. We did not perform any tests of statistical significance to compare results in each study phase because of small sample sizes over each phase. OPTION and ACCEPT scores were low in each phase, but physicians did engage in GCD. We found that 76% of the goals of care recorded in medical records after the discussion were consistent with preferences expressed by patients during recorded observations. Several patients expressed confusion about GCD. Barriers identified by intensivists leading GCD include physician attitudes, challenges to performing GCD along with the demands of the intensive care unit, misunderstandings, and lack of training. Facilitators include a patient-centered approach, a clear decision aid, and positive patient attitudes. In future work, an environment that supports physicians in performing GCD, promotes earlier and higher quality patient GCD before admission to the intensive care unit, and encourages meaningful SDM in critical care must be assessed as pathways to successful intensive care unit GCD.ConclusionA context-adapted decision aid about goals of care was created in addition to a complementary online training module. The online training was completed by all participating physicians but no increased involvement of patients in SDM during intensive care unit GCD was observed, and use of the decision aid was also not observed. We found several communication barriers that will need to be explored to improve intensive care unit GCD.Trial registration number:NCT04034979Key pointsMisunderstandings and concerns among older adult patients about goals of care and invasive interventions in the ICU contribute to delayed decision-making.An online training regarding shared decision making with a corresponding decision aid for discussing goals of care was completed by all participating intensivists, but no increased involvement of patients nor use of the decision aid was observed in the ICU.Facilitators to the uptake of shared decision making may include the involvement of non-intensivist health professionals, mandating documentation discussions and their results in patient files, and challenging a long-held reluctance to discuss death as an outcome.