Cited by 63Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation

A Video to Improve Patient and Surrogate Understanding of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Choices in the ICU: A Randomized Controlled Trial*

Wilson, Michael E., Krupa, Artur, Hinds, Richard F., Litell, John M., Swetz, Keith M., Akhoundi, Abbasali, Kashyap, Rahul, Gajic, Ognjen +1 more·2015·Critical Care Medicine

Abstract

Objective To determine if a video depicting cardiopulmonary resuscitation and resuscitation preference options would improve knowledge and decision making among patients and surrogates in the ICU. Design Randomized, unblinded trial. Setting Single medical ICU. Patients Patients and surrogate decision makers in the ICU. Interventions The usual care group received a standard pamphlet about cardiopulmonary resuscitation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation preference options plus routine code status discussions with clinicians. The video group received usual care plus an 8-minute video that depicted cardiopulmonary resuscitation, showed a simulated hospital code, and explained resuscitation preference options. Measurements and main results One hundred three patients and surrogates were randomized to usual care. One hundred five patients and surrogates were randomized to video plus usual care. Median total knowledge scores (0-15 points possible for correct answers) in the video group were 13 compared with 10 in the usual care group, p value of less than 0.0001. Video group participants had higher rates of understanding the purpose of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and resuscitation options and terminology and could correctly name components of cardiopulmonary resuscitation. No statistically significant differences in documented resuscitation preferences following the interventions were found between the two groups, although the trial was underpowered to detect such differences. A maj…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/ccm.0000000000000749

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wilson, M. E., Krupa, A., Hinds, R. F., Litell, J. M., Swetz, K. M., Akhoundi, A., Kashyap, R., Gajic, O., & Kashani, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
Venue
Critical Care Medicine
Published
2015-03
Volume
43
Issue
3
Pages
621-629
ISSN
0090-3493 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2312302709
Cited by
63
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5
FWCI
4.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Critical Care Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Mayo Clinic
  • Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Radiological and Ultrasound Technology › Family and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Keywords
cardiopulmonary resuscitation, resuscitation preferences, advance care planning, surrogate decision-making, patient education, educational videos, intensive care unit, code status discussions, patient knowledge
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Education as Topic, Socioeconomic Factors, Videotape Recording, Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review