The Language of Prognostication in Intensive Care Units

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Rationale. Although misunderstandings about prognosis are common in intensive care units (ICUs), little is known about how physicians actually communicate prognostic information. Objectives. The authors sought to 1) develop a framework to describe the language physicians use to disclose prognosis, 2) determine whether physicians frame prognostic statements as estimates for populations or estimates for individual patients, and 3) determine whether physicians use the recommended ‘‘ask-tell-ask’’ approach when discussing prognosis. Methods. The authors conducted a multicenter, cross-sectional study of 51 audiotaped physician-family conferences about life support decisions in ICUs. They identified each prognostic statement and used grounded theory methods to develop a framework to understand the language physicians use to communicate prognosis. Main Results. Physicians prognosticated in 50 of 51 conferences. When discussing prognosis, physicians used qualitative probability statements in 72% (36/50) of conferences, numeric statements in 20% (10/50), absolute statements in 13% (4/32), and nonprobabilistic statements in 40% (20/50). Physicians exclusively used population-based language in 10% (5/50) of conferences, single-event probability statements in 62% (31/50), and both in 28% (14/ 50). In only 2% (1/50) of conferences did physicians ask whether the family wished to hear prognostic information prior to discussing it, and in only 14% of conferences (7/50) did physicians check to verify that families understood the prognostic information. Conclusions. There is considerable variability in the language used by physicians to disclose prognosis, with only 20% of physicians using quantitative terms. Very few physicians checked whether families understood prognostic information. These findings may provide potential targets for interventions to improve communication about prognosis in ICUs.

This publication has 42 references indexed in Scilit: