Systematic Review: The Effect on Surrogates of Making Treatment Decisions for Others
Publication: Annals of Internal Medicine
Volume 154, Number 5
Submit a Comment
Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest. Comments are moderated. Please see our information for authorsregarding comments on an Annals publication.
Abstract
Background:
Clinical practice relies on surrogates to make or help to make treatment decisions for incapacitated adults; however, the effect of this practice on surrogates has not been evaluated.
Purpose:
To assess the effect on surrogates of making treatment decisions for adults who cannot make their own decisions.
Data Sources:
Empirical studies published in English and listed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, BIOETHICSLINE, PsycINFO, or Scopus before 1 July 2010.
Study Selection:
Eligible studies provided quantitative or qualitative empirical data, by evaluating surrogates, regarding the effect on surrogates of making treatment decisions for an incapacitated adult.
Data Extraction:
Information on study location, number and type of surrogates, timing of data collection, type of decisions, patient setting, methods, main findings, and limitations.
Data Synthesis:
40 studies, 29 using qualitative and 11 using quantitative methods, provided data on 2854 surrogates, more than one half of whom were family members of the patient. Most surrogates were surveyed several months to years after making treatment decisions, the majority of which were end-of-life decisions. The quantitative studies found that at least one third of surrogates experienced a negative emotional burden as the result of making treatment decisions. The qualitative studies reported that many or most surrogates experienced negative emotional burden. The negative effects on surrogates were often substantial and typically lasted months or, in some cases, years. The most common negative effects cited by surrogates were stress, guilt over the decisions they made, and doubt regarding whether they had made the right decisions. Nine of the 40 studies also reported beneficial effects on a few surrogates, the most common of which were supporting the patient and feeling a sense of satisfaction. Knowing which treatment is consistent with the patient's preferences was frequently cited as reducing the negative effect on surrogates.
Limitations:
Thirty-two of the 40 articles reported data collected in the United States. Because the study populations were relatively homogenous, it is unclear whether the findings apply to other groups. In some cases, the effect of making treatment decisions could not be isolated from that of other stressors, such as grief or prognostic uncertainty. Nine of the studies had a response rate less than 50%, and 9 did not report a response rate. Many of the studies had a substantial interval between the treatment decisions and data collection.
Conclusion:
Making treatment decisions has a negative emotional effect on at least one third of surrogates, which is often substantial and typically lasts months (or sometimes years). Future research should evaluate ways to reduce this burden, including methods to identify which treatment options are consistent with the patient's preferences.
Primary Funding Source:
National Institutes of Health.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Raymont V, Bingley W, Buchanan A, David AS, Hayward P, Wessely S, et al. Prevalence of mental incapacity in medical inpatients and associated risk factors: cross-sectional study. Lancet. 2004;364:1421-7. [PMID: 15488217]
2.
Silveira MJ, Kim SY, Langa KM. Advance directives and outcomes of surrogate decision making before death. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1211-8. [PMID: 20357283]
3.
Smedira NG, Evans BH, Grais LS, Cohen NH, Lo B, Cooke M, et al. Withholding and withdrawal of life support from the critically ill. N Engl J Med. 1990;322:309-15. [PMID: 2296273]
4.
Prendergast TJ, Claessens MT, Luce JM. A national survey of end-of-life care for critically ill patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1998;158:1163-7. [PMID: 9769276]
5.
Buchanan AE, Brock DW. Deciding for Others: The Ethics of Surrogate Decision Making. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge Univ Pr; 1989.
6.
Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 6th ed. New York: Oxford Univ Pr; 2009.
7.
Meeker MA, Jezewski MA. Family decision making at end of life. Palliat Support Care. 2005;3:131-42. [PMID: 16594438]
8.
Wiegand DL. Families and withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy: state of the science. J Fam Nurs. 2006;12:165-84. [PMID: 16621784]
9.
Giacomini M, Cook D, DeJean D. Life support decision making in critical care: Identifying and appraising the qualitative research evidence. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:1475-82. [PMID: 19242328]
10.
Meeker MA, Jezewski MA. Metasynthesis: withdrawing life-sustaining treatments: the experience of family decision-makers. J Clin Nurs. 2009;18:163-73. [PMID: 19120746]
11.
Pochard F, Azoulay E, Chevret S, Lemaire F, Hubert P, Canoui P, et al; French FAMIREA Group. Symptoms of anxiety and depression in family members of intensive care unit patients: ethical hypothesis regarding decision-making capacity. Crit Care Med. 2001;29:1893-7. [PMID: 11588447]
12.
Mead GE, O'Keeffe ST, Jack CI, Maèstri-Banks AM, Playfer JR, Lye M. What factors influence patient preferences regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation? J R Coll Physicians Lond. 1995;29:295-8. [PMID: 7473323]
13.
Singer PA, Martin DK, Lavery JV, Thiel EC, Kelner M, Mendelssohn DC. Reconceptualizing advance care planning from the patient's perspective. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:879-84. [PMID: 9570174]
14.
Terry PB, Vettese M, Song J, Forman J, Haller KB, Miller DJ, et al. End-of-life decision making: when patients and surrogates disagree. J Clin Ethics. 1999;10:286-93. [PMID: 10791278]
15.
Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Jones D, Young B, Sutton A. Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10:45-53. [PMID: 15667704]
16.
Harden A, Brunton G, Fletcher A, Oakley A. Teenage pregnancy and social disadvantage: systematic review integrating controlled trials and qualitative studies. BMJ. 2009;339:b4254. [PMID: 19910400]
17.
Popay J, Rogers A, Williams G. Rationale and standards for the systematic review of qualitative literature in health services research. Qual Health Res. 1998;8:341-51. [PMID: 10558335]
18.
Mays N, Pope C. Qualitative research in health care. Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ. 2000;320:50-2. [PMID: 10617534]
19.
Tilden VP, Tolle SW, Garland MJ, Nelson CA. Decisions about life-sustaining treatment. Impact of physicians' behaviors on the family. Arch Intern Med. 1995;155:633-8. [PMID: 7887760]
20.
Silberfeld M, Grundstein-Amado R, Stephens D, Deber R. Family and physicians' views of surrogate decision-making: the roles and how to choose. Int Psychogeriatr. 1996;8:589-96. [PMID: 9147172]
21.
Swigart V, Lidz C, Butterworth V, Arnold R. Letting go: family willingness to forgo life support. Heart Lung. 1996;25:483-94. [PMID: 8950128]
22.
Jacobson JA, Francis LP, Battin MP, Green GJ, Grammes C, VanRiper J, et al. Dialogue to action: lessons learned from some family members of deceased patients at an interactive program in seven Utah hospitals. J Clin Ethics. 1997;8:359-71. [PMID: 9503086]
23.
Jacob DA. Family members' experiences with decision making for incompetent patients in the ICU: a qualitative study. Am J Crit Care. 1998;7:30-6. [PMID: 9429681]
24.
Jeffers BR. The surrogate's experience during treatment decision-making. Medsurg Nurs. 1998;7:357-63. [PMID: 10036440]
25.
Penrod J, Dellasega C, Strang VR, Neufeld A, Nolan M. Caregivers' experiences in making placement decisions. West J Nurs Res. 1998;20:706-22. [PMID: 9842288]
26.
Mayer SA, Kossoff SB. Withdrawal of life support in the neurological intensive care unit. Neurology. 1999;52:1602-9. [PMID: 10331685]
27.
Tilden VP, Tolle SW, Nelson CA, Thompson M, Eggman SC. Family decision making in foregoing life-extending treatments. J Fam Nurs. 1999;5:426-442.
28.
Wackerbarth S. Modeling a dynamic decision process: supporting the decisions of caregivers of family members with dementia. Qual Health Res. 1999;9:294-314.
29.
Forbes S, Bern-Klug M, Gessert C. End-of-life decision making for nursing home residents with dementia. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2000;32:251-8. [PMID: 12462819]
30.
Robinson EM. Wives' struggle in living through treatment decisions for husbands with advanced Alzheimer's disease. J Nurs Law. 2000;7:21-30. [PMID: 12545984]
31.
Abbott KH, Sago JG, Breen CM, Abernethy AP, Tulsky JA. Families looking back: one year after discussion of withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining support. Crit Care Med. 2001;29:197-201. [PMID: 11176185]
32.
Butcher HK, Holkup PA, Park M, Maas M. Thematic analysis of the experience of making a decision to place a family member with Alzheimer's disease in a special care unit. Res Nurs Health. 2001;24:470-80. [PMID: 11746076]
33.
Heyland DK, Tranmer JE; Kingston General Hospital ICU Research Working Group. Measuring family satisfaction with care in the intensive care unit: the development of a questionnaire and preliminary results. J Crit Care. 2001;16:142-9. [PMID: 11815899]
34.
Tilden VP, Tolle SW, Nelson CA, Fields J. Family decision-making to withdraw life-sustaining treatments from hospitalized patients. Nurs Res. 2001;50:105-15. [PMID: 11302290]
35.
Norton SA, Tilden VP, Tolle SW, Nelson CA, Eggman ST. Life support withdrawal: communication and conflict. Am J Crit Care. 2003;12:548-55. [PMID: 14619361]
36.
Kirchhoff KT, Walker L, Hutton A, Spuhler V, Cole BV, Clemmer T. The vortex: families' experiences with death in the intensive care unit. Am J Crit Care. 2002;11:200-9. [PMID: 12022483]
37.
Hayes CM. Surrogate decision-making to end life-sustaining treatments for incapacitated adults. J Hospice Palliative Nursing. 2003;5:91-102.
38.
Heyland DK, Cook DJ, Rocker GM, Dodek PM, Kutsogiannis DJ, Peters S, et al. Decision-making in the ICU: perspectives of the substitute decision-maker. Intensive Care Med. 2003;29:75-82. [PMID: 12528026]
39.
Meeker MA. Family surrogate decision making at the end of life: seeing them through with care and respect. Qual Health Res. 2004;14:204-25. [PMID: 14768458]
40.
Hansen L, Archbold PG, Stewart B, Westfall UB, Ganzini L. Family caregivers making life-sustaining treatment decisions: factors associated with role strain and ease. J Gerontol Nurs. 2005;31:28-35. [PMID: 16320432]
41.
Hansen L, Archbold PG, Stewart BJ. Role strain and ease in decision-making to withdraw or withhold life support for elderly relatives. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2004;36:233-8. [PMID: 15495492]
42.
Azoulay E, Pochard F, Kentish-Barnes N, Chevret S, Aboab J, Adrie C, et al; FAMIREA Study Group. Risk of post-traumatic stress symptoms in family members of intensive care unit patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005;171:987-94. [PMID: 15665319]
43.
Caron C, Griffith J, Arcand M. End-of-life decision making in dementia. The perspective of family caregivers. Dementia. 2005;4:113-36.
44.
Caron C, Griffith J, Arcand M. Decision making at the end of life in dementia: how family caregivers perceive their interactions with health are providers in long-term-care settings. J Appl Gerontol. 2005;24:231-47.
45.
Chambers-Evans J, Carnevale FA. Dawning of awareness: the experience of surrogate decision making at the end of life. J Clin Ethics. 2005;16:28-45. [PMID: 15915844]
46.
Davis BA, Burns J, Rezac D, Dillard B, Kieffner E, Gargus J, et al. Family stress and advance directives: a comparative study. J Hospice Palliative Nursing. 2005;7:219-227.
47.
Sood JR, Fisher CB, Sulmasy DP. Religious coping and mental health outcomes in family members making DNR decisions. In: Piedmont RL, eds. Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion. Vol 16. Boston: Brill; 2006:221-43.
48.
Colclough YY, Young HM. Decision making at end of life among Japanese American families. J Fam Nurs. 2007;13:201-25. [PMID: 17452603]
49.
Limerick MH. The process used by surrogate decision makers to withhold and withdraw life-sustaining measures in an intensive care environment. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2007;34:331-9. [PMID: 17573297]
50.
Vig EK, Starks H, Taylor JS, Hopley EK, Fryer-Edwards K. Surviving surrogate decision-making: what helps and hampers the experience of making medical decisions for others. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22:1274-9. [PMID: 17619223]
51.
Braun UK, Beyth RJ, Ford ME, McCullough LB. Voices of African American, Caucasian, and Hispanic surrogates on the burdens of end-of-life decision making. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23:267-74. [PMID: 18172738]
52.
Gries CJ, Curtis JR, Wall RJ, Engelberg RA. Family member satisfaction with end-of-life decision making in the ICU. Chest. 2008;133:704-12. [PMID: 18198256]
53.
Handy CM, Sulmasy DP, Merkel CK, Ury WA. The surrogate's experience in authorizing a do not resuscitate order. Palliat Support Care. 2008;6:13-9. [PMID: 18282340]
54.
Wiegand D. In their own time: the family experience during the process of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy. J Palliat Med. 2008;11:1115-21. [PMID: 18980452]
55.
Dreyer A, Forde R, Nortvedt P. Autonomy at the end of life: life-prolonging treatment in nursing homes—relatives' role in the decision-making process. J Med Ethics. 2009;35:672-7. [PMID: 19880703]
56.
Radwany S, Albanese T, Clough L, Sims L, Mason H, Jahangiri S. End-of-life decision making and emotional burden: placing family meetings in context. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2009;26:376-83. [PMID: 19571324]
57.
Buckey JW, Abell N. Life-sustaining treatment decisions: a social work response to meet needs of health care surrogates. J Soc Work End Life Palliat Care. 2010;6:27-50. [PMID: 20544476]
58.
Gries CJ, Engelberg RA, Kross EK, Zatzick D, Nielsen EL, Downey L, et al. Predictors of symptoms of posttraumatic stress and depression in family members after patient death in the ICU. Chest. 2010;137:280-7. [PMID: 19762549]
59.
Fagerlin A, Schneider CE. Enough. The failure of the living will. Hastings Cent Rep. 2004;34:30-42. [PMID: 15156835]
60.
Green MJ, Levi BH. Development of an interactive computer program for advance care planning. Health Expect. 2009;12:60-9. [PMID: 18823445]
61.
Martin DK, Emanuel LL, Singer PA. Planning for the end of life. Lancet. 2000;356:1672-6. [PMID: 11089839]
62.
Sehgal A, Galbraith A, Chesney M, Schoenfeld P, Charles G, Lo B. How strictly do dialysis patients want their advance directives followed? JAMA. 1992;267:59-63. [PMID: 1489360]
63.
Puchalski CM, Zhong Z, Jacobs MM, Fox E, Lynn J, Harrold J, et al. Patients who want their family and physician to make resuscitation decisions for them: observations from SUPPORT and HELP. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment. Hospitalized Elderly Longitudinal Project. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000;48:S84-90. [PMID: 10809461]
64.
Lynn J. Why I don't have a living will. Law Med Health Care. 1991;19:101-4. [PMID: 1895759]
65.
Curtis JR, White DB. Practical guidance for evidence-based ICU family conferences. Chest. 2008;134:835-43. [PMID: 18842916]
66.
Thompson BT, Cox PN, Antonelli M, Carlet JM, Cassell J, Hill NS, et al; American Thoracic Society. 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;32:1781-4. [PMID: 15286559]
67.
Carlet J, Thijs LG, Antonelli M, Cassell J, Cox P, Hill N, 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;30:770-84. [PMID: 15098087]
68.
Levy MM. Shared decision-making in the ICU: entering a new era [Editorial]. Crit Care Med. 2004;32:1966-8. [PMID: 15343031]
69.
Ruark JE, Raffin TA. Initiating and withdrawing life support. Principles and practice in adult medicine. N Engl J Med. 1988;318:25-30. [PMID: 3275889]
70.
Rothchild E. Family dynamics in end-of-life treatment decisions. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1994;16:251-8. [PMID: 7926701]
71.
Coppola KM, Ditto PH, Danks JH, Smucker WD. Accuracy of primary care and hospital-based physicians' predictions of elderly outpatients' treatment preferences with and without advance directives. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:431-40. [PMID: 11176769]
72.
Ouslander JG, Tymchuk AJ, Rahbar B. Health care decisions among elderly long-term care residents and their potential proxies. Arch Intern Med. 1989;149:1367-72. [PMID: 2499292]
73.
Seckler AB, Meier DE, Mulvihill M, Paris BE. Substituted judgment: how accurate are proxy predictions? Ann Intern Med. 1991;115:92-8. [PMID: 2058868]
74.
Rid A, Wendler D. Can we improve treatment decision-making for incapacitated patients? Hastings Cent Rep. 2010;40:36-45. [PMID: 20964162]
Comments
Sign In to Submit A CommentInformation & Authors
Information
Published In
Annals of Internal Medicine
Volume 154 • Number 5 • 1 March 2011
Pages: 336 - 346
History
Published online: 1 March 2011
Published in issue: 1 March 2011
Keywords
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. For an editable text file, please select Medlars format which will download as a .txt file. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.
Download article citation data for:
Systematic Review: The Effect on Surrogates of Making Treatment Decisions for Others. Ann Intern Med.2011;154:336-346. [Epub 1 March 2011]. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-154-5-201103010-00008
Systematic Review: The Effect on Surrogates of Making Treatment Decisions for Others. Ann Intern Med.2011;154:336-346. [Epub 1 March 2011]. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-154-5-201103010-00008
View More
Login Options:
Purchase
You will be redirected to acponline.org to sign-in to Annals to complete your purchase.
Access to EPUBs and PDFs for FREE Annals content requires users to be registered and logged in. A subscription is not required. You can create a free account below or from the following link. You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals. If you are accessing the Free Annals content via your institution's access, registration is not required.
Create your Free Account
You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals.
Mitigating Surrogate Burden
Wendler and Rid, in their important systemic review, highlight an under-appreciated phenomenon in clinical care. Surrogates operate under significant stress which affects the quality of their decisions as well as the quality of their relationships with their ill relatives and other family members.
Many families that clinicians label as "difficult" merely have their capacity to cope overwhelmed by these stressors. An important strategy for addressing these challenging families and their decisions that often seem unreasonable is to explicitly recognize and validate surrogates' emotional burdens. Often, this step alone is sufficient to mitigate incapacitating loads, and is a good step towards enriching the therapeutic relationship and for introducing other supports, such as palliative care, pastoral care, and social work.
Conflict of Interest:
None declared
Re:Mitigating Surrogate Burden
The authors have discussed an issue that I have observed numerous times in the past 40 years which is at times compounded by the use hospitalists and referral to tertiary care centers. First, physicians often forget to use the term "we": "WE are going to work together to achieve the best possible outcome" or "We will look at the best possible treatments." This communicates that the patient, the family and doctor are a team, and the surrogate does not have to work through the problem alone. Second the clinician should not be afraid to state that he/she has made a clinical decision that the current medical treatment is only prolonging a dying process and that it is the PHYSICIAN'S decision that treatment should be stopped, etc. The PHYSICIAN should then ask the surrogate to discuss the PHYSICIAN'S decision to stop treatment with other family members and then meet for a decision making session with all concerned.
Conflict of Interest:
None declared
Physician Role in End of Life Decisions
This paper by Wendler and Rid and the January 11, 2011 "Frontline" documentary "Facing Death" on PBS prompted the following comments on the physician's role in medical decision making.
The Annals paper and the references cited (7-10) as to how decisions were made by surrogates mentioned discussions with the health care staff but did not indicate what specific information was provided by thephysicians. The documentary "Facing Death" pre-sented several end of life situations in which family members alone or with input from the patient were asked to decide about further therapy after discussion of the prognosis and treatment options with the health care staff. In none of the scenarios was there a recommendation by a physician as to what he felt was the best course of action based on his knowledge of the patient's illness, probable prognosis, any advanced directive, and the expressed feelings of family members.
After practicing Internal Medicine and Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine for forty-five years it was evident to me that patients are best served when a trusted physician makes her best recommendation for treatment,or withdrawing treatment,after explaining all of the options and consequences. This maintains the decision-maker's autonomy to accept or reject the physician's recommendation. This, in my experience, removed much of the stress placed on patients and surrogates when asked to make decisions that are difficult enough for the physician.
Advanced directives, when available, are very helpful in making recommendations but the decision as to when to (or not to)institute those directives can be very challenging, even with the aid of an ethics committee.
Even in the exteme situation where life support is discontinued due to "futility" in spite of surro- gates initial decision to the contrary, family members later usually accepted the decision with equanimity.
Conflict of Interest:
None declared