Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ethical aspects of determining and communicating prognosis in critical care

  • Ethical Matters
  • Published:
Neurocritical Care Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Physicians have an ethical duty to accurately determine and clearly communicate a patient’s prognosis because a patient’s or surrogate’s decision whether to consent for aggressive treatment rests largely on their understanding of the patient’s diagnosis and prognosis. Pitfalls in determining prognosis include uniformed summary judgement based on faulty pattern recognition, inadequate outcome data, utter reliance on retrospective studies, statistical limitations, nongeneralizability of outcome data, and the fallacy of the self-fulfilling prophecy. Pitfalls in physicians’ communication of prognosis include inadequate time spent in discussion, use of technical jargon, biased framing of decisions, unjustified physician bias, patient innumeracy, ethnicity barriers, and surrogates’ unfounded intuitions about critical illness and death. Improving the recognition of and surmounting the barriers to accurate determination and clear communication of prognosis can make critical care physicians more scientific and virtuous.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gilchrist JM, ed. Prognosis in Neurology. Boston, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Evans RW, Baskin DS, Yatsu FM, eds. Prognosis of Neurological Disorders, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bernat JL. Areas of consensus in withdrawing life-sustaining treatment in the neurointensive care unit. Neurology 1999;52:1538–1539.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Meisel A, Kuczewski M. Legal and ethical myths about informed consent. Arch Intern Med 1996;156:2521–2526.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Gert B, Nelson WA, Culver CM. Moral theory and neurology. Neurol Clin 1989;7:681–696.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Brock DW. The ideal of shared decision-making between physicians and patients. Kennedy Inst Ethics J 1991;1:28–47.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Rich BA. Defining and delineating a duty to prognosticate. Theor Med Bioethics 2001;22:177–192.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Annas GJ. Informed consent, cancer, and truth in prognosis. N Engl J Med 1994;330:223–225.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Schneiderman LJ, Arras JD. Counseling patients to counsel physicians on future care in the event of patient incompetence. Ann Intern Med 1985;102:693–698.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Menikoff JA, Sachs GA, Siegler M. Beyond advancedirectives{/}health care surrogate laws. N Engl J Med 1992;327:1165–1169.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bernat JL. Ethical Issues in Neurology, 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2002:85–96.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bernat JL. Plan ahead: how neurologists can enhance patient-centered medicine. Neurology 2001;56:144–145.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Knaus WA, Wagner DP, Drape. The APACHE III prognostic system: risk prediction of hospital mortality for critically ill hospitalized patients. Chest 1991;100:1619–1636.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Knaus WA, Harrell FE Jr, Lynn J, et al. The SUPPORT model: objective estimates of survival for seriously ill hospitalized adults. Ann Intern Med 1995;122:191–203.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Levy DE, Caronna JJ, Singer BH, et al. Predicting outcome from hypoxic-ischemic coma. JAMA 1985;253:1420–1426.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Justice AC, Covinsky KE, Berlin JA. Assessing the generalizability of prognostic information. Ann Intern Med 1999;130:515–524.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Braitman LE, Davidoff F. Predicting clinical states in individual patients. Ann Intern Med 1996;125:406–412.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Shewmon DA, De Giorgio CM. Early prognosis in anoxic coma. Neurol Clin 1989;7:823–843.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Mayer SA, Kossoff SB. Withdrawal of life support in the neurological intensive care unit. Neurology 1999;52:1602–1609.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Becker KJ, Baxter AB, Cohen WA, et al. Withdrawal of support in intracerebral hemorrhage may lead to self-fulfilling prophecies. Neurology 2001;56:766–772.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Broderick JP, Brott TG, Duldner JE, et al. Volume of intracerebral hemorrhage. A powerful and easy-to-use predictor of 30-day mortality. Stroke 1993;24:987–993.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Tuhrim S, Dambrosia JM, Price TR, et al. Prediction of intracerebral hemorrhage survival. Ann Neurol 1988;24:258–263.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Tuhrim S, Horowitz DR, Sacher M, et al. Validation and comparison of models predicting survival after intracerebral hemorrhage. Crit Care Med 1995;23:950–954.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Tuhrim S, Horowitz DR, Sacher M, et al. Volume of intraventricular blood is an important determinant of outcome in supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage. Crit Care Med 1999;27:617–621.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Fogelholm R, Avikainen S, Murros K. Prognostic value and determinants of first-day mean arterial pressures in spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage. Stroke 1997;28:1396–1400.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Broderick JP, Adams HP Jr, Barsan W, et al. Guidelines for the management of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage: a statement for healthcare professionals from a special writing group of the Stroke Council, American Heart Association. Stroke 1999;30:905–915.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Multi-Society Task Force on PVS. Medical aspects of the persistent vegetative state. Parts I. N Engl J Med 1994;330:1499–1508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Multi-Society Task Force on PVS. Medical aspects of the persistent vegetative state. Parts II. N Engl J Med 1994;330:1572–1579.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Volicer L, Berman SA, Cipolloni PB, Mandell A. Persistent vegetative state in Alzheimer disease: does it exist? Arch Neurol 1997;54:1382–1384.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Murray LS, Teasdale GM, Murray GD, et al. Does prediction of outcome alter patient management? Lancet 1993;341:1487–1491.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Christakis NA. Prognostication and bioethics. Daedalus 1999;128:197–214.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Katz J. Why doctors don’t disclose uncertainty. Hastings Cent Rep 1984;14:35–44.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Christakis NA. Death Foretold: Prophecy and Prognosis in Medical Care. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Quill TE. Recognizing and adjusting to barriers in doctor-patient communication. Ann Intern Med 1989;111:51–57.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Quill TE. Initiating end-of-life discussions with seriously ill patients: addressing the “elephant in the room”. JAMA 2000;284:2502–2507.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Ptacek JT, Eberhardt TL. Breaking bad news: a review of the literature. JAMA 1996;276:496–502.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Buckman R. How to Break Bad News: A Guide for Health Care Professionals. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Quill TE, Arnold RM, Platt F. “I wish things were different”: expressing wishes in response to loss, futility, and unrealistic hope. Ann Intern Med 2001;135:551–555.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Christakis NA, Iwashnya TJ. Attitude and selfreported practice regarding prognostication in a national sample of internists. Arch Intern Med 1998;158:2389–2395.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. SUPPORT Principal Investigators. A controlled trial to improve care for seriously ill hospitalized patients. The Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment (SUPPORT). JAMA 1995;274:1591–1598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Hoffman JC, Wenger NS, Davis RB, et al. Patient preferences for communication with physicians about end-of-life decisions. Ann Intern Med 1997;127:1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Mazur DJ, Hickam DH. Patients’ interpretations of probability terms. J Gen Intern Med 1991;6:237–240.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Tversky A, Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 1981;211:453–458.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Malenka DJ, Baron JA, Johansen S, et al. The framing effect of relative and absolute risk. J Gen Intern Med 1993;8:543–548.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Murphy DJ, Burrows D, Santilli S, et al. The influence of the probability of survival on patients’ preferences regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation. N Engl J Med 1994;330:545–549.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Bogardus ST Jr, Holmboe E, Jekel JF. Perils, pitfalls, and possibilities in talking about medical risk. JAMA 1999;281:1037–1041.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Solomon NA, Glick HA, Russo CJ, et al. Patient preferences for stroke outcomes. Stroke 1994;25:1721–1725.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Jecker NS, Carrese JA, Pearlman RA. Caring for patients in cross-cultural settings. Hastings Cent Rep 1995;25:6–14.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Crawley LM, Marshall PA, Lo B, Koenig BA. Strategies for culturally effective end-of-life care. Ann Intern Med 2002;136:673–679.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Blackhall LJ, Murphy ST, Frank G, Michel V, Azen A. Ethnicity and attitudes toward patient autonomy. JAMA 1995;274:820–825.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Kagawa-Singer M, Blackhall LJ. Negotiating cross-cultural issues at the end of life: “you got to go where helives.” JAMA 2001;286:2993–3001.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Freedman B. Offering truth: one ethical approach to the uninformed cancer patient. Arch Intern Med 1993;153:572–576.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Youngner SJ, Landefeld S, Coulton CJ, et al. “Brain death” and organ retrieval: a cross-sectional survey of knowledge and concepts among health professionals. JAMA 1989;261:2205–2210.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Frank JI. Perceptions of death and brain death among fourth-year medical students: defining our challenge as neurologists [abstract]. Neurology 2001;56(Suppl 3):A429.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Molinari GF. Brain death, irreversible coma, and words doctors use. Neurology 1982;32:400–402.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Miedema F. Medical treatment after brain death: a case report and ethical analysis. J Clin Ethics 1991;2:50–52.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Cranford RE. Discontinuation of ventilation after brain death: policy should be balanced with concern for the family. Br Med J 1999;318:1754–1755.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH

    James L. Bernat MD (Professor of Medicine (Neurology)

Authors
  1. James L. Bernat MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James L. Bernat MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bernat, J.L. Ethical aspects of determining and communicating prognosis in critical care. Neurocrit Care 1, 107–117 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1385/NCC:1:1:107

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1385/NCC:1:1:107

Key Words

Search

Navigation