McKenzie Mary S, Auriemma Catherine L, Olenik Jennifer, Cooney Elizabeth, Gabler Nicole B, Halpern Scott D
1Pulmonary Division, Legacy Medical Group, Portland, OR. 2Fostering Improvement in End-of-Life Decision Science Program, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 3Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA. 4Leonard Davis Institute Center for Health Incentives and Behavioral Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 5Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 6Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 7Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Crit Care Med. 2015 Aug;43(8):1660-8. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001084.
The ICU is a place of frequent, high-stakes decision making. However, the number and types of decisions made by intensivists have not been well characterized. We sought to describe intensivist decision making and determine how the number and types of decisions are affected by patient, provider, and systems factors.
Direct observation of intensivist decision making during patient rounds.
Twenty-four-bed academic medical ICU.
Medical intensivists leading patient care rounds.
None.
During 920 observed patient rounds on 374 unique patients, intensivists made 8,174 critical care decisions (mean, 8.9 decisions per patient daily, 102.2 total decisions daily) over a mean of 3.7 hours. Patient factors associated with increased numbers of decisions included a shorter time since ICU admission and an earlier slot in rounding order (both p < 0.05). Intensivist identity explained the greatest proportion of variance in number of decisions per patient even when controlling for all other factors significant in bivariable regression. A given intensivist made more decisions per patient during days later in the 14-day rotation (p < 0.05). Female intensivists made significantly more decisions than male intensivists (p < 0.05).
Intensivists made over 100 daily critical care decisions during rounds. The number of decisions was influenced by a variety of patient- and system-related factors and was highly variable among intensivists. Future work is needed to explore effects of the decision-making burden on providers' choices and on patient outcomes.
重症监护病房(ICU)是一个频繁进行高风险决策的场所。然而,重症监护医生所做决策的数量和类型尚未得到充分描述。我们试图描述重症监护医生的决策过程,并确定决策的数量和类型如何受到患者、医疗服务提供者及系统因素的影响。
在患者查房期间直接观察重症监护医生的决策过程。
拥有24张床位的学术性医学ICU。
负责患者护理查房的内科重症监护医生。
无。
在对374例不同患者进行的920次观察查房中,重症监护医生在平均3.7小时内做出了8174项重症监护决策(平均每位患者每天8.9项决策,每天总计102.2项决策)。与决策数量增加相关的患者因素包括入住ICU后的时间较短以及查房顺序靠前(均p<0.05)。即使在控制了双变量回归中所有其他显著因素后,重症监护医生的身份在每位患者决策数量的方差中所占比例最大。在14天轮班的后期,同一位重症监护医生每位患者做出的决策更多(p<0.05)。女性重症监护医生做出的决策明显多于男性重症监护医生(p<0.05)。
重症监护医生在查房期间每天做出超过100项重症监护决策。决策数量受到多种与患者和系统相关因素的影响,并且在重症监护医生之间差异很大。未来需要开展工作来探索决策负担对医疗服务提供者选择和患者结局的影响。