Background: Increasing age is accompanied by a greater need for medical decisions, due in part to age-related increases in chronic disease and disability. In later life, medical decisions about end-of-life care in particular are likely. However, a significant percentage of these decisions are made by surrogate decision-makers. "Surrogates" are most often instructed to use the substituted judgment standard and make decisions that patients would choose if they were able. Whether surrogates make decisions that adequately match patients' preferences is a concern. Surrogates are generally poor predictors of patient preferences (Shalowitz et al., 2006). However, no critical review of this literature has yet been published.
Method: A critical review was conducted to summarise and provide a methodological critique of 25 studies.
Results: These studies generally concur that patient-surrogate agreement on medical decisions is poor. However, this conclusion is qualified by inconsistencies in methodological quality and the potentially limited generalisability of these findings.
Conclusions: Clinical research incorporating standardised hypothetical decision-making protocols, as well as triangulated data collection methods, would bolster confidence in future findings. Investigations prioritising the surrogate decision-making process, rather than solely the decisional outcome, could better identify ways to improve the decision-making process for incapacitated patients.
Keywords: end of life; medical decision-making; surrogate decision-making; treatment decisions.
© 2020 The International Association of Applied Psychology.