Development, validation, and results of a survey to measure understanding of cardiopulmonary resuscitation choices among ICU patients and their surrogate decision makers

BMC Anesthesiology

Michael E Wilson³  Abbasali Akhoundi¹  Artur K Krupa⁴  Richard F Hinds⁵  John M Litell²  Ognjen Gajic³  Kianoush Kashani¹ 

[1] Department of Medicine, Divisions of Nephrology and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA

[2] Divisions of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

[3] Department of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA

[4] Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Hawaii, John A. Burns School of Medicine, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA

[5] Anesthesia Critical Care Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA

关键词: Intensive care unit;    Health knowledge;    Questionnaires;    Cardiopulmonary resuscitation;   

Others  :  816509
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2253-14-15

 received in 2014-01-02, accepted in 2014-02-26,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Shared-decision-making about resuscitation goals of care for intensive care unit (ICU) patients depends on a basic understanding of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Our objective was to develop and validate a survey to assess comprehension of CPR among ICU patients and surrogate decision-makers.

Methods

We developed a 12-item verbally-administered survey incorporating input from patients, clinicians, and expert focus groups.

Results

We administered the survey to 32 ICU patients and 37 surrogates, as well as to 20 resident physicians to test discriminative validity. Median (interquartile range) total knowledge scores were 7 (5-10) for patients, 9 (7-12) for surrogates, and 14.5 (14-15) for physicians (p <.001). Forty-four percent of patients and 24% of surrogates could not explain the purpose of CPR. Eighty-eight percent of patients and 73% of surrogates could not name chest compressions and breathing assistance as two components of CPR in the hospital. Forty-one percent of patients and 24% of surrogates could not name a single possible complication of CPR. Forty-three percent of participants could not specify that CPR would be performed with a full code order and 25% of participants could not specify that CPR would not be performed with a do-not-resuscitate order. Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.97) and test-retest reliability (Pearson correlation = 0.96, p < .001) were high.

Conclusions

This easily administered survey, developed to measure knowledge of CPR and resuscitation preference options among ICU patients and surrogates, showed strong face validity, content validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and discriminative validity. A substantial proportion of ICU patients and surrogates decision-makers have poor knowledge of CPR and basic resuscitation options.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Wilson et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Guidelines for the appropriate use of do-not-resuscitate orders. Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, American Medical Association JAMA 1991, 265:1868-1871.
• [2]2005 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Circulation 2005, 112:IV1-IV203.
• [3]Gehlbach TG, Shinkunas LA, Forman-Hoffman VL, Thomas KW, Schmidt GA, Kaldjian LC: Code status orders and goals of care in the medical ICU. Chest 2011, 139:802-809.
• [4]Heyland DK, Frank C, Groll D, Pichora D, Dodek P, Rocker G, Gafni A: Understanding cardiopulmonary resuscitation decision making: perspectives of seriously ill hospitalized patients and family members. Chest 2006, 130:419-428.
• [5]Hofmann JC, Wenger NS, Davis RB, Teno J, Connors AF Jr, Desbiens N, Lynn J, Phillips RS: Patient preferences for communication with physicians about end-of-life decisions. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preference for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment. Ann Intern Med 1997, 127:1-12.
• [6]Kaldjian LC, Erekson ZD, Haberle TH, Curtis AE, Shinkunas LA, Cannon KT, Forman-Hoffman VL: Code status discussions and goals of care among hospitalised adults. J Med Ethics 2009, 35:338-342.
• [7]von Gunten CF, Ferris FD, Emanuel LL: The patient-physician relationship. Ensuring competency in end-of-life care: communication and relational skills. JAMA 2000, 284:3051-3057.
• [8]Anderson WG, Chase R, Pantilat SZ, Tulsky JA, Auerbach AD: Code status discussions between attending hospitalist physicians and medical patients at hospital admission. J Gen Intern Med 2011, 26:359-366.
• [9]Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T: Decision-making in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision-making model. Soc Sci Med 1999, 49:651-661.
• [10]Kerridge IH, Pearson SA, Rolfe IE, Lowe M, McPhee JR: Impact of written information on knowledge and preferences for cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Med J Aust 1999, 171:239-242.
• [11]Miller DL, Jahnigen DW, Gorbien MJ, Simbartl L: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation: how useful? Attitudes and knowledge of an elderly population. Arch Intern Med 1992, 152:578-582.
• [12]Murphy DJ, Burrows D, Santilli S, Kemp AW, Tenner S, Kreling B, Teno J: The influence of the probability of survival on patients’ preferences regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation. N Engl J Med 1994, 330:545-549.
• [13]Schonwetter RS, Teasdale TA, Taffet G, Robinson BE, Luchi RJ: Educating the elderly: cardiopulmonary resuscitation decisions before and after intervention. J Am Geriatr Soc 1991, 39:372-377.
• [14]Schonwetter RS, Walker RM, Kramer DR, Robinson BE: Resuscitation decision making in the elderly: the value of outcome data. J Gen Intern Med 1993, 8:295-300.
• [15]Thorevska N, Tilluckdharry L, Tickoo S, Havasi A, Amoateng-Adjepong Y, Manthous CA: Patients’ understanding of advance directives and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. J Crit Care 2005, 20:26-34.
• [16]Yamada R, Galecki AT, Goold SD, Hogikyan RV: A multimedia intervention on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and advance directives. J Gen Intern Med 1999, 14:559-563.
• [17]Deep KS, Griffith CH, Wilson JF: Communication and decision making about life-sustaining treatment: examining the experiences of resident physicians and seriously-ill hospitalized patients. J Gen Intern Med 2008, 23:1877-1882.
• [18]Azoulay E, Pochard F, Kentish-Barnes N, Chevret S, Aboab J, Adrie C, Annane D, Bleichner G, Bollaert PE, Darmon M, Fassier T, Galliot R, Garrouste-Orgeas M, Goulenok C, Goldgran-Toledano D, Haydon J, Jourdain M, Kaidomar M, Laplace C, Larché J, Liotier J, Papazian L, Poisson C, Reignier J, Saidi F, Schlemmer B, FAMIREA Study Group: Risk of post-traumatic stress symptoms in family members of intensive care unit patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2005, 171:987-994.
• [19]Cook D, Rocker G, Marshall J, Sjokvist P, Dodek P, Griffith L, Freitag A, Varon J, Bradley C, Levy M, Finfer S, Hamielec C, McMullin J, Weaver B, Walter S, Guyatt G, for the Level of Care Study Investigators and the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group: Withdrawal of mechanical ventilation in anticipation of death in the intensive care unit. N Engl J Med 2003, 349:1123-1132.
• [20]Smith AK, Ries AP, Zhang B, Tulsky JA, Prigerson HG, Block SD: Resident approaches to advance care planning on the day of hospital admission. Arch Intern Med 2006, 166:1597-1602.
• [21]Muni S, Engelberg RA, Treece PD, Dotolo D, Curtis JR: The influence of race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status on end-of-life care in the ICU. Chest 2011, 139:1025-1033.
• [22]Gates RA, Weaver MJ, Gates RH: Patient acceptance of an information sheet about cardiopulmonary resuscitation options. J Gen Intern Med 1993, 8:679-682.
• [23]Sivakumar R, Knight J, Devlin C, Keir P, Ghosh P, Khan S: Communicating information on cardiopulmonary resuscitation to hospitalised patients. J Med Ethics 2004, 30:311-312.