Browsing by Author "Wocial, Lucia D."
Now showing 1 - 10 of 15
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Assessment of Discordance Between Surrogate Care Goals and Medical Treatment Provided to Older Adults With Serious Illness(JAMA Network, 2020-05) Comer, Amber R.; Hickman, Susan E.; Slaven, James E.; Monahan, Patrick O.; Sachs, Greg A.; Wocial, Lucia D.; Burke, Emily S.; Torke, Alexia M.; Health Sciences, School of Health and Human SciencesImportance: An important aspect of high-quality care is ensuring that treatments are in alignment with patient or surrogate decision-maker goals. Treatment discordant with patient goals has been shown to increase medical costs and prolong end-of-life difficulties. Objectives: To evaluate discordance between surrogate decision-maker goals of care and medical orders and treatments provided to hospitalized, incapacitated older patients. Design, setting, and participants: This prospective cohort study included 363 patient-surrogate dyads. Patients were 65 years or older and faced at least 1 major medical decision in the medical and medical intensive care unit services in 3 tertiary care hospitals in an urban Midwestern area. Data were collected from April 27, 2012, through July 10, 2015, and analyzed from October 5, 2018, to December 5, 2019. Main outcomes and measures: Each surrogate's preferred goal of care was determined via interview during initial hospitalization and 6 to 8 weeks after discharge. Surrogates were asked to select the goal of care for the patient from 3 options: comfort-focused care, life-sustaining treatment, or an intermediate option. To assess discordance, the preferred goal of care as determined by the surrogate was compared with data from medical record review outlining the medical treatment received during the target hospitalization. Results: A total of 363 dyads consisting of patients (223 women [61.4%]; mean [SD] age, 81.8 [8.3] years) and their surrogates (257 women [70.8%]; mean [SD] age, 58.3 [11.2] years) were included in the analysis. One hundred sixty-nine patients (46.6%) received at least 1 medical treatment discordant from their surrogate's identified goals of care. The most common type of discordance involved full-code orders for patients with a goal of comfort (n = 41) or an intermediate option (n = 93). More frequent in-person contact between surrogate and patient (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.43; 95% CI, 0.23-0.82), patient residence in an institution (AOR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.23-0.82), and surrogate-rated quality of communication (AOR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.96-0.99) were associated with lower discordance. Surrogate marital status (AOR for single vs married, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.01-3.66), number of family members involved in decisions (AOR for ≥2 vs 0-1, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.05-3.21), and religious affiliation (AOR for none vs any, 4.87; 95% CI, 1.12-21.09) were associated with higher discordance. Conclusions and relevance: This study found that discordance between surrogate goals of care and medical treatments for hospitalized, incapacitated patients was common. Communication quality is a modifiable factor associated with discordance that may be an avenue for future interventions.Item CEASE: A guide for clinicians on how to stop resuscitation efforts(ATS, 2015-03) Torke, Alexia M.; Bledsoe, Patricia; Wocial, Lucia D.; Bosslet, Gabriel T.; Helft, Paul R.; Department of Medicine, IU School of MedicineResuscitation programs such as Advanced Cardiac Life Support, Cardiac Life Support, Pediatric Advanced Life Support, and the Neonatal Resuscitation Program offer inadequate guidance to physicians who must ultimately decide when to stop resuscitation efforts. These decisions involve clinical and ethical judgments and are complicated by communication challenges, group dynamics, and family considerations. This article presents a framework, summarized in a mnemonic (CEASE: Clinical Features, Effectiveness, Ask, Stop, Explain), for how to stop resuscitation efforts and communicate that decision to clinicians and ultimately the patient’s family. Rather than a decision rule, this mnemonic represents a framework based on best evidence for when physicians are considering stopping resuscitation efforts and provides guidance on how to communicate that decision.Item A code of ethics for health care ethics consultants: Journey to the present and implications for the field(Taylor and Francis, 2015-05) Tarzian, Anita J.; Wocial, Lucia D.; IU School of NursingFor decades a debate has played out in the literature about who bioethicists are, what they do, whether they can be considered professionals qua bioethicists, and, if so, what professional responsibilities they are called to uphold. Health care ethics consultants are bioethicists who work in health care settings. They have been seeking guidance documents that speak to their special relationships/duties toward those they serve. By approving a Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibilities for Health Care Ethics Consultants, the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities (ASBH) has moved the professionalization debate forward in a significant way. This first code of ethics focuses on individuals who provide health care ethics consultation (HCEC) in clinical settings. The evolution of the code's development, implications for the field of HCEC and bioethics, and considerations for future directions are presented here.Item Continuity Strategies for Long-Stay PICU Patients: Consensus Statements From the Lucile Packard Foundation PICU Continuity Panel(Wolters Kluwer, 2023) Edwards, Jeffrey D.; Wocial, Lucia D.; Madrigal, Vanessa N.; Moon, Michelle M.; Ramey-Hunt, Cheryl; Walter, Jennifer K.; Baird, Jennifer D.; Leland, Brian D.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineObjectives: To develop consensus statements on continuity strategies using primary intensivists, primary nurses, and recurring multidisciplinary team meetings for long-stay patients (LSPs) in PICUs. Participants: The multidisciplinary Lucile Packard Foundation PICU Continuity Panel comprising parents of children who had prolonged PICU stays and experts in several specialties/professions that care for children with medical complexity in and out of PICUs. Design/methods: We used modified RAND Delphi methodology, with a comprehensive literature review, Delphi surveys, and a conference, to reach consensus. The literature review resulted in a synthesized bibliography, which was provided to panelists. We used an iterative process to generate draft statements following panelists' completion of four online surveys with open-ended questions on implementing and sustaining continuity strategies. Panelists were anonymous when they voted on revised draft statements. Agreement of 80% constituted consensus. At a 3-day virtual conference, we discussed, revised, and re-voted on statements not reaching or barely reaching consensus. We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation to assess the quality of the evidence and rate the statements' strength. The Panel also generated outcome, process, and balancing metrics to evaluate continuity strategies. Results: The Panel endorsed 17 consensus statements in five focus areas of continuity strategies (Eligibility Criteria, Initiation, Standard Responsibilities, Resources Needed to Implement, Resources Needed to Sustain). The quality of evidence of the statements was low to very low, highlighting the limited evidence and the importance of panelists' experiences/expertise. The strength of the statements was conditional. An extensive list of potential evaluation metrics was generated. Conclusions: These expert/parent-developed consensus statements provide PICUs with novel summaries on how to operationalize, implement, and sustain continuity strategies for LSP, a rapidly growing, vulnerable, resource-intensive population in PICUs.Item Disclosing Medical Mistakes: A Communication Management Plan for Physicians(2013-04) Petronio, Sandra; Torke, Alexia M.; Bosslet, Gabriel T.; Isenberg, Steven; Wocial, Lucia D.; Helft, Paul R.Introduction: There is a growing consensus that disclosure of medical mistakes is ethically and legally appropriate, but such disclosures are made difficult by medical traditions of concern about medical malpractice suits and by physicians’ own emotional reactions. Because the physician may have compelling reasons both to keep the information private and to disclose it to the patient or family, these situations can be conceptualized as privacy dilemmas. These dilemmas may create barriers to effectively addressing the mistake and its consequences. Although a number of interventions exist to address privacy dilemmas that physicians face, current evidence suggests that physicians tend to be slow to adopt the practice of disclosing medical mistakes. Methods: This discussion proposes a theoretically based, streamlined, two-step plan that physicians can use as an initial guide for conversations with patients about medical mistakes. The mistake disclosure management plan uses the communication privacy management theory. Results: The steps are 1) physician preparation, such as talking about the physician’s emotions and seeking information about the mistake, and 2) use of mistake disclosure strategies that protect the physician-patient relationship. These include the optimal timing, context of disclosure delivery, content of mistake messages, sequencing, and apology. A case study highlighted the disclosure process. Conclusion: This Mistake Disclosure Management Plan may help physicians in the early stages after mistake discovery to prepare for the initial disclosure of a medical mistakes. The next step is testing implementation of the procedures suggested.Item "Doctor, what would you do?": physicians' responses to patient inquiries about periviable delivery(Elsevier, 2015-01) Tucker Edmonds, Brownsyne; McKenzie, Fatima; Panoch, Janet E.; Wocial, Lucia D.; Barnato, Amber E.; Frankel, Richard M.; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, IU School of MedicineOBJECTIVE: To qualitatively assess obstetricians' and neonatologists' responses to standardized patients (SPs) asking "What would you do?" during periviable counseling encounters. METHODS: An exploratory single-center simulation study. SPs, portraying a pregnant woman presenting with ruptured membranes at 23 weeks, were instructed to ask, "What would you do?" if presented options regarding delivery management or resuscitation. Responses were independently reviewed and classified. RESULTS: We identified five response patterns: 'Disclose' (9/28), 'Don't Know' (11/28), 'Deflect' (23/28), 'Decline' (2/28), and 'Ignore' (2/28). Most physicians utilized more than one response pattern (22/28). Physicians 'deflected' the question by: restating or offering additional medical information; answering with a question; evoking a hypothetical patient; or redirecting the SP to other sources of support. When compared with neonatologists, obstetricians (40% vs. 15%) made personal or professional disclosures more often. Though both specialties readily acknowledged the importance of values in making a decision, only one physician attempted to elicit the patient's values. CONCLUSION: "What would you do?" represented a missed opportunity for values elicitation. Interventions are needed to facilitate values elicitation and shared decision-making in periviable care. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: If physicians fail to address patients' values and goals, they lack the information needed to develop patient-centered plans of care.Item Doctor, What Would You Do?: An ANSWER for patients requesting advice about value-laden decisions(AAP, 2015-10) Edmonds, Brownsyne Tucker; Torke, Alexia M.; Helft, Paul; Wocial, Lucia D.; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, IU School of MedicineThis article presents a previously published framework, summarized in the mnemonic ANSWER (A, Active listening; N, Needs assessment; S, Self-awareness/reflection; W, Whose perspective?; E, Elicit values; R, Respond) for how to respond to the question, “Doctor, what would you do?” when considering medical decisions that are preference-sensitive, meaning there is limited or debatable evidence to guide clinical recommendations, or are value-laden, such that the “right” decision may differ based on the context or values of a given individual. Using the mnemonic and practical examples, we attempt to make the framework for an ethically appropriate approach to these conversations more accessible for clinicians. Rather than a decision rule, this mnemonic represents a set of points to consider when physicians are considering an ethically acceptable response that fosters trust and rapport. We apply this approach to a case of periviable counseling, among the more emotionally challenging and value-laden antenatal decisions faced by providers and patients.Item The Family Navigator: A pilot intervention to support intensive care unit family surrogates(American Association of Critical Care Nurses, 2016-11) Torke, Alexia M.; Wocial, Lucia D.; Johns, Shelley A.; Sachs, Greg A.; Callahan, Christopher M.; Bosslet, Gabriel T.; Slaven, James E.; Perkins, Susan M.; Hickman, Susan E.; Montz, Kianna; Burke, Emily; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground Although communication problems between family surrogates and intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians have been documented, there are few effective interventions. Nurses have the potential to play an expanded role in ICU communication and decision making. Objectives To conduct a pilot randomized controlled trial of the Family Navigator (FN), a distinct nursing role to address family members’ unmet communication needs early in an ICU stay. Methods An inter-disciplinary team developed the FN protocol. A randomized controlled pilot intervention trial of the FN was performed in a tertiary referral hospital ICU to test the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention. The intervention addressed informational and emotional communication needs through daily contact using structured clinical updates, emotional and informational support modules, family meeting support and follow-up phone calls. Results Twenty-six surrogate/patient pairs (13 per study arm) were enrolled. Surrogates randomized to the intervention had contact with the FN 90% or more of eligible patient days. All surrogates agreed or strongly agreed that they would recommend the FN to other families. Open-ended comments from both surrogates and clinicians were uniformly positive. For both groups, 100% of baseline data collection interviews and 81% of 6–8 week follow-up interviews were completed. Conclusions A fully integrated nurse empowered to facilitate decision making is a feasible intervention in the ICU setting. It is well-received by ICU families and staff. A larger randomized controlled trial is needed to demonstrate an impact on important outcomes, such as surrogate well-being and decision quality.Item Group Concept Mapping Conceptualizes High-Quality Care for Long-Stay Pediatric Intensive Care Unit Patients and Families(Elsevier, 2023) Leland, Brian D.; Wocial, Lucia D.; Madrigal, Vanessa N.; Moon, Michelle M.; Ramey-Hunt, Cheryl; Walter, Jennifer K.; Baird, Jennifer D.; Edwards, Jeffrey D.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineObjective: To describe and conceptualize high-quality care for long-stay pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) patients using group concept mapping (GCM). Study design: We convened an expert panel to elucidate domains of high-quality care for this growing patient population for which transitory care models fail to meet their needs. Thirty-one healthcare professionals and 7 parents of patients with previous prolonged PICU hospitalizations comprised a diverse, interprofessional multidisciplinary panel. Participants completed the prompt "For PICU patients and families experiencing prolonged lengths of stay, high quality care from the medical team includes ______", with unlimited free text responses. Responses were synthesized into individual statements, then panelists sorted them by idea similarity and rated them by perceived importance. Statement analysis using GCM software through GroupWisdom generated nonoverlapping clusters representing domains of high-quality care. Results: Participants submitted 265 prompt responses representing 313 unique ideas, resulting in 78 final statements for sorting and rating. The resultant cluster map best representing the data contained 8 domains: (1) Family-Centered Care and Shared Decision Making, (2) Humanizing the Patient, (3) Clinician Supports and Resources, (4) Multidisciplinary Coordination of Care, (5) Family Well-Being, (6) Anticipatory Guidance and Care Planning, (7) Communication, and (8) Continuity of Care. Conclusions: GCM empowered a panel of healthcare professionals and parents to explicitly describe and conceptualize high-quality care for patients and families experiencing prolonged PICU stays. This information will aid the effort to address shortcomings of transitory PICU care models.Item Institutional Ethics Resources: Creating Moral Spaces(Wiley, 2016-09) Hamric, Ann B.; Wocial, Lucia D.; School of NursingSince 1992, institutions accredited by The Joint Commission have been required to have a process in place that allows staff members, patients, and families to address ethical issues or issues prone to conflict. While the commission's expectations clearly have made ethics committees more common, simply having a committee in no way demonstrates its effectiveness in terms of the availability of the service to key constituents, the quality of the processes used, or the outcomes achieved. Beyond meeting baseline accreditation standards, effective ethics resources are requisite for quality care for another reason. The provision of care to the sick is a practice with profound moral dimensions. Clinicians need what Margaret Urban Walker has called “moral spaces,” reflective spaces within institutions in which to explore and communicate values and ethical obligations as they undergird goals of care. Walker proposed that ethicists needed to be concerned with the design and maintenance of these moral spaces. Clearly, that concern needs to extend beyond ethicists to institutional leaders. This essay uses Walker's idea of moral space to describe individuals and groups who are actual and potential ethics resources in health care institutions. We focus on four requisite characteristics of effective resources and the challenges to achieving them, and we identify strategies to build them. In our view, such moral spaces are particularly important for nurses and their colleagues on interprofessional teams and need to be expanded and strengthened in most settings.