Cited by 46Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsEthics in medical practice

How do clinicians prepare family members for the role of surrogate decision-maker?

Cunningham, Thomas V, Scheunemann, Leslie P, Arnold, Robert M, White, Douglas·2018·Journal of Medical Ethics

Abstract

Purpose: Although surrogate decision-making (SDM) is prevalent in intensive care units (ICUs) and concerns with decision quality are well documented, little is known about how clinicians help family members understand the surrogate role. We investigated whether and how clinicians provide normative guidance to families regarding how to function as a surrogate. Subjects and methods: We audiorecorded and transcribed 73 ICU family conferences in which clinicians anticipated discussing goals of care for incapacitated patients at high risk of death. We developed and applied a coding framework to identify normative statements by clinicians regarding what considerations should guide surrogates’ decisions, including whether clinicians explained one or more of Buchanan and Brock’s three standard principles of SDM to family members. Results: Clinicians made at least one statement about how to perform the surrogate role in 24 (34%) conferences (mean of 0.83 statements per conference (1.77; range 0–9)). We observed three general types of normative guidance provided to surrogates, with some conferences containing more than one type of guidance: counselling about one or more standard principles of SDM (24% of conferences); counselling surrogates to make decisions centred on the patient as a person, without specifying how to accomplish that (14% of conferences); and counselling surrogates to make decisions based on the family’s values (8% of conferences). Conclusions: Clinicians did not provide normative guidance about the surrogate role in two-thirds of family conferences for incapacitated patients at high risk for death. When they did, clinicians’ guidance was often incomplete and sometimes conflicted with standard principles of SDM. Future work is needed to understand whether providing explicit guidance on how to perform the surrogate role improves decision-making or mitigates surrogates’ psychological distress.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/medethics-2016-103808

Cites

20 of 20 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

1 of the 21 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cunningham, T. V., Scheunemann, L. P., Arnold, R. M., & White, D.
Affiliations
  • Kaiser Permanente West Los Angeles Medical Center (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
Corresponding author
Cunningham, Thomas V
Venue
Journal of Medical Ethics
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2017-07-17
Volume
44
Issue
1
Pages
21-26
ISSN
  • 0306-6800 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-4257
OpenAlex
W2734450279
Cited by
45
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4
FWCI
4.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Ethics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Jewish Health Care Foundation
  • Arthur Vining Davis Foundations
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
  • Greenwall Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Aging
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 › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Ethics in medical practice
Keywords
surrogate decision-making, family meetings, intensive care unit, normative guidance, goals of care, clinician-family communication, patient-centered decision-making, family values, end-of-life decisions
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Communication, Counseling, Decision Making, Family, Female, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Male, Middle Aged, Professional-Family Relations, Stress, Psychological, Terminal Care, Proxy, Third-Party Consent, Young Adult

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