Do-Not-Resuscitate Status Is Associated With Increased Mortality But Not Morbidity

The role of Advance Directives and Living Wills in Anesthesia Practice

Preoperative review of existing advance directives and a discussion of patient goals should be routinely done to address any potential limitations on resuscitative therapies during perioperative care. Both surgeons and anesthesiologists should be collaboratively involved in these discussions, and all perioperative physicians should receive training in shared decision making and goals of care discussions. These discussions should center around patient preferences for limitations on life-sustaining medical therapy, which should be accurately documented and adhered to during the perioperative period. Patients should be informed that limitations of life-sustaining medical therapy may increase their risk of postoperative mortality.

Unintended Consequences of Code Status in the Intensive Care Unit: What Happens After a Do-Not-Resuscitate Order Is Placed? A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Some clinicians suspect that patients with do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders receive less aggressive care. Extrapolation from code status to goals of care could cause significant harm. This study asked the question: Do DNR orders in the intensive care unit (ICU) lead to a decrease in invasive interventions? Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of ICU patients from three teaching hospitals. All ICU patients were assessed for inclusion. Exclusion criteria were medical futility and death, comfort care, or ICU discharge <48 hours after DNR initiation. Five hundred thirty-six patients met inclusion criteria. One hundred forty-five were included in the final analysis. Primary outcomes were occurrence of invasive interventions after DNR initiation-surgical operation, central line, ventilation, dialysis, or other procedure. Secondary outcomes were antibiotic administration, blood transfusion, mortality, and discharge location. Results: Patients with DNR orders underwent fewer surgical operations (14.5% vs. 31.1%, p = 0.002), but more central lines (42.1% vs. 23.0%, p = 0.009), ventilator use (49.0% vs. 18.9%, p < 0.001), and dialysis (20.0% vs. 4.1%, p = 0.002), compared with patients without DNR orders. Transfusions and antibiotic use decreased similarly over admission for both groups (transfusions: β = 1.25; p = 0.59; and antibiotics: β = 1.44; p = 0.27). Mortality and hospice discharges were higher for DNR patients (p < 0.001.). Conclusions: DNR status did not decrease the number of nonoperative interventions patients received as compared with full code counterparts. Although differences in populations existed, patients with DNR orders were likely to receive a similar number of invasive interventions. This finding suggests that providers do not wholesale limit these options for patients with code status limitations.

Variation in the definition of 'failure to rescue' from postoperative complications: a systematic review and recommendations for outcome reporting

BACKGROUND

Failure to rescue is the rate of death amongst patients with postoperative complications and has been proposed as a perioperative quality indicator. However, variation in its definition has limited comparisons between studies. We systematically reviewed all surgical literature reporting failure to rescue rates and examined variations in the definition of the 'numerator,' 'denominator,' and timing of failure to rescue measurement.

METHODS

Databases were searched from inception to 31 December 2022. All studies reporting postoperative failure to rescue rates as a primary or secondary outcome were included. We examined the complications included in the failure to rescue denominator, the percentage of deaths captured by the failure to rescue numerator, and the timing of measurement for complications and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 359 studies, including 212,048,069 patients, were analyzed. The complications included in the failure to rescue denominator were reported in 295 studies (82%), with 131 different complications used. The median number of included complications per study was 10 (interquartile range 8-15). Studies that included a higher number of complications in the failure-to-rescue denominator reported lower failure-to-rescue rates. Death was included as a complication in the failure to rescue the denominator in 65 studies (18%). The median percentage of deaths captured by the failure to rescue calculation when deaths were not included in the denominator was 79%. Complications (52%) and mortality (40%) were mostly measured in-hospital, followed by 30-days after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Failure to rescue is an important concept in the study of postoperative outcomes, although its definition is highly variable and poorly reported. Researchers should be aware of the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches to defining failure to rescue.

Relationship Between Newly Established Perioperative DNR Status and Perioperative Outcomes in the Elderly Population: A NSQIP Database Analysis

Background: Health care practitioners have developed complex algorithms to numerically calculate surgical risk. We examined the association between the initiation of a new do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status during hospitalization and postoperative outcomes, including mortality. We hypothesized that new DNR status would be associated with similar complication rates, even though mortality rates may be higher. Methods: A retrospective cohort study using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) Geriatric Surgery Research File. Two cohorts were defined by the presence of a new DNR status during the hospitalization that was not present on hospital admission. Multivariable logistic regression was used to control for differences between the DNR and non-DNR cohorts. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included rates of postoperative complications, including returning to the operating room, reintubation, failure to wean from ventilation, surgical site infections, dehiscence, pneumonia, acute kidney injury, renal failure, stroke, cardiac arrest, acute myocardial infarction, transfusion requirements, sepsis, urinary tract infections, venous thromboembolisms, total number of complications for each patient, and hospital length of stay. Results: In our geriatric population with a newly established DNR status, the mortality rate was 39.29%, significantly greater than the non-DNR population after multivariable regression. Secondary outcomes also occurred at an increased rate in the DNR cohort including surgical site infections (8.29% vs 4.04%), pneumonia (18% vs 2.26%), renal insufficiency (2.43% vs 0.35%), acute renal failure (5% vs 0.19%), stroke (3% vs 0.36%), acute myocardial infarction (6.29% vs 0.95%), and cardiac arrest (5.86% vs 0.51%). Conclusions: The initiation of a new DNR status during hospitalization is associated with a significantly higher burden of both morbidity and mortality. This contrasts with prior studies that did not show an increased rate of adverse outcomes and suggests that a new DNR status in postoperative patients may reflect a consequence of adverse postoperative events. The informed consent process in older patients at risk for adverse outcomes after surgery should include discussions regarding goals of care and acceptable risk.

Prevalence, Management, and Outcomes Related to Preoperative Medical Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) in an Adult Surgical Population: Preoperative MOLST and Code Status Discussions

OBJECTIVE

To determine prevalence of documented preoperative code status discussions and postoperative outcomes (specifically mortality, readmission, and discharge disposition) of patients with completed MOLST forms before surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

A MOLST form documents patient care preference regarding treatment limitations. When considering surgery in these patients, preoperative discussion is necessary to ensure concordance of care. Little is known about prevalence of these discussions and postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted consisting of all patients having surgery during a 1-year period at a tertiary care academic center in Boston, Massachusetts.

RESULTS

Among 21,787 surgical patients meeting inclusion criteria, 402 (1.8%) patients had preoperative MOLST. Within the MOLST, 224 (55.7%) patients had chosen to limit cardiopulmonary resuscitation and 214 (53.2%) had chosen to limit intubation and mechanical ventilation. Code status discussion was documented presurgery in 169 (42.0%) patients with MOLST. Surgery was elective or nonurgent for 362 (90%), and median length of stay (Q1, Q3) was 5.1 days (1.9, 9.9). The minority of patients with preoperative MOLST were discharged home [169 (42%), and 103 (25.6%) patients were readmitted within 30 days. Patients with preoperative MOLST had a 30-day mortality of 9.2% (37 patients) and cumulative 90-day mortality of 14.9% (60 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

Fewer than half of surgical patients with preoperative MOLST have documented code status discussions before surgery. Given their high risk of postoperative mortality and the diversity of preferences found in MOLST, thoughtful discussion before surgery is critical to ensure concordant perioperative care.

Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders and Outcomes for Patients with Pancreatic Cancer

Background

The impact of the do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order on patients with pancreatic cancer remains uncertain. In this study, we evaluated whether DNR status was associated with in-hospital mortality and costs for inpatient stay among patients hospitalized with pancreatic cancer.

Methods

Data were obtained from the National Inpatient Sample, Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, which represents ∼20% of all discharges from US community hospitals; 40,246 pancreatic cancer admissions between 2011 and 2016 were included. Mortality was modeled using a logistic regression model; costs for inpatient stay were modeled using a multivariable generalized linear regression model.

Results

The sample included 6041 (15%) patients with a documented DNR order. After controlling for covariates, patients with a DNR order had approximately six times greater odds of mortality compared with patients without a DNR order (odds ratio 5.90, p < 0.0001). Compared with patients who survived without a DNR order during the hospital stay, patients who had a DNR order and died during the hospital stay had significantly lower costs (-US$983; p = 0.0270), and patients who died without a DNR order during the hospital stay had significantly higher costs (US$5638; p < 0.0001). Patients who survived with a DNR order had costs that were not significantly different from patients who survived without a DNR order.

Conclusions

The presence of a DNR order among patients with pancreatic cancer was significantly associated with higher mortality risk as well as lower costs for patients who died during the hospital stay. However, DNR status was not significantly associated with costs for pancreatic cancer patients who were discharged alive.

Early DNR in Older Adults Hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 Infection During Initial Pandemic Surge

The role of early Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) in hospitalized older adults (OAs) with SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. The objective of the study was to identify characteristics and outcomes associated with early DNR in hospitalized OAs with SARS-CoV-2. We conducted a retrospective chart review of older adults (65+) hospitalized with COVID-19 in New York, USA, between March 1, 2020, and April 20, 2020. Patient characteristics and hospital outcomes were collected. Early DNR (within 24 hours of admission) was compared to non-early DNR (late DNR, after 24 hours of admission, or no DNR). Outcomes included hospital morbidity and mortality. Of 4961 patients, early DNR prevalence was 5.7% (n = 283). Compared to non-early DNR, the early DNR group was older (85.0 vs 76.8, P < .001), women (51.2% vs 43.6%, P = .012), with higher comorbidity index (3.88 vs 3.36, P < .001), facility-based (49.1% vs 19.1%, P < .001), with dementia (13.3% vs 4.6%, P < .001), and severely ill on presentation (57.9% vs 32.3%, P < .001). In multivariable analyses, the early DNR group had higher mortality risk (OR: 2.94, 95% CI: 2.10-4.11), less hospital delirium (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.40-.77), lower use of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV, OR: 0.37, 95% CI: .21-.67), and shorter length of stay (LOS, 4.8 vs 10.3 days, P < .001), compared to non-early DNR. Regarding early vs late DNR, while there was no difference in mortality (OR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.85-1.62), the early DNR group experienced less delirium (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: .40-.75), IMV (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.29-.96), and shorter LOS (4.82 vs 10.63 days, OR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.30-.41). In conclusion, early DNR prevalence in hospitalized OAs with COVID-19 was low, and compared to non-early DNR is associated with higher mortality but lower morbidity.

The Impact of Do-Not-Resuscitate Order in the Emergency Department on Respiratory Failure after ICU Admission

(1) Background: It has been hypothesized that a discrepancy exists in the understanding of a do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order among physicians. We hypothesized that a DNR order signed in the emergency department (ED) could influence the patients’ prognosis after intensive care unit (ICU) admission. (2) Methods: We included patients older than 17 years, who visited the emergency department for non-traumatic disease, who had respiratory failure, required ventilator support, and were admitted to the ICU between January 2010 and December 2016. The associations between DNR and mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), and medical fees were analyzed. Prolonged hospital LOS was defined as hospital stay ≥75th percentile (≥26 days for the study). Patients were classified as those who did and did not sign a DNR order. A 1:4 propensity score matching was conducted for demographics, comorbidities, and etiology. (3) Results: The study enrolled a total of 1510 patients who signed a DNR and 6040 patients who did not sign a DNR. The 30-day mortality rates were 47.4% and 28.0% among patients who did and did not sign a DNR, respectively. A DNR order was associated with mortality after adjusting for confounding factors (hazard ratio, 1.9; confidence interval, 1.70−2.03). It was also a risk factor for prolonged hospital LOS in survivors (odds ratio, 1.2; confidence interval, 1.02−1.44). Survivors who signed a DNR order were charged higher medical fees than those who did not sign a DNR (217,159 vs. 245,795 New Taiwan Dollars, p < 0.001). (4) Conclusions: Signing a DNR order in the ED increased the ICU mortality rate among patients who had respiratory failure and needed ventilator support. It increased the risk of prolonged hospital LOS among survivors. Finally, signing a DNR order was associated with high medical fees among survivors.

The Role of Anesthesiologists in Perioperative Limitation of Potentially Life-Sustaining Medical Treatments: A Narrative Review and Perspective

No patient arrives at the hospital to undergo general anesthesia for its own sake. Anesthesiology is a symbiont specialty, with the primary mission of preventing physical and psychological pain, easing anxiety, and shepherding physiologic homeostasis so that other care may safely progress. For most elective surgeries, the patient-anesthesiologist relationship begins shortly before and ends after the immediate perioperative period. While this may tempt anesthesiologists to defer goals of care discussions to our surgical or primary care colleagues, we have both an ethical and a practical imperative to share this responsibility. Since the early 1990s, the American College of Surgeons (ACS), the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA), and the Association of Perioperative Registered Nurses (AORN) have mandated a "required reconsideration" of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders. Key ethical considerations and guiding principles informing this "required reconsideration" have been extensively discussed in the literature and include respect for patient autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence. In this article, we address how well these principles and guidelines are translated into daily clinical practice and how often anesthesiologists actually discuss goals of care or potential limitations to life-sustaining medical treatments (LSMTs) before administering anesthesia or sedation. Having done so, we review how often providers implement goal-concordant care, that is, care that reflects and adheres to the stated patient wishes. We conclude with describing several key gaps in the literature on goal-concordance of perioperative care for patients with limitations on LSMT and summarize novel strategies and promising efforts described in recent literature to improve goal-concordance of perioperative care.

Preoperative Cognitive Impairment as a Perioperative Risk Factor in Patients Undergoing Total Knee Arthroplasty

Background:

The study assessed whether pre-existing cognitive impairment (CI) prior to elective total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is associated with worse postoperative outcomes such as delirium, in-hospital medical complications, 30-day mortality, hospital length of stay and non-home discharge.

Methods:

A retrospective database analysis from the NSQIP Geriatric Surgery Pilot Project was used. There was an initial cohort of 6350 patients undergoing elective TKA, 104 patients with CI were propensity score matched to 104 patients without CI.

Results:

Analysis demonstrated a significantly increased incidence of post-operative delirium (POD) in the cohort with pre-op CI (p = < .001), a worsened functional status (p = < .001) and increased nonhome discharge postoperatively compared to the group without CI (p = 0.029). Other post-operative outcomes included 30-day mortality of 0% in both groups, and low rate of complications such as infection (2.88% vs 0.96%), pneumonia (1.92% vs 0%), failure to wean (0.96% vs 0%), and reintubation (0.96% vs 0%). Some other differences between the CI group and non-CI group, although not statistically significant, included increased rate of transfusion (10.58% vs 6.73%), and sepsis (1.92% vs 0%). The length of stay was increased in the non-CI group (4.28% vs 2.32%, p = 0.122).

Conclusion:

CI in patients undergoing TKA is associated with an increased risk of POD, worsened postoperative functional status, and discharge to non-home facility.

The Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order in the perioperative setting: practical considerations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Addressing patients' Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) status in the perioperative setting is important for shared patient decision-making. Although the inherently resuscitative nature of anesthesia and surgery may pose an ethical quandary for clinicians tasked with caring for the patient, anesthesiologist-led efforts need to evaluate all aspects of the DNR order and operative procedures.

RECENT FINDINGS

Approximately 15% of patients undergoing surgical procedures have a preexisting DNR order (Margolis et al., 1995) [1]. American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) and the American College of Surgeons (ACS) do not support automatic reversal of the DNR order in the perioperative setting. Citing patient self-determination and autonomy, these societies advocate for a thoughtful discussion where a patient or legal designee may make an informed decision regarding resuscitation in the perioperative setting. Although studies have suggested increased perioperative mortality among patients with a preexisting DNR order, this data remains largely inconclusive.

SUMMARY

Efforts must be made to address the DNR order in the perioperative setting. The fundamental tenets of medical ethics, nonmaleficence, beneficence, and patient autonomy can help to guide this oftentimes challenging discussion.

Exploring Factors Associated With Morbidity and Mortality in Patients With Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders: A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database Analysis Within Surgical Groups

BACKGROUND

Anesthesiologists caring for patients with do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders may have ethical concerns because of their resuscitative wishes and may have clinical concerns because of their known increased risk of morbidity/mortality. Patient heterogeneity and/or emphasis on mortality outcomes make previous studies among patients with DNR orders difficult to interpret. We sought to explore factors associated with morbidity and mortality among patients with DNR orders, which were stratified by surgical subgroups.

METHODS

Exploratory retrospective cohort study in adult patients undergoing prespecified colorectal, vascular, and orthopedic surgeries was performed using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant Use File data from 2010 to 2013. Among patients with preoperative DNR orders (ie, active DNR order written in the patient's chart before surgery), factors associated with 30-day mortality, increased length of stay, and inpatient death were determined via penalized regression. Unadjusted and adjusted estimates for selected variables are presented.

RESULTS

After selection as above, 211,420 patients underwent prespecified procedures, and of those, 2755 (1.3%) had pre-existing DNR orders and met above selection to address morbidity/mortality aims. By specialty, of these patients with a preoperative DNR, 1149 underwent colorectal, 870 vascular, and 736 orthopedic surgery. Across groups, 36.2% were male and had a mean age 79.9 years (range 21-90). The 30-day mortality was 15.4%-27.2% and median length of stay was 6-12 days. Death at discharge was 7.0%, 13.1%, and 23.0% in orthopedics, vascular, and colorectal patients with a DNR, respectively. The strongest factors associated with increased odds of 30-day mortality were preoperative septic shock in colorectal patients, preoperative ascites in vascular patients, and any requirement of mechanical ventilation at admission in orthopedic patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with DNR orders undergoing common surgical procedures, the association of characteristics with morbidity and mortality varies in both direction and magnitude. The DNR order itself should not be the defining measure of risk.

Perceptions of ICU Care Following Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders: A Military Perspective

Although do-not-resuscitate orders only prohibit cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the case of cardiac arrest, the common initiation of this code status in the context of end-of-life care may lead providers to draw premature conclusions about other goals of care. The aim of this study is to identify concerns regarding care quality in the setting of do-not-resuscitate orders within the Department of Defense and compare differences in perceptions between members of the critical care team.

Design

A cross sectional observational study was conducted.

Setting

This study took place in the setting of critical care within the Department of Defense.

Subjects

All members of the Uniformed Services Section of the Society of Critical Care Medicine were invited to participate.

Interventions

A validated 31-question survey exploring the perceptions of care quality in the setting of do-not-resuscitate status was distributed.

Measurements and Main Results

Exploratory factor analysis was used to categorically group survey questions, and average factor scores were compared between respondent groups using t tests. Responses to individual questions were also analyzed between comparison groups using Fisher exact tests. Factor analysis revealed no significant differences between respondents of different training backgrounds; however, those with do-not-resuscitate training were more likely to agree that active treatment would be pursued (p = 0.024) and that trust and communication would be maintained (p = 0.005). Although 38% of all respondents worry that quality of care will decrease, 93% agree that life-prolonging treatments should be offered. About a third of providers wrongly believed that a do-not-resuscitate order must be reversed prior to an operation.

Conclusions

Although providers across training backgrounds held similar concerns about decreased care quality in the ICU, there is wide belief that the routine and noninvasive interventions are offered as indicated. Those with do-not-resuscitate training were more likely to believe that standards of care continued to be met after code status change.

Adult Perianesthesia Do Not Resuscitate Orders: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review is to assess if Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) orders should be routinely rescinded during anesthesia, determine if consensus on retaining DNR orders exists in the literature, and explore the current state of clinical practice.

DESIGN

This systematic review followed preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines.

METHODS

In June 2018, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and PubMed databases were systematically searched using defined inclusion/exclusion criteria.

FINDINGS

Ninety-one articles from the databases were pooled with 16 works identified as formative to the research questions. Forty-nine articles were analyzed and included in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

It is unethical to automatically rescind DNR orders during anesthesia. Patients have the right to retain their DNR orders unaltered or modify them for the perianesthesia period. Sufficient evidence exists to create meaningful policy at every level. A consensus exists among professional organizations that the standard of care is a required reconsideration of DNR orders before anesthesia.

Creating a Pathway for Multidisciplinary Shared Decision-Making to Improve Communication During Preoperative Assessment

Shared decision-making (SDM) is essential for high-quality surgical care. Barriers to SDM exist in clinical practice but there is evidence these obstacles can be overcome. SDM requires clinician and patient engagement. Though patients may indicate understanding, deficits in decision making may persist based on language, age, or educational barriers. Multidisciplinary decision-making before surgery is an opportunity for anesthesiologists and other perioperative professionals to improve surgical care. The authors present an example of a successfully implemented pathway for high-risk surgical patients at a tertiary care center, leveraging the preoperative anesthesia evaluation.

Do-Not-Resuscitate status as an independent risk factor for patients undergoing surgery for hip fracture

AIM

To determine morbidity and mortality in hip fracture patients and also to assess for any independent associations between Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) status and increased post-operative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing surgical repair of hip fractures.

METHODS

We conducted a propensity score matched retrospective analysis using de-identified data from the American College of Surgeons’ National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS NSQIP) for all patients undergoing hip fracture surgery over a 7 year period in hospitals across the United States enrolled in the ACS NSQIP with and without DNR status. We measured patient demographics including DNR status, co-morbidities, frailty and functional baseline, surgical and anaesthetic procedure data, post-operative morbidity/complications, length of stay, discharge destination and mortality.

RESULTS

Of 9218 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, 13.6% had a DNR status, 86.4% did not. Mortality was higher in the DNR compared to the non-DNR group, at 15.3% vs 8.1% and propensity score matched multivariable analysis demonstrated that DNR status was independently associated with mortality (OR = 2.04, 95%CI: 1.46-2.86, P < 0.001). Additionally, analysis of the propensity score matched cohort demonstrated that DNR status was associated with a significant, but very small increased likelihood of post-operative complications (0.53 vs 0.43 complications per episode; OR = 1.21; 95%CI: 1.04-1.41, P = 0.004). Cardiopulmonary resuscitation and unplanned reintubation were significantly less likely in patients with DNR status.

CONCLUSION

While DNR status patients had higher rates of post-operative complications and mortality, DNR status itself was not otherwise associated with increased morbidity. DNR status appears to increase 30-d mortality via ceilings of care in keeping with a DNR status, including withholding reintubation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation.