Does the DNR order need life-sustaining intervention? Time for comprehensive advance directives

Mechanical Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Choice of Patients on Chronic Peritoneal Dialysis

Fifty-five adult patients (5 women, 50 men) on chronic peritoneal dialysis, mostly continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), for 2 to 155 mon were asked whether or not they wanted to have mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in case of sudden death. Thirty-five patients (65%) opted for CPR and 20 (36%) declined. Statistically, sex (although the number of women interviewed was too small for a valid sample) and duration of dialysis had no effect on choice of CPR, whereas older age, the presence of diabetes, advanced medical disability, and advanced socioeconomic disability were associated with a tendency to decline CPR. Among the 10 patients who had CPR, 5 developed flail chest, 4 had multiple rib fractures, and only 1 had no chest wall trauma from CPR. Two patients left the hospital alive. One third of the patients on chronic peritoneal dialysis do not want CPR. Advanced age, diabetes, and poor medical and socioeconomic states predispose peritoneal dialysis patients to decline CPR.

Advance directives

Most patients want some control over their medical care, including-or even especially-when they are too sick to participate in decisions. Clinicians who have to make decisions for patients who are unable to participate often would appreciate guidance from patients' wishes. Advance care planning responds to these needs. The process provides for discussions about goals in different scenarios and allows inclusion of the family and physician as well as the patient. It helps to have the patient and family complete validated worksheets that walk them through the various considerations and result in expressions of preference that are clinically meaningful. For the clinician, scenario-based goals for care and personal thresholds for when desired care shifts from primarily cure-oriented to primarily palliative are the most useful features to know about. The patient and family should do most of the discussing on their own time; the physician and team should coordinate to screen for problems and ensure agreement. Ideally, this should occur over the course of regular clinical encounters, with some dedicated time for the topic at suitable intervals.

Ethics review: 'Living wills' and intensive care--an overview of the American experience

Withdrawal and limitation of life support in the intensive care unit is common, although how this decision is reached can be varied and arbitrary. Inevitably, the patient is unable to participate in this discussion because their capacity is limited by the nature of the illness and the effects of its treatment. Physicians often discuss these decisions with relatives in an attempt to respect the patient's wishes despite evidence suggesting that the relatives may not correctly reflect the patient's desires. Advance decisions, commonly known as 'living wills', have been proposed as a way of facilitating the maintenance of an individual's autonomy when they become incapacitated. Others have argued that legalising advance decisions is euthanasia by the back door. In October 2007 in England and Wales, advance decisions will become legally binding as part of the 2005 Mental Capacity Act. This has been the case in the USA for many years. The purpose of the present review is to examine the published literature regarding the effect of advance decisions in relation to the provision of adult critical care.

Prehospital resuscitation practices: a survey of prehospital providers

Numerous factors affect decision making in the prehospital provision of resuscitative care. This study was undertaken to determine current practices involved in the initiation, continuation and termination of resuscitative efforts, and the impact of advance directives, in the prehospital resuscitation setting. This cross-sectional mailed questionnaire surveyed 3807 members of the National Association of Emergency Medical Technicians. The study instrument included questions regarding the termination and withholding of resuscitative efforts in the prehospital setting, as well as survival rates, local protocols and compliance with advance directives. Of 1546 respondents (41% response rate), with a mean 9.0 years of experience, most (89%) indicated that they would withhold resuscitative efforts in the presence of an official state-approved advance directive. However, very few providers would withhold resuscitative efforts if only an unofficial document (4%) or verbal report of an advance directive (10%) were available. Providers with more than 10 years experience were more likely to withhold resuscitation attempts in the presence of only a verbal report of an advance directive (p = 0.02, Chi-square), and were more likely to withhold resuscitation attempts in situations they considered futile (p = 0.001, Chi-square). Most (77%) respondents have local EMS guidelines for termination of resuscitation in the prehospital setting, but 23% of those consider existing guidelines to be inadequate. The majority of prehospital providers stated that they honor official state-approved advance directives, but do not follow directives from unofficial documents or verbal reports of advance directives. More experienced providers stated that they withhold resuscitative efforts more often in futile situations, or in the presence of unofficial advance directives. Advance directives should be utilized more uniformly among patients who wish to forgo resuscitative efforts in the event of cardiac arrest. Because many local protocols are judged to be inadequate, we support the institution of improved clinical guidelines regarding the prehospital termination of resuscitative efforts.

A new approach to Advance Directives

OBJECTIVE

To martial arguments for listing simplified Advance Directives on the Medicare card.

DESIGN AND MAIN RESULTS

Literature review shows that 90% of patients do not have advance directives, that patients and doctors are both remiss in discussing end-of-life issues, and that Medicare, insurance companies, and hospitals do little to remedy this lapse.

CONCLUSION

A case is made for listing simplified Advance Directives on the Medicare card.

Documenting life-support preferences in hospitalized patients

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article was to determine the extent to which patients at high risk of hospital death who undergo cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) have previously had their life support preferences addressed and documented.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of all patients older than 18 years of age hospitalized for more than 24 hours who sustained a cardiac arrest with attempted CPR at our tertiary care university teaching hospital during 1994 (n = 71). We searched all hospital charts specifying ICD-9 codes: Cardiac arrest, ventricular fibrillation, ventricular tachycardia, asystole, electromechanical dissociation, defibrillation, or CPR. Patients were selected if (1) they had a true cardiac arrest (abrupt cessation of spontaneous circulation) and (2) had attempted CPR or defibrillation. Patients were classified as "high risk" if they satisfied at least one of the following: modified prearrest morbidity index > or = 7, moderate/severe dementia, day 1 APACHE II score > 24 or > or = 4 dysfunctional organ systems.

RESULTS

We searched 147 charts; of 71 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 53 were high risk. Of patients at high risk of sustaining a cardiopulmonary arrest during the index hospital admission, 3 (6%) had preferences addressed within the first 24 hours of hospitalization, 7 (13%) had delayed discussion of preferences before arrest, 23 (43%) had preferences addressed post arrest, and 20 (38%) had no documented discussions. Of the 23 high-risk patients initially surviving cardiac arrest, all were subsequently given "do not resuscitate" orders. Univariate analysis of factors associated with life-support discussion before cardiac arrest were previous cardiac arrest (OR, 5.9) and APACHE II score > 24 (OR, 1.1), although neither reached statistical significance. None of the 32 patients with a modified PAM index > or = 7 (32 of 71) survived hospitalization. Only 3 patients survived to hospital discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Early communication regarding life-support preferences is important in high-risk patients so that inappropriate or unwanted treatment is not implemented. Given that optimal care includes addressing and documenting life-support preferences in high-risk patients early in their hospitalization, this standard was infrequently met.

Preferences of physicians and their patients for end-of-life care

OBJECTIVE

Both physicians and patients view advance directives as important, yet discussions occur infrequently. We assessed differences and correlations between physicians' and their patients' desires for end-of-life care for themselves.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Study physicians (n = 78) were residents and faculty practicing in an inner-city, academic primary care general internal medicine practice. Patients (n = 831) received primary care from these physicians and were either at least 75 or between 50 and 74 years of age, with selected morbid conditions. Physicians and patients completed identical questionnaires that included an assessment of their preferences for six specific treatments if they were terminally ill. There were significant differences between physicians' and patients' preferences for all six treatments (p < .0001), with physicians wanting less treatment than their patients for five of them. Patients desiring more care (p < .01) were more often male (odds ratio [OR] 1.7). African-American (OR 1.6), and older (OR 1.02 per year). There were no such correlates with physicians' preferences. A treatment preference score was calculated from respondents' desires to receive or refuse the six treatments. Physicians' scores were highly correlated with those of their enrolled primary care patients (r = .51, p < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although patients and physicians as groups differ substantially in their preferences for end-of-life care, there was significant correlation between individual academic physicians' preferences and those of their primary care patients. Reasons for this correlation are unknown.

The influence of physician explanations on patient preferences about future health-care states

OBJECTIVE

To determine the influence of alternative explanations by physicians of the purpose of a medical intervention (intubation and ventilatory support, IVS) on three types of patient preferences: desire for IVS, the length of time patients would find IVS acceptable, and the minimum probability of a good medical outcome patients would require before assenting to continued support with IVS.

METHODS

Structured interviews were conducted with patients followed in a continuity care general medicine clinic at the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Portland, Oregon. Patients were asked to consider whether they would accept IVS at a future time. Patients were randomly assigned to one of two explanation conditions that differed in terms of their future medical contexts, that is, the degrees of specification of the nature of the medical condition patients were asked to consider. The general-explanation group was asked to consider the future medical context of " an unspecified medical condition"; the specific-explanation group was asked to consider the future medical context of "a severe pneumonia." Patients were asked three questions: 1) Would you accept IVS (yes or no)? 2) How long would you allow your physician to continue IVS?; and 3) After being on IVS for 2-3 days, what would be the minimum chance of recovery from the condition you would require before agreeing to continued IVS? "Chance of recovery" was defined for both groups as the probability that the patient would be able to leave the hospital and be able to take care of activities of daily living unassisted with minimal change in his or her mental state from the pre-hospitalization status.

RESULTS

Of 186 patients (mean age = 66.5 years; mean education = 12.7 years), 97 received the general explanation and 89 received the specific explanation about a severe pneumonia. Significantly fewer (p = 0.03) patients receiving the general explanation wanted physicians to intervene with IVS (general 94% vs specific 100%). Patients receiving the general explanation were willing to accept significantly fewer (p = 0.009) days of intubation (general 65 days vs specific 96 days). Significantly fewer (p < 0.0001) patients receiving the general explanation wanted physicians to continue IVS when the probability of a successful outcome was less than 50% (general 30% vs specific 64%).

CONCLUSION

Physician explanations--based on general (unspecified medical condition) vs specific (severe pneumonia) explanations--have a marked influence on the duration of IVS patients would permit and the probability of a good outcome required to continue IVS.

Physicians' experiences with prehospital do-not-resuscitate orders in North Carolina

INTRODUCTION

Many states are implementing prehospital do-not-resuscitate (DNR) programs through legislation or by state or local protocol. There are no outcome studies in the literature regarding the utilization of, access to, or barriers to prehospital DNR programs, nor are there studies that evaluated whether they meet the patients' needs.

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To explore physicians' perceptions of the utilization of, access to, and barriers to a southeastern state's prehospital DNR program, and to identify key professional groups needing information about prehospital DNR issues.

METHODS

A convenience sample survey and a descriptive review using retrospective, self-report questionnaires sent to all physicians who requested and obtained a supply of the state's out-of-facility DNR forms in 1993.

RESULTS

Respondents reported that the most common terminal conditions for patients with prehospital DNR orders are cancer and multiple chronic diseases in elderly patients. More than half of the physicians recalled that enrolled patients had engaged the services of emergency medical services (EMS), most often because the patients' conditions worsened, and the families were uncertain about what to do. Most of the enrolled patients have at least one other DNR order in another health-care setting, and are at home with hospice care or home-health care at the time of the prehospital DNR order implementation. The most frequent barrier to honoring dying patients' wishes in the prehospital environment is a lack of knowledge of prehospital issues by patients, families, primary care physicians, and nursing home staff. Ninety-eight percent of the respondents support a single, universal DNR order that would apply across all health-care settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients, families, and key health-care professional groups need to be targeted with educational programs regarding prehospital DNR issues. Primary care physicians, using the current prehospital DNR program, support more comprehensive approaches to DNR orders across health-care settings.

Advance directives in the medical intensive care unit of a community teaching hospital

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the frequency with which advance directives (ADs) are available at the time of admission and their impact on subsequent care in a medical intensive care unit (MICU) setting before and 9 months after the implementation of the Patient Self-Determination Act (PSDA).

DESIGN

Prospective nonrandomized cohort data collection and analysis.

SETTING

Thirteen-bed MICU of community teaching hospital providing primary and referred care.

PATIENTS

Consecutive admissions during 2-month periods separated by 1 year: August-September 1991 (91) and August-September 1992 (92).

MEASUREMENTS

The following were assessed: the presence and type or absence of AD at the time of admission; the presence or absence of a written order to limit resuscitation (WO-R) during the MICU stay; duration of MICU stay in hours; outcome; and combined duration of use or administration of seven selected interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen of 133 patients (11.3%) in the 91 group and 15 of 171 patients (8.8%) in the 92 group presented with an AD. This difference was not significant (p = 0.578). Most patients in both groups (75.9% in 91 and 80.1% in 92) presented without an AD and did not have a WO-R during their MICU course. In addition, most patients who did present with an AD, 11 of 15 (73.3%) in the 91 group and 14 of 15 (93.3%) in the 92 group, did not have a WO-R. A subgroup of older and more severely ill patients in both cohorts was identified; they did not present with an AD but subsequently a WO-R was established. These patients had the highest mortality, about 40%, when compared with the overall mortality of 8.2%.

CONCLUSION

Advanced directives were infrequently available and had little impact on the pattern of care.

Contributions of empirical research to medical ethics

Empirical research pertaining to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), clinician behaviors related to do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders and substituted judgment suggests potential contributions to medical ethics. Research quantifying the likelihood of surviving CPR points to the need for further philosophical analysis of the limitations of the patient autonomy in decision making, the nature and definition of medical futility, and the relationship between futility and professional standards. Research on DNR orders has identified barriers to the goal of patient involvement in these life and death discussions. The initial data on surrogate decision making also points to the need for a reexamination of the moral basis for substituted judgment, the moral authority of proxy decision making and the second-order status of the best interests standard. These examples of empirical research suggest that an interplay between empirical research, ethical analysis and policy development may represent a new form of interdisciplinary scholarship to improve clinical medicine.

Resuscitation decision making in the elderly: the value of outcome data

OBJECTIVE

To assess the relationship between cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) information and desire for CPR in an elderly population and to determine the influence of outcome data on desire for CPR in older persons.

DESIGN

An interventional study utilizing an educational program.

SETTING

Elderly independent retirement community.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred two persons, all more than 62 years old, who were neither demented nor depressed.

INTERVENTION

Participants received an educational intervention consisting of descriptive CPR information and quantitative information about CPR outcomes. CPR information, survival estimates, and preferences were recorded prior to and after the intervention.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Subjects exhibited a high level of basic knowledge about CPR, which did not change with the intervention. While subjects consistently overestimated their chances of survival post CPR, these estimates decreased toward more realistic levels after the intervention (p < 0.001). CPR preferences changed in three of five hypothetical clinical scenarios after the intervention (p < 0.05). Those who were more realistic in their estimates of CPR survival desired less CPR in the hypothetical scenarios (p < 0.01). A trend in our data suggest that quantitative outcome information may have a greater influence on CPR preferences than has descriptive information (p = 0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

CPR preferences changed after an educational intervention. An improved understanding of quantitative outcome data appears to influence the desire for CPR and therefore should be included in CPR discussions with older patients.

Educating the elderly: cardiopulmonary resuscitation decisions before and after intervention

Considering the limited success of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in achieving survival to hospital discharge in older persons, it is appropriate to educate, discuss and determine patients' wishes at a time when they are able. Sixty-four ambulatory, non-depressed, non-demented veterans greater than 74 years of age were interviewed and educated. Knowledge of CPR at baseline was variable and most overestimated their survival chances. Most subjects desired routine CPR discussions with physicians. Only 17% had previously discussed their CPR preferences, and none had done so with physicians. Knowledge of CPR increased (P = 0.01) after educational intervention. There was no change in subjects' CPR decisions after education and presentation of current CPR outcome data. In considering five hypothetical scenarios, 9% never wanted CPR, and 17% always wanted CPR. Those who never wanted CPR were more realistic about their suspected survival chance (P = 0.003) and had higher educational levels (P = 0.03) Folstein (P = 0.03) and Geriatric Depression Scale (P = 0.04) scores. With the dependent variable being the number of hypothetical situations in which the patient desired CPR, a regression analysis (adjusted r2 = 0.72) limited significant variables to the patient's current CPR decision, Folstein score, religion, marital status, and previous ICU admissions. This study emphasizes that most elderly male veterans are willing and want to discuss their CPR attitude with physicians and that most have fixed CPR decisions which may be elicited under stable clinical conditions.

Advance directives for medical care--a case for greater use

BACKGROUND. Advance directives for medical care and the designation of proxy decision makers to guide medical care after a patient has become incompetent have been widely advocated but little studied. We investigated the attitudes of patients toward planning, perceived barriers to such planning, treatment preferences in four hypothetical scenarios, and the feasibility of using a particular document (the Medical Directive) in the outpatient setting to specify advance directives.

METHODS

We surveyed 405 outpatients of 30 primary care physicians at Massachusetts General Hospital and 102 members of the general public in Boston and asked them as part of the survey to complete the Medical Directive.

RESULTS

Advance directives were desired by 93 percent of the outpatients and 89 percent of the members of the general public (P greater than 0.2). Both the young and the healthy subgroups expressed at least as much interest in planning as those older than 65 and those in fair-to-poor health. Of the perceived barriers to issuing advance directives, the lack of physician initiative was among the most frequently mentioned, and the disturbing nature of the topic was among the least. The outpatients refused life-sustaining treatments in 71 percent of their responses to options in the four scenarios (coma with chance of recovery, 57 percent; persistent vegetative state, 85 percent; dementia, 79 percent; and dementia with a terminal illness, 87 percent), with small differences between widely differing types of treatments. Specific treatment preferences could not be usefully predicted according to age, self-rated state of health, or other demographic features. Completing the Medical Directive took a median of 14 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

When people are asked to imagine themselves incompetent with a poor prognosis, they decide against life-sustaining treatments about 70 percent of the time. Health, age, or other demographic features cannot be used, however, to predict specific preferences. Advance directives as part of a comprehensive approach such as that provided by the Medical Directive are desired by most people, require physician initiative, and can be achieved during a regular office visit.

Improving advance directives for healthy older people

The quality and quantity of advance directives for healthy older people need to increase. Quality will improve with literal interpretations of do-not-resuscitate orders and more comprehensive directives. Changing the term "DNR" to "No ACLS (Advanced Cardiac Life Support)" should discourage health-care providers from subsuming other limitations under the directive to withhold resuscitation. Other aggressive medical and surgical interventions should be prospectively considered in addition to resuscitation. The quantity of advance directives will increase when physicians feel motivated to devote time and expertise to thorough discussions of advance directives. Although education and legislation will motivate physicians to some extent, their roles are limited. Fair reimbursement for this primary-care service is the most effective motive. The initial investment by Medicare may save large sums in the long run by reducing expensive, undesired care for older people.

Do-not-resuscitate orders in Swedish medical wards

In a nation-wide survey, procedures related to do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders in Swedish medical wards were investigated by means of a questionnaire given to internists-in-charge. The response rate was 89% (286 out of 323), of whom all but 2% (seven individuals) stated that DNR orders were used in their wards. The most common procedure was an oral direction to the nurse, who documented the order in the nurses' day-to-day work sheet. The DNR orders were signed by 28% of the physicians. A wide range of symbols and code words were used, and there was considerable disagreement regarding the meaning of a DNR order. Such orders were often associated with withdrawal and withholding of life-sustaining treatments other than cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Most physicians stated that they never discuss DNR order with the patients, and that only in a minority of DNR decisions do they involve family members. There was considerable conflict with regard to DNR ordering procedures not only between internists in different hospitals, but also within individual hospitals.