+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Disagreement Between Clinicians and Score in Decision-Making Capacity of Critically Ill Patients



Disagreement Between Clinicians and Score in Decision-Making Capacity of Critically Ill Patients



Critical Care Medicine 47(3): 337-344



To compare the assessment of decision-making capacity of ICU patients by attending clinicians (physicians, nurses, and residents) with a capacity score measured by the Mini-Mental Status Examination, completed by Aid to Capacity Evaluation if necessary. The primary outcome was agreement between physicians' assessments and the score. Secondary outcomes were agreement between nurses' or residents' assessments and the score and identification of factors associated with disagreement. A 1-day prevalence study. Nineteen ICUs in France. All patients hospitalized in the ICU on the study day and the attending clinicians. The decision-making capacity of patients was assessed by the attending clinicians and independently by an observer using the score. A total of 206 patients were assessed by 213 attending clinicians (57 physicians, 97 nurses, and 59 residents). Physicians designated more patients as having decision-making capacity (n = 92/206 [45%]) than score (n = 34/206 [17%]; absolute difference 28% [95% CI, 20-37%]; p = 0.001). There was a high disagreement between assessments of all clinicians and score (Kappa coefficient 0.39 [95% CI, 0.29-0.50] for physicians; 0.39 [95% CI, 0.27-0.52] for nurses; and 0.46 [95% CI, 0.35-0.58] for residents). The main factor associated with disagreement was a Glasgow Coma Scale score between 10 and 15 (odds ratio, 2.92 [1.18-7.19], p = 0.02 for physicians; 4.97 [1.50-16.45], p = 0.01 for nurses; and 3.39 [1.12-10.29], p = 0.03 for residents) without differentiating between the Glasgow Coma Scale scores from 10 to 15. The decision-making capacity of ICU patients was largely overestimated by all attending clinicians as compared with a score. The main factor associated with disagreement was a Glasgow Coma Scale score between 10 and 15, suggesting that clinicians confused consciousness with decision-making capacity.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 065756141

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 30418220

DOI: 10.1097/ccm.0000000000003550


Related references

Decisions to limit life-sustaining treatment for critically ill patients who lack both decision-making capacity and surrogate decision-makers. Critical Care Medicine 34(8): 2053-2059, 2006

Rivers in practice: clinicians' assessments of patients' decision-making capacity. Hospital and Community Psychiatry 40(11): 1159-1162, 1989

When patients refuse assessment of decision-making capacity: how should clinicians respond?. Archives of Internal Medicine 164(16): 1757-1760, 2004

Researchers offer up a mnemonic tool to guide clinicians who must assess decision-making capacity in patients during emergency situations. Ed Management 27(3): 32-34, 2015

Developing a two-sided intervention to facilitate shared decision-making in haemophilia: decision boxes for clinicians and patient decision aids for patients. Haemophilia 20(6): 800-806, 2014

A universal decision support system. Addressing the decision-making needs of patients, families, and clinicians in the setting of critical illness. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 190(4): 366-373, 2014

Evidence summaries (decision boxes) to prepare clinicians for shared decision-making with patients: a mixed methods implementation study. Implementation Science 9: 144, 2014

Surrogate decision makers' attitudes towards research decision making for critically ill patients. Intensive Care Medicine 38(10): 1616-1623, 2012

A web-based clinical decision tool to support treatment decision-making in psychiatry: a pilot focus group study with clinicians, patients and carers. Bmc Psychiatry 17(1): 265, 2017

The 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay for Node-Positive, Early-Stage Breast Cancer and Impact of RxPONDER Trial on Chemotherapy Decision-Making: Have Clinicians Already Decided?. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network 15(4): 494-503, 2017

Clinicians' concerns about decision support interventions for patients facing breast cancer surgery options: understanding the challenge of implementing shared decision-making. Health Expectations 14(2): 133-146, 2011

The Intentions Affecting the Medical Decision-Making Behavior of Surrogate Decision Makers of Critically Ill Patients and Related Factors. Hu Li Za Zhi Journal of Nursing 65(2): 32-42, 2018

Who decides who decides? When disagreement occurs between the physician and the patient's appointed proxy about the patient's decision-making capacity. Archives of Internal Medicine 155(8): 793-796, 1995

Patients and clinicians must be at the centre of decision making. Bmj 346: F213, 2013

A new score system for decision making during percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction patients with multivessel disease (the CATCH-ON score). European Heart Journal 34(Suppl 1): P4836-P4836, 2013