Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Practice Guideline
. 2016 Jan;44(1):188-201.
doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001396.

Shared Decision Making in ICUs: An American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society Policy Statement

Affiliations
Practice Guideline

Shared Decision Making in ICUs: An American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society Policy Statement

Alexander A Kon et al. Crit Care Med. 2016 Jan.

Abstract

Objectives: Shared decision making is endorsed by critical care organizations; however, there remains confusion about what shared decision making is, when it should be used, and approaches to promote partnerships in treatment decisions. The purpose of this statement is to define shared decision making, recommend when shared decision making should be used, identify the range of ethically acceptable decision-making models, and present important communication skills.

Design: The American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society Ethics Committees reviewed empirical research and normative analyses published in peer-reviewed journals to generate recommendations. Recommendations approved by consensus of the full Ethics Committees of American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society were included in the statement.

Main results: Six recommendations were endorsed: 1) DEFINITION: Shared decision making is a collaborative process that allows patients, or their surrogates, and clinicians to make healthcare decisions together, taking into account the best scientific evidence available, as well as the patient's values, goals, and preferences. 2) Clinicians should engage in a shared decision making process to define overall goals of care (including decisions regarding limiting or withdrawing life-prolonging interventions) and when making major treatment decisions that may be affected by personal values, goals, and preferences. 3) Clinicians should use as their "default" approach a shared decision making process that includes three main elements: information exchange, deliberation, and making a treatment decision. 4) A wide range of decision-making approaches are ethically supportable, including patient- or surrogate-directed and clinician-directed models. Clinicians should tailor the decision-making process based on the preferences of the patient or surrogate. 5) Clinicians should be trained in communication skills. 6) Research is needed to evaluate decision-making strategies.

Conclusions: Patient and surrogate preferences for decision-making roles regarding value-laden choices range from preferring to exercise significant authority to ceding such authority to providers. Clinicians should adapt the decision-making model to the needs and preferences of the patient or surrogate.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Potential conflicts of interest for members of the writing group were reviewed based on ACCM standard operating procedure. No potential conflicts relating to the content of this statement were identified. Potential conflicts disclosed were:

Dr. Kon is an Associate Editor for AJOB Empirical Research and receives funding from the Greenwall Foundation's Faculty Scholars in Bioethics program. Dr. Davidson holds a business license for a private education company, however has earned no income related to the topic presented in this statement. She also provides research-related volunteer services to AACN and STTI on topics not related to those presented in this statement. Dr. Morrison is a member of a data monitoring committee for Glaxo Smith Klein on research not related to the topics covered in this statement, is a speaker and committee member of the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities, and is an editorial board member for the American Academy of Pediatrics. Dr. Danis has professional relationships with the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities and the Society of General Internal Medicine not directly related to the topics covered in this statement. Dr. White receives grant funding from the Greenwall Foundation and from the Moore Foundation.

References

    1. Carlet J, Thijs LG, Antonelli M, et al. Challenges in end-of-life care in the ICU. Statement of the 5th International Consensus Conference in Critical Care: Brussels, Belgium, April 2003. Intensive Care Med. 2004;30(5):770–784. - PubMed
    1. Thompson BT, Cox PN, Antonelli M, et al. Challenges in end-of-life care in the ICU: statement of the 5th International Consensus Conference in Critical Care: Brussels, Belgium, April 2003: executive summary. Crit Care Med. 2004;32(8):1781–1784. - PubMed
    1. Davidson JE, Powers K, Hedayat KM, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for support of the family in the patient-centered intensive care unit: American College of Critical Care Medicine Task Force 2004–2005. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(2):605–622. - PubMed
    1. Lanken PN, Terry PB, Delisser HM, et al. An official American Thoracic Society clinical policy statement: palliative care for patients with respiratory diseases and critical illnesses. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2008;177(8):912–927. - PubMed
    1. Gries CJ, Engelberg RA, Kross EK, et al. Predictors of symptoms of posttraumatic stress and depression in family members after patient death in the ICU. Chest. 2010;137(2):280–287. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types