{"title":"ICU神经预后的时机。","authors":"Laura Faiver, Alexis Steinberg","doi":"10.1097/MCC.0000000000001241","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Neuroprognostication after acute brain injury (ABI) is complex. In this review, we examine the threats to accurate neuroprognostication, discuss strategies to mitigate the self-fulfilling prophecy, and how to approach the indeterminate prognosis.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The goal of neuroprognostication is to provide a timely and accurate prediction of a patient's neurologic outcome so treatment can proceed in accordance with a patient's values and preferences. Neuroprognostication should be delayed until at least 72 h after injury and/or only when the necessary prognostic data is available to avoid early withdraw life-sustaining treatment on patients who may otherwise survive with a good outcome. Clinicians should be aware of the limitations of available predictors and prognostic models, the role of flawed heuristics and the self-fulfilling prophecy, and the influence of surrogate decision-maker bias on end-of-life decisions.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>The approach to neuroprognostication after ABI should be systematic, use highly reliable multimodal data, and involve experts to minimize the risk of erroneous prediction and perpetuating the self-fulfilling prophecy. Even when such standards are rigorously upheld, the prognosis may be indeterminate. In such cases, clinicians should engage in shared decision-making with surrogates and consider the use of a time-limited trial.</p>","PeriodicalId":10851,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","volume":" ","pages":"155-161"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Timing of neuroprognostication in the ICU.\",\"authors\":\"Laura Faiver, Alexis Steinberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MCC.0000000000001241\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Neuroprognostication after acute brain injury (ABI) is complex. In this review, we examine the threats to accurate neuroprognostication, discuss strategies to mitigate the self-fulfilling prophecy, and how to approach the indeterminate prognosis.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The goal of neuroprognostication is to provide a timely and accurate prediction of a patient's neurologic outcome so treatment can proceed in accordance with a patient's values and preferences. Neuroprognostication should be delayed until at least 72 h after injury and/or only when the necessary prognostic data is available to avoid early withdraw life-sustaining treatment on patients who may otherwise survive with a good outcome. Clinicians should be aware of the limitations of available predictors and prognostic models, the role of flawed heuristics and the self-fulfilling prophecy, and the influence of surrogate decision-maker bias on end-of-life decisions.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>The approach to neuroprognostication after ABI should be systematic, use highly reliable multimodal data, and involve experts to minimize the risk of erroneous prediction and perpetuating the self-fulfilling prophecy. Even when such standards are rigorously upheld, the prognosis may be indeterminate. In such cases, clinicians should engage in shared decision-making with surrogates and consider the use of a time-limited trial.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10851,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Critical Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"155-161\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Critical Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000001241\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000001241","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Purpose of review: Neuroprognostication after acute brain injury (ABI) is complex. In this review, we examine the threats to accurate neuroprognostication, discuss strategies to mitigate the self-fulfilling prophecy, and how to approach the indeterminate prognosis.
Recent findings: The goal of neuroprognostication is to provide a timely and accurate prediction of a patient's neurologic outcome so treatment can proceed in accordance with a patient's values and preferences. Neuroprognostication should be delayed until at least 72 h after injury and/or only when the necessary prognostic data is available to avoid early withdraw life-sustaining treatment on patients who may otherwise survive with a good outcome. Clinicians should be aware of the limitations of available predictors and prognostic models, the role of flawed heuristics and the self-fulfilling prophecy, and the influence of surrogate decision-maker bias on end-of-life decisions.
Summary: The approach to neuroprognostication after ABI should be systematic, use highly reliable multimodal data, and involve experts to minimize the risk of erroneous prediction and perpetuating the self-fulfilling prophecy. Even when such standards are rigorously upheld, the prognosis may be indeterminate. In such cases, clinicians should engage in shared decision-making with surrogates and consider the use of a time-limited trial.
期刊介绍:
Current Opinion in Critical Care delivers a broad-based perspective on the most recent and most exciting developments in critical care from across the world. Published bimonthly and featuring thirteen key topics – including the respiratory system, neuroscience, trauma and infectious diseases – the journal’s renowned team of guest editors ensure a balanced, expert assessment of the recently published literature in each respective field with insightful editorials and on-the-mark invited reviews.