Quality of Life and Recommendations for Further Care

Recommendation-making in the emergency department: A qualitative study of how Canadian emergency physicians guide treatment decisions about resuscitation in critically ill patients

Study Objective

Emergency physicians are frequently responsible for making time-sensitive decisions around the provision of life-sustaining treatment. These decisions can involve goals of care or code status discussion, which will often substantially alter a patient's care pathway. A central part of these conversations that has received relatively little attention are recommendations for care. By proposing a best course of action or treatment via a recommendation, a clinician can ensure that their patients receive care that is concordant with their values. The objective of this study is to explore emergency physicians' attitudes toward recommendations about resuscitation in critically ill patients in the emergency department (ED).

Methods

We recruited Canadian emergency physicians via multiple recruitment strategies to ensure maximum variation sampling. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted until thematic saturation occurred. Participants were asked about their perspectives and experiences with respect to recommendation-making in critically ill patients and to identify areas for improvement in this process in the ED. We used a qualitative descriptive approach and thematic analysis to identify themes around recommendation-making in the ED for critically ill patients.

Results

Sixteen emergency physicians agreed to participate. We identified four themes and multiple subthemes. Major themes included identification of the roles and responsibilities of the emergency physician (EP) with respect to making a recommendation, the logistics or process of making a recommendation, barriers to making a recommendation, and how to improve recommendation-making and goals of care conversations in the ED.

Conclusion

Emergency physicians provided a range of perspectives on the role of recommendation-making in critically ill patients in the ED. Several barriers to the inclusion of a recommendation were identified and many physicians provided ideas on how to improve goals of care conversations, the recommendation-making process, and ensure that critically ill patients receive care that is concordant with their values.

Why Intellectual Disability is Not Mere Difference

A key question in disability studies, philosophy, and bioethics concerns the relationship between disability and well-being. The mere difference view, endorsed by Elizabeth Barnes, claims that physical and sensory disabilities by themselves do not make a person worse off overall-any negative impacts on welfare are due to social injustice. This article argues that Barnes's Value Neutral Model does not extend to intellectual disability. Intellectual disability is (1) intrinsically bad-by itself it makes a person worse off, apart from a non-accommodating environment; (2) universally bad-it lowers quality of life for every intellectually disabled person; and (3) globally bad-it reduces a person's overall well-being. While people with intellectual disabilities are functionally disadvantaged, this does not imply that they are morally inferior-lower quality of life does not mean lesser moral status. No clinical implications concerning disability-based selective abortion, denial of life-saving treatment, or rationing of scarce resources follow from the claim that intellectual disability is bad difference.

Discordant Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Code Status at Death

CONTEXT

One fundamental way to honor patient autonomy is to establish and enact their wishes for end-of-life care. Limited research exists regarding adherence with code status.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to characterize cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) attempts discordant with documented code status at the time of death in the U.S. and to elucidate potential contributing factors.

METHODS

The Cerner Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) outcomes database, which includes 237 U.S. hospitals that collect manually abstracted data from all critical care patients, was queried for adults admitted to intensive care units with a documented code status at the time of death from January 2008 to December 2016. The primary outcome was discordant CPR at death. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify patient-level and hospital-level associated factors after adjustment for age, hospital, and illness severity (APACHE III score).

RESULTS

A total of 21,537 patients from 56 hospitals were included. Of patients with a do-not-resuscitate code status, 149 (0.8%) received CPR at death, and associated factors included black race, higher APACHE III score, or treatment in small or nonteaching hospitals. Of patients with a full code status, 203 (9.0%) did not receive CPR at death, and associated factors included higher APACHE III score, primary neurologic or trauma diagnosis, or admission in a more recent year.

CONCLUSION

At the time of death, 1.6% of patients received or did not undergo CPR in a manner discordant with their documented code statuses. Race and institutional factors were associated with discordant resuscitation, and addressing these disparities may promote concordant end-of-life care in all patients.

Assessing Relationships Between Muslim Physicians’ Religiosity and End-of-Life Health-Care Attitudes and Treatment Recommendations: An Exploratory National Survey

Background:

Research demonstrates that the attitudes of religious physicians toward end-of-life care treatment can differ substantially from their nonreligious colleagues. While there are various religious perspectives regarding treatment near the end of life, the attitudes of Muslim physicians in this area are largely unknown.

Objective:

This article attempts to fill in this gap by presenting American Muslim physician attitudes toward end-of-life care decision-making and by examining associations between physician religiosity and these attitudes.

Methods:

A randomized national sample of 626 Muslim physicians completed a mailed questionnaire assessing religiosity and end-of-life care attitudes. Religiosity, religious practice, and bioethics resource utilization were analyzed as predictors of quality-of-life considerations, attitudes regarding withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment, and end-of-life treatment recommendations at the bivariate and multivariable level.

Results:

Two-hundred fifty-five (41% response rate) respondents completed surveys. Most physicians reported that religion was either very or the most important part of their life (89%). Physicians who reported consulting Islamic bioethics literature more often had higher odds of recommending active treatment over hospice care in an end-of-life case vignette. Physicians who were more religious had higher odds of viewing withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment more ethically and psychologically challenging than withholding it and had lower odds of agreeing that one should always comply with a competent patient’s request to withdraw life-sustaining treatment.

Discussion:

Religiosity appears to impact Muslim physician attitudes toward various aspects of end-of-life health-care decision-making. Greater research is needed to evaluate how this relationship manifests itself in patient care conversations and shared clinical decision-making in the hospital.

Physician Decision-Making in the Setting of Advanced Illness: An Examination of Patient Disposition and Physician Religiousness

CONTEXT

Little is known about patient and physician factors that affect decisions to pursue more or less aggressive treatment courses for patients with advanced illness.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to determine how patient age, patient disposition, and physician religiousness affect physician recommendations in the context of advanced illness.

METHODS

A survey was mailed to a stratified random sample of U.S. physicians, which included three vignettes depicting advanced illness scenarios: 1) cancer, 2) heart failure, and 3) dementia with acute infection. One vignette included experimental variables to test how patient age and patient disposition affected physician recommendations. After each vignette, physicians indicated their likelihood to recommend disease-directed medical care vs. hospice care.

RESULTS

Among eligible physicians (n = 1878), 62% (n = 1156) responded. Patient age and stated patient disposition toward treatment did not significantly affect physician recommendations. Compared with religious physicians, physicians who reported that religious importance was "not applicable" were less likely to recommend chemotherapy (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.39, 95% CI 0.23-0.66) and more likely to recommend hospice (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.15-3.16) for a patient with cancer. Compared with physicians who ever attended religious services, physicians who never attended were less likely to recommend left ventricular assist device placement for a patient with congestive heart failure (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35-0.92). In addition, Asian ethnicity was independently associated with recommending chemotherapy (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.13-2.61) and being less likely to recommend hospice (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40-0.91) for the patient with cancer; and it was associated with recommending antibiotics for the patient with dementia and pneumonia (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.08-2.50).

CONCLUSION

This study provides preliminary evidence that patient disposition toward more and less aggressive treatment in advanced illness does not substantially factor into physician recommendations. Non-religious physicians appear less likely to recommend disease-directed medical treatment in the setting of advanced illness, although this finding was not uniform and deserves further research.

Development of a prediction model for long-term quality of life in critically ill patients

PURPOSE

We developed a prediction model for quality of life (QOL) 1 year after intensive care unit (ICU) discharge based upon data available at the first ICU day to improve decision-making.

METHODS

The database of a 1-year prospective study concerning long-term outcome and QOL (assessed by EuroQol-5D) in critically ill adult patients consecutively admitted to the ICU of a university hospital was used. Cases with missing data were excluded. Utility indices at baseline (UIb) and at 1 year (UI1y) were surrogates for QOL. For 1-year non-survivors UI1y was set at zero. The grouped lasso technique selected the most important variables in the prediction model. R² and adjusted R² were calculated.

RESULTS

1831 of 1953 cases (93.8%) were complete. UI1y depended significantly on: UIb (P<0.001); solid tumor (P<0.001); age (P<0.001); activity of daily living (P<0.001); imaging (P<0.001); APACHE II-score (P=0.001); ≥80 years (P=0.001); mechanical ventilation (P=0.006); hematological patient (P=0.007); SOFA-score (P=0.008); tracheotomy (P=0.018); admission diagnosis surgical P<0.001 (versus medical); and comorbidity (P=0.049). Only baseline health status and surgical patients were positively associated with UI1y. R² was 0.3875 and adjusted R² 0.3807.

CONCLUSION

Although only 40% of variability in long-term QOL could be explained, this prediction model can be helpful in decision-making.