Information de reference pour ce titreAccession Number: | 00004495-199704000-00017.
|
Author: | Teno, Joan MD, MS *; Lynn, Joanne MD *; Wenger, Neil MD +; Phillips, Russell S. MD ++; Murphy, Donald P MD [S]; Connors, Alfred F Jr MD [P]; Desbiens, Norman MD **; Fulkerson, William MD ; Bellamy, Paul MD +; Knaus, William A MD ; SUPPORT Investigators
|
Institution: | From the (*) Center to Improve Care of the Dying, The George Washington University, Washington, DC; (+)University of California at Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA;(++) Beth Israel Hospital, Boston, MA; ([S])St. Luke's Presbyterian Hospital, Denver CO; ([P]) MetroHealth Medical Center, Cleveland, OH; (**)Marshfield Clinic and Marshfield Medical Research Foundation, Marshfield, WI;( ) Duke University Hospital, Durham, NC; and( ) The Department of Health Evaluation Sciences, The University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA
|
Title: | Advance Directives for Seriously Ill Hospitalized Patients: Effectiveness with the Patient Self-Determination Act and the SUPPORT Intervention.[Article]
|
Source: | Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 45(4):500-507, April 1997.
|
Abstract: | OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of written advance directives (ADs) in the care of seriously ill, hospitalized patients. In particular, to conduct an assessment after ADs were promoted by the Patient Self-Determination Act(PSDA) and enhanced by the effort to improve decision-making in the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments(SUPPORT), focusing upon the impact of ADs on decision-making about resuscitation.
DESIGN: Observational cohort study conducted for 2 years before (PRE) and for 2 years after (POST) the PSDA, with a randomized, controlled trial of an additional intervention to improve decision-making after the PSDA(POST+SUPPORT).
SETTING: Five teaching hospitals in the United States
PATIENTS: A total of 9105 seriously ill patients treated in five teaching hospitals.
INTERVENTIONS: The PSDA mandated patient education about ADs at hospital entry and documentation of ADs in the medical record. The SUPPORT intervention, in addition, provided a nurse to facilitate communication among patients, surrogates, and physicians about preferences for and outcomes of treatment alternatives and, when clinically appropriate, to encourage completion and utilization of ADs.
MEASUREMENTS: Interviews were conducted with patients, surrogates, and attending physicians about awareness, completion, and impact of ADs. Medical records were reviewed for discussion about preferences concerning resuscitation, timing and writing of "Do Not Resuscitate" (DNR) orders, evidence of ADs, and the use or forgoing of resuscitation at the time of death.
RESULTS: In the three cohorts, PRE, POST, and POST+SUPPORT, average was 63. One-quarter of patients died during the initial hospitalization, one-half were dead within 6 months, and one-half were unconscious for their last 3 days. Before the PSDA (PRE), 62% were familiar with a living will, and 21% had an AD. These rates were similar for the POST and POST+SUPPORT cohorts. Just 36 (6%) of these directives were mentioned in the medical records for PRE, but a stable 35% were documented for POST, and POST + SUPPORT had an increasing rate averaging 78% (P < .001).
As previously reported for PRE patients, the POST patients with and without ADs had no significant differences in the rates of medical record documentation of discussions about resuscitation (33% vs 38%, POST without AD vs POST with AD), DNR orders among those who wanted to forgo resuscitation(54% vs 58%), and attempted resuscitations at death (17% vs 9%). The POST+SUPPORT patients had similar results, with no evidence that the intervention enhanced the effect of ADs on these three measures of resuscitation decision-making. Patients with ADs more often reported that preferences about resuscitation were discussed with a physician (e.g., for POST patients, 30% for those with no AD and 43% for those with an AD,P < .05).
Only 12% of patients with ADs had talked with a physician when completing the AD. Only 42% reported ever having discussed the AD with their physician. By the second study week, only one in four physicians was aware of patients' ADs.
CONCLUSIONS: In these seriously ill patients, ADs did not substantially enhance physician-patient communication or decision-making about resuscitation. This lack of effect was not altered by the PSDA or by the enhanced efforts in SUPPORT, although these interventions each substantially increased documentation of existing ADs. Current practice patterns indicate that increasing the frequency of ADs is unlikely to be a substantial element in improving the care of seriously ill patients. Future work to improve decision-making should focus upon improving the current pattern of practice through better communication and more comprehensive advance care planning.
(C) Williams & Wilkins 1997. All Rights Reserved.
|
References: | 1. Thomasma DC. Functional status care categories and national health policy. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1993;41:437-443.
2. Weeks WB, Kofoed LL, Wallace AE, Welch HG. Advance directives and the cost of terminal hospitalization. Arch Intern Med 1994;154:2077-2083.
3. Chambers CV, Diamond JJ, Perkel RL, Lasch LA. Relationship of advance directives to hospital charges in a Medicare population. Arch Intern Med 1994;154:541-547.
4. Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA-90), Pub. L. 101-508, 4206 and 4751 (Medicare and Medicaid, respectively), 42 U.S.C. 1395cc(a) (I)(Q), 1395 mm (c)(8), 1395cc(f), 1396a(a)(57), 1396a(a)(58), and 1396a(w) (Supp. 1991).
5. Murphy DJ. Improving advance directives for healthy older people. J Am Geriatr Soc 1990;38:1251-1256.
6. Emanuel L. Structure advance planning: Is it finally time for physician action and reimbursement? JAMA 1995;274:501-503.
7. Schneiderman LJ, Kronick R, Kaplan RM et al. Effects of offering advance directives on medical treatments and costs. Ann Intern Med 1992;117:599-606.
8. Emanuel LL, Barry MJ, Stoeckle JD et al. Advance directives for medical care - A case for greater use. N Engl J Med 1991;324:889-895.
9. Davidson KW, Hackler C, Caradine DR, McCord RS. Physicians' attitudes on advance directives. JAMA 1989;262:2415-2419.
10. Danis M, Southerland LI, Garrett JM et al. A prospective study of advance directives for life sustaining care. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:882-888.
11. Morrison RS, Olson E, Mertz KR, Meier DE. The inaccessibility of advance directives on transfer from ambulatory to acute care settings. JAMA 1995;274:478-482.
12. Teno J, Lynn J, Phillips RS et al. Do formal advance directives impact on resuscitation decisions and resource utilization among seriously ill patients? J Clin Ethics 1994;5:23-30.
13. Murphy DJ, Knaus WA, Lynn J. Study population in SUPPORT: Patients (as defined by disease categories and mortality projections), surrogates, and physicians. J Clin Epidemiol 1990;43(Suppl):11-28.
14. The SUPPORT Investigators. A controlled trial to improve outcomes for seriously ill hospitalized patients: The Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment(SUPPORT). JAMA; 1995;274:1591-1598.
15. Teno M, Lynn J, Connors AF et al. The illusion of end-of-life resource savings with advance directives. J Am Geriatr Soc 1997;45:513-518.
16. Teno JM, Licks S, Lynn J et al. Do advance directives provide instructions that direct care? J Am Geriatr Soc 1997;45:508-512.
17. Knaus WA, Wagner DP, Draper EA et al. The APACHE III prognostic system: Risk prediction of hospital mortality for critically ill hospitalized adults. Chest 1991;100:1619-1636.
18. Teasdale G, Jennett B. Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness: A practical scale. Lancet 1974;ii:81-83.
19. Cullen DJ, Civetta JM, Briggs BA, Ferrara LC. Therapeutic intervention scoring system: a method for quantitative comparison of patient care. Crit Care Med 1974;2:57-60.
20. Callahan D. The Troubled Dream of Life, Living With Mortality. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1993.
21. Teno JM, Nelson HL, Lynn J. Advance care planning: Priorities for ethical and empirical research. Hastings Cent Rep 1994;Nov-Dec(Spec. Sup):32-36.
22. Sugarman J, Powe NR, Brillantes DA, Smith MK. The costs of ethics legislation: A look at the Patient Self-Determination Act. Kennedy Institute of Ethics J 1993;3:387-399.
23. Murphy DJ, Burrows D, Santilli S et al. The influence of the probability of survival on patients' preferences regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation. N Engl J Med 1994;330:545-549.
|
Language: | English.
|
Document Type: | Special Article.
|
Journal Subset: | Clinical Medicine. Behavioral & Social Sciences.
|
ISSN: | 0002-8614
|
NLM Journal Code: | 7503062, h6v
|
Annotation(s) | |
|
|