Clinical PotpourriThe ability of intensive care unit physicians to estimate long-term prognosis in survivors of critical illness
Introduction
The ICU physician is increasingly involved in decision making concerning follow up and post-ICU treatment of patients who have survived ICU care [1]. To do so, it is important to identify patients with an increased risk of poor outcome at the time of ICU discharge [2], [3]. Currently prognoses at ICU discharge are largely based on the intuitive insight of the treating physicians. Based on their clinical expertise, they incorporate a patient's condition before ICU admission (medical history, functional status, quality of life and social environment) and the events during hospital and ICU stay into a holistic prognosis for the patient. This contrasts with the ‘objective’ multivariable prediction models typically used in ICU research, which incorporate a patient's vital status, age and pre-existing comorbidities at ICU admission. However, these models typically do not incorporate prior functional status or quality of life [4], [5], and are mostly focused on prediction of short-term mortality rather than long-term functional outcomes.
Because of these omissions, researchers have tried to validate the ICU physicians' estimations of the risk of poor ICU outcomes [6], [7]. And they directly compared the prognostic performance of physicians' prognoses to those of statistical models [8], [9], [10]. A systematic review of such studies showed that at ICU admission, physicians were more accurate in discriminating patients who would die in comparison to contemporary statistical models [10]. However, thus far, only in the domain of the neurologically critically ill were the studies focused on predicting functional status as outcome of interest [11]. Studies in the general ICU population focused on survival alone [8], [12]. As a result, it is unknown whether ICU physicians are also accurate at predicting survival in conjunction with quality of life, at the moment a general ICU patient is discharged from the ICU.
So, with the increasing attention for the long-term functional consequences of ICU care in all critically ill patients [13], [14], prognostic estimations made at ICU discharge should accurately reflect both the probability of long-term survival and that of an adequate health related quality of life (HRQoL) [12], [13]. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the ability of physicians to accurately prognosticate survivors of critical illness upon ICU discharge with respect to their long-term survival and HRQoL.
Section snippets
Study design, setting and participants
This study was designed as a cohort study using data prospectively collected for the purpose of benchmarking and follow-up data for quality of care evaluation. The study was performed at the ICU of the University Medical Center Utrecht. This ICU's population is a mix of medical-surgical critically ill patients, including those after major cardiac, neurological (trauma, vascular and oncology related), gastro-intestinal and transplant surgery, and most types of medical patients. We included ICU
Study population
Among 1676 unique patients enrolled during the inclusion period having a length of stay over 48 h, 1419 (84.7%) survived their ICU stay. Of these eligible patients, three were excluded because of a missing Sabadell score. Seventeen patients were considered lost to follow-up because they were not registered in the Dutch municipal registry, or because there was no available address. This left 1399 patients to be included in this study (fig. 1).
In the total study population, the median ICU length
Discussion
We investigated to what extent the physician's estimation of a patient's prognosis at ICU discharge was in accordance with observed long-term outcomes, and found that ICU physicians performed only moderately. Moreover, when studying the predictive performance for survival and HRQoL combined, the discriminatory performance was poor. One third of all ICU survivors experienced an outcome which was particularly worse than what was expected by the ICU physician.
Interestingly, in patients whom the
Conclusions
The subjective prognosis estimated by ICU physicians incorrectly predicted long-term survival and HRQoL in one out of three ICU patients, regardless of physician experience. This suggests that ICU physicians are currently unable to perform sufficiently reliable risk stratifications in survivors of critical illness with respect to long-term patient-centered outcomes.
The following are the supplementary data related to this article.
Ethical Approval and Consent to participate
The institutional review board (IRB) of the University Medical Center Utrecht approved the study protocol and waived the need for informed consent when working with anonymised patient and follow-up data (UMC Utrecht IRB protocol number 10/006).
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Availability of supporting data
A minimal version of this study's research datasets are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request, which also takes into account Dutch Law and good scientific practice for sharing anonymised biomedical patient data.
Competing interests statement
This study was supported by the NutsOhra Foundation, project nr 1404–013, entitled “Prognostics and decision making in prolonged intensive care treatment”. Additionally, all authors were appointed as researchers and/or medical doctors by the University Medical Center Utrecht, the academic hospital where this study was performed. Neither the NutsOhra foundation, nor the hospital had influence on any part of the conducting or writing of this study. On behalf of all authors, the corresponding
Funding
This study was supported by the NutsOhra Foundation, project nr 1404-013, entitled “Prognostics and decision making in prolonged intensive care treatment”.
Authors' contributions
IWS contributed to data collection, carried out the data analysis and drafted the manuscript. IWS and OC conceived the study. OC contributed to data collection. DL participated in the study's design and coordination and helped to draft the manuscript. AS contributed to data collection. JD participated in the drafting of the manuscript. DD participated in the drafting of the manuscript and contributed to data collection. LP participated in the data analysis, advised on the methodological design
Acknowledgements
Not applicable.
References (32)
- et al.
Accuracy of predictions of survival at admission to the intensive care unit
J Crit Care
(2001) - et al.
Review: a gentle introduction to imputation of missing values
J Clin Epidemiol
(2006) - et al.
Early prediction of new-onset physical disability after intensive care unit stay: a preliminary instrument
Crit Care
(2014) - et al.
Functional status after intensive care: a challenge for rehabilitation professionals to improve outcome
J Rehabil Med
(2009) - et al.
Quality of life in adult survivors of critical illness: a systematic review of the literature
Intensive Care Med
(2005) - et al.
Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) IV: hospital mortality assessment for today's critically ill patients
Crit Care Med
(2006) - et al.
SAPS 3—from evaluation of the patient to evaluation of the intensive care unit. Part 2: development of a prognostic model for hospital mortality at ICU admission
Intensive Care Med
(2005) - et al.
Foreseeing the future: predicting 6 month outcomes from events in the medical intensive care unit (MICU)
Am J Resp Crit Care
(2011) - et al.
Comparison of physician prediction with 2 prognostic scoring systems in predicting 2-year mortality after intensive care admission: a linked-data cohort study
J Crit Care
(2012) - et al.
Outcome prediction in critical care: physicians' prognoses vs. scoring systems
Eur J Anaesthesiol
(2004)
Mortality predictions in the intensive care unit: comparing physicians with scoring systems
Crit Care Med
Outcome prediction in mechanically ventilated neurologic patients by junior neurointensivists
Neurology
Predicting mortality in intensive care unit survivors using a subjective scoring system
Crit Care
Quality of life after intensive care: a systematic review of the literature
Crit Care Med
Long-term outcomes of ICU treatment
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd
The SOFA (sepsis-related organ failure assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure. On behalf of the working group on sepsis-related problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine
Intensive Care Med
Cited by (23)
Using long-term predicted Quality of Life in ICU clinical practice to prepare patients for life post-ICU: A feasibility study
2022, Journal of Critical CareCitation Excerpt :Seven patients died during their ICU admission after being identified as expected survivors and a measurement had taken place. This is in accordance with prior literature, which reported that an overoptimistic prognosis did not match the outcome in a third of patients [6]. Clinicians in this study all acknowledged that health deterioration was a part of ICU care, and did not think they should not have included these patients.
On predictions in critical care: The individual prognostication fallacy in elderly patients
2021, Journal of Critical CareCitation Excerpt :Approximately 1 in 6 patients who were unanimously predicted to die actually survived [15]. Similar problems with the quality of heuristic outcome predictions have been reported in other settings [16,17]. To overcome the flaws of personal judgement and improve the accuracy of prognostication, more structured approaches to the collection and analysis of data have been developed in the past [18].
Are providers overconfident in predicting outcome after cardiac arrest?
2020, ResuscitationCitation Excerpt :Our results parallel those in general critical care patients as well. One study asked providers to predict long-term prognosis of general ICU patients by asking them to choose from four options (good prognosis to death) and showed that providers were wrong a third of the time.40 Similar to our work, most errors were overly optimistic predictions and providers' experience did not affect results.40
Reprint of: Intensive care for old patients
2020, Journal Europeen des Urgences et de ReanimationIntensive care for old patients
2020, Bulletin de l'Academie Nationale de Medecine