• Michael A De Georgia.
• University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States of America. Electronic address: michael.degeorgia@uhhospitals.org.
• J Crit Care. 2022 Jun 1; 69: 153997.

AbstractAccurately estimating the prognosis of brain injury patients can be difficult, especially early in their course. Prognostication is important because it largely determines the care level we provide, from aggressive treatment for patients we predict could have a good outcome to withdrawal of treatment for those we expect will have a poor outcome. Accurate prognostication is required for ethical decision-making. However, several studies have shown that prognostication is frequently inaccurate and variable. Overly optimistic prognostication can lead to false hope and futile care. Overly pessimistic prognostication can lead to therapeutic nihilism. Overlapping is the powerful effect that cognitive biases, in particular code status, can play in shaping our perceptions and the care level we provide. The presence of Do Not Resuscitate orders has been shown to be associated with increased mortality. Based on a comprehensive search of peer-reviewed journals using a wide range of key terms, including prognostication, critical illness, brain injury, cognitive bias, and code status, the following is a review of prognostic accuracy and the effect of code status on outcome. Because withdrawal of treatment is the most common cause of death in the ICU, a clearer understanding of this intersection of prognostication and code status is needed.Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.

12 keywords...

hide…