Keywords
Communication
Family
Perception
Preference
How to Cite
Copyright © | All rights reserved.
The journal holds the exclusive copyright for the publication of this article under the terms of Brazilian law 9610/98.
Partial reproduction
The use of parts of the texts, figures and questionnaire of the article is free, being mandatory the citation of the authors and journal.
Total reproduction
It is expressly prohibited and must be authorized by the journal.
Abstract
Objective: To describe perceptions and preferences of family members of adult patients in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) regarding communication of suspicion and opening of the brain death (BD) protocol. Method: Field study, exploratory, descriptive, observational, cross-sectional, quantitative and qualitative, using the logbook instruments, checklist and specific questionnaire. Five family members of patients with suspected BD in the ICU of a tertiary public hospital in the Federal District participated. Descriptive analysis of the communication routine about BD and the objective and content responses for the discursive ones was carried out. Results: Preferences and perceptions of bad news about suspicion and opening of an BD protocol were convergent. Families' predominant preferences: receive the news personally, with attention, eye contact, honesty and respect for the level of understanding, space to express understanding, with pauses and availability to clarify doubts. Conclusion: The compatibility between perceptions and preferences indicates that the communication routine in the study scenario has contemplated the families' preferences. The communication of suspicion and opening of the BD protocol is complex, serial and difficult to understand, with an emotional reaction of “shock”. It is recommended an interdisciplinary approach to families, use of bad news communication protocols and knowledge about family preferences.
References
BAILE WF, et al. SPIKES—A Six-Step Protocol for Delivering Bad News: Application to the Patient with Cancer. The Oncologist, 2000; 5: 302-311.
BARDIN L. Análise de conteúdo. Lisboa: Edições 70, 2004; 228p.
BASTOS BR, et al. Formação dos profissionais de saúde na comunicação de más notícias em cuidados paliativos oncológicos. Revista Brasileira de Cancerologia, 2016; 62(3): 263-266.
BRASIL. Ministério da Saúde. HumanizaSUS: Política Nacional de Humanização. Brasília, DF: Ministério da Saúde, 2004. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/publicacoes/humanizasus_2004.pdf. Acessado em: 21 de março de 2023.
BROWN VA, et al. Patient preferences for the delivery of bad news - the experience of a UK Cancer Centre. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl), 2011; 20(1): 56-61.
CALSAVARA VJ, et al. A comunicação de más notícias em saúde: aproximações com a abordagem centrada na pessoa. Revista da Abordagem Gestáltica: Phenomenological Studies, 2019; 25(1): 92-102.
CONSELHO FEDERAL DE MEDICINA. Resolução nº 2.173 de Novembro de 2017. Diário Oficial da União. Disponível em: https://saude.rs.gov.br/upload/arquivos/carga20171205/19140504-resolucao-do-conselho- federal-de-medicina-2173-2017.pdf. Acessado em: 28 de julho de 2021.
COX A, et al. Information needs and experiences: An audit of UK cancer patients. European Journal of Oncology Nursing, 2006; 10(4): 263–272.
DAVISON BJ, et al. Patients’ preferences for communicating a prostate cancer diagnosis and participating in medical decision-making. BJU International, 2004; 93(1): 47–51.
GOEBEL S e MEHDORN HM. Breaking Bad News to Patients with Intracranial Tumors: The Patients’ Perspective. World Neurosurgery, 2018; 1: e254-e262.
GOMES AN, et al. Perfil epidemiológico de notificações de Morte Encefálica. Research, Society and Development, 2020; 9(7): e862974662-e862974662.
KRIEGER T, et al. Cancer patients’ experiences and preferences when receiving bad news: a qualitative study. Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology, 2022: 23: 1-12.
MARÇOLA L, et al. Comunicação de más notícias em uma unidade de terapia intensiva neonatal: a avaliação feita pelos pais. Revista Paulista de Pediatria, 2020; 38: 1-6.
MENESES NP, et al. Comunicação de morte encefálica a familiares: levantamento com profissionais de saúde. Revista da SBPH, 2018; 21(1): 192-217.
MOURA KD, et al. Prevalência e fatores associados ao diagnóstico de morte encefálica. Revista de enfermagem da UFSM, 2021; 11(39): 1-15.
NUEVO AL e ROCHA TC. O que pode a psicologia hospitalar diante da morte encefálica na uti: um relato de experiência. Revista científica da escola estadual de saúde pública de Goiás, 2021; 7: e7000037- e7000037.
TORRES JC e LAGE AM. Manifestações psicológicas de familiares com pacientes em morte encefálica. Revista de Psicologia, 2013; 4(1): 38-51.
TRAIBER C e LAGO PM. Comunicação de más notícias em pediatria. Boletim Científico de Pediatria, 2012; 1(1): 3-6.
VON BLANCKENBURG P, et al. Assessing patients’ preferences for breaking Bad News according to the SPIKES-Protocol: the MABBAN scale. Patient Education and Counseling, 2020; 103(1): 1623-1629.
WOOD G, et al. Communication in the ICU: Holding a meeting with families and caregivers. UpToDate, 2021.