Prognostic Discussion for Infants with Neurologic Conditions: Qualitative Analysis of Family Conferences

Overview

Journal Ann Neurol

Specialty Neurology

Date 2022 Jul 22

PMID 35866708

Authors

Monica E Lemmon

Mary C Barks

Sarah Bernstein

J Kelly Davis

Megan G Jiao

Erica C Kaye

Hannah C Glass

Debra Brandon

Peter A Ubel

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: We characterize the content and role of prognostic discussion for infants with neurologic conditions.

Methods: In this descriptive qualitative study, we prospectively enrolled infants (age < 1 year) in the intensive care unit with a neurologic condition anticipated to have ≥1 family conference about prognosis or goals of care. We audiorecorded family conferences as they occurred. We used a rapid-cycle qualitative approach to identify and refine themes.

Results: Forty infants and 61 parents were enrolled; 68 family conferences occurred for 24 infants. The majority of infant cases (n = 23/24, 96%) and conferences (n = 64/68, 94%) included discussion of neurologic prognosis. Common infant diagnoses included prematurity (n = 12, 52%), genetic conditions (n = 9, 35%), and brain malformations (n = 7, 30%). We identified 2 themes relating to the characterization of the infant's prognosis: (1) predictions of impairment and (2) rationale for prognostic predictions. We identified 3 themes characterizing the role of prognostic discussion: (1) aligning parent and clinician understanding of infant outcome, (2) influencing decision-making, and (3) preparing for life at home. We identified 2 themes characterizing discussion of prognostic uncertainty: (1) multilayered types of uncertainty and (2) holding space for hope alongside uncertainty.

Interpretation: In this cohort of infants with neurologic conditions and their parents, we identified salient themes characterizing the content and role of discussion about neurologic outcome. Our findings highlight that prognostic discussion focuses on anticipated impairments, informs decision-making, and helps families prepare for home life. Future work should characterize whether these findings align with parent preferences for prognostic disclosure. ANN NEUROL 2022;92:699-709.

Citing Articles

Discussion of Spirituality in Family Conferences of Infants With Neurologic Conditions.

Peralta D, Nanduri N, Bansal S, Rent S, Brandon D, Pollak K J Pain Symptom Manage. 2024; 69(1):34-43.e1.

PMID: 39326468 PMC: 11659047. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2024.09.020.

Prognostic Discordance Among Parents and Physicians Caring for Infants with Neurologic Conditions.

Bernstein S, Barks M, Ubel P, Weinfurt K, Barlet M, Farley S J Pediatr. 2023; 263:113677.

PMID: 37611734 PMC: 10841319. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2023.113677.

Supporting Disclosure of Unmet Mental Health Needs among Parents of Critically Ill Infants.

Bansal S, Willis R, Barks M, Pollak K, Brandon D, Kaye E J Pediatr. 2023; 262:113596.

PMID: 37399922 PMC: 10757990. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2023.113596.

Seminars in Fetal & neonatal medicine: Palliative and end of life care in the NICU.

Peralta D, Bogetz J, Lemmon M Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2023; 28(3):101457.

PMID: 37230860 PMC: 10827319. DOI: 10.1016/j.siny.2023.101457.

Affirming Perspectives About Quality-of-Life With Caregivers of Children With Severe Neurological Impairment.

Bogetz J, Lemmon M Pediatr Neurol. 2023; 144:104-106.

PMID: 37216762 PMC: 10330590. DOI: 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2023.04.022.

References

Bogetz J, Boss R, Lemmon M . Communicating With Families of Children With Severe Neurological Impairment. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2021; 63(2):e264-e266. PMC: 9624372. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2021.10.012. View

Sandelowski M . Combining qualitative and quantitative sampling, data collection, and analysis techniques in mixed-method studies. Res Nurs Health. 2000; 23(3):246-55. DOI: 10.1002/1098-240x(200006)23:3<246::aid-nur9>3.0.co;2-h. View

Jones K, Quinn T, Mazor K, Muehlschlegel S . Prognostic Uncertainty in Critically Ill Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury: A Multicenter Qualitative Study. Neurocrit Care. 2021; 35(2):311-321. DOI: 10.1007/s12028-021-01230-3. View

Anderson W, Cimino J, Ernecoff N, Ungar A, Shotsberger K, Pollice L . A multicenter study of key stakeholders' perspectives on communicating with surrogates about prognosis in intensive care units. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2014; 12(2):142-52. PMC: 4342839. DOI: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201407-325OC. View

Wong M, Nicosia F, Smith A, Walter L, Lam V, Cohen H . "You have to be sure that the patient has the full picture": Adaptation of the Best Case/Worst Case communication tool for geriatric oncology. J Geriatr Oncol. 2022; 13(5):606-613. PMC: 9232997. DOI: 10.1016/j.jgo.2022.01.014. View

Kiker W, Rutz Voumard R, Andrews L, Holloway R, Brumback L, Engelberg R . Assessment of Discordance Between Physicians and Family Members Regarding Prognosis in Patients With Severe Acute Brain Injury. JAMA Netw Open. 2021; 4(10):e2128991. PMC: 8531991. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.28991. View

Janvier A, Farlow B, Barrington K, Bourque C, Brazg T, Wilfond B . Building trust and improving communication with parents of children with Trisomy 13 and 18: A mixed-methods study. Palliat Med. 2019; 34(3):262-271. DOI: 10.1177/0269216319860662. View

Lemmon M, Glass H, Shellhaas R, Barks M, Bailey B, Grant K . Parent experience of caring for neonates with seizures. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2020; 105(6):634-639. PMC: 7581607. DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2019-318612. View

OBrien B, Harris I, Beckman T, Reed D, Cook D . Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Acad Med. 2014; 89(9):1245-51. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000388. View

10.

Averill J . Matrix analysis as a complementary analytic strategy in qualitative inquiry. Qual Health Res. 2002; 12(6):855-66. DOI: 10.1177/104973230201200611. View

11.

Evans L, Boyd E, Malvar G, Apatira L, Luce J, Lo B . Surrogate decision-makers' perspectives on discussing prognosis in the face of uncertainty. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2008; 179(1):48-53. PMC: 2615661. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.200806-969OC. View

12.

Ge C, Goss A, Crawford S, Goostrey K, Buddadhumaruk P, Shields A . Variability of Prognostic Communication in Critically Ill Neurologic Patients: A Pilot Multicenter Mixed-Methods Study. Crit Care Explor. 2022; 4(2):e0640. PMC: 8863127. DOI: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000000640. View

13.

Taylor B, Henshall C, Kenyon S, Litchfield I, Greenfield S . Can rapid approaches to qualitative analysis deliver timely, valid findings to clinical leaders? A mixed methods study comparing rapid and thematic analysis. BMJ Open. 2018; 8(10):e019993. PMC: 6194404. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019993. View

14.

Boss R, Lemmon M, Arnold R, Donohue P . Communicating prognosis with parents of critically ill infants: direct observation of clinician behaviors. J Perinatol. 2017; 37(11):1224-1229. PMC: 5688012. DOI: 10.1038/jp.2017.118. View

15.

Racine E, Bell E, Farlow B, Miller S, Payot A, Rasmussen L . The 'ouR-HOPE' approach for ethics and communication about neonatal neurological injury. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2016; 59(2):125-135. DOI: 10.1111/dmcn.13343. View

16.

Bogetz J, Lewis H, Trowbridge A, Jonas D, Hauer J, Wilfond B . From Monochromatic to Technicolor: Parent Perspectives on Challenges and Approaches to Seeing Children with Severe Neurological Impairment Holistically. J Palliat Med. 2021; 25(3):437-444. DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2021.0344. View

17.

Quinn T, Moskowitz J, Khan M, Shutter L, Goldberg R, Col N . What Families Need and Physicians Deliver: Contrasting Communication Preferences Between Surrogate Decision-Makers and Physicians During Outcome Prognostication in Critically Ill TBI Patients. Neurocrit Care. 2017; 27(2):154-162. PMC: 5693603. DOI: 10.1007/s12028-017-0427-2. View

18.

Teno J, Fisher E, Hamel M, Wu A, Murphy D, Wenger N . Decision-making and outcomes of prolonged ICU stays in seriously ill patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000; 48(S1):S70-4. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2000.tb03144.x. View

19.

Sobo E, Billman G, Lim L, Murdock J, Romero E, Donoghue D . A rapid interview protocol supporting patient-centered quality improvement: hearing the parent's voice in a pediatric cancer unit. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 2002; 28(9):498-509. DOI: 10.1016/s1070-3241(02)28055-4. View

20.

Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T . Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Soc Sci Med. 1997; 44(5):681-92. DOI: 10.1016/s0277-9536(96)00221-3. View