Does Calculated Prognostic Estimation Lead to Different Outcomes Compared With Experience-Based Prognostication in the ICU? A Systematic Review. (February 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Basile, Melissa; Press, Anne; Adia, Alexander C.; Wang, Jason J.; Herman, Saori Wendy; Lester, Janice; Parikh, Nisha; Hajizadeh, Negin
• Is Part Of: Critical care explorations. Volume 1:Number 2(2019)
• Publication Date: 2019-02
• Subjects: critical care -- decision-making -- end-of-life -- intensive care units -- life support -- prognostic estimates
• DOI: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000000004
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2639-8028

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: Little is known about the impact of providing calculator/guideline based versus clinical experiential-based prognostic estimates to patients/caregivers in the ICU. We sought to determine whether studies have compared types of prognostic estimation in the ICU and associations with outcomes. Data Sources: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, databases searched were PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. The search was run on January 4, 2016, and April 12, 2017. References for included articles were searched. Study Selection: Studies meeting the following criteria were included in the analysis: communication of prognostic estimates, a comparator group, and in the adult ICU setting. Data Extraction: Titles/abstracts were reviewed by two researchers. We identified 10, 704 articles of which 10 met inclusion criteria. Seven of the studies included estimates obtained from calculators/guidelines and three were based on subjective estimation wherein clinicians were asked to estimate prognosis based on experience. Only the seven using calculated/guideline based estimation were used for pooled analysis. Of these, one was a randomized trial, and six were nonrandomized before/after studies. All of the studies communicated the calculated/guideline-based estimates to the clinician. Two studies involved the communication of calculated prognostic estimates to the ICU physicians for all ICU patients. Four included identification of high-risk patients based on guidelines or review of historical local data which triggered a palliative care/ethics consultation, and one study included communication to physicians about guideline based likely outcomes for neurologic recovery for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors. The comparator arm in all studies was usual care without protocolized prognostication. Data Synthesis: Included studies were assessed for risk of bias. The most common outcomes measured were hospital mortality; do-not-resuscitate status; and medical ICU length of stay. In pooled analyses, there was an association between calculated/guideline based prognostic estimation and decreased medical ICU length of stay as well as increased do-not-resuscitate status, but no difference in hospital mortality. Conclusions: Protocolized assessment of calculator/guideline based prognosis in ICU patients is associated with decreased medical ICU length of stay and increased do-not-resuscitate status but does not have a significant effect on mortality. Future studies should explore how communicating these estimates to physicians changes behaviors including communication to patients/families and whether calculator/guideline based prognostication is associated with improved patient and family rated outcomes. Abstract : Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.