Demonstrating the impact of POLST forms on hospital care requires information not contained in state registries

An Integrative Review of the State of POLST Science: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go?

OBJECTIVES

POLST is widely used in the care of seriously ill patients to document decisions made during advance care planning (ACP) conversations as actionable medical orders. We conducted an integrative review of existing research to better understand associations between POLST use and key ACP outcomes as well as to identify directions for future research.

DESIGN

Integrative review.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Not applicable.

METHODS

We queried PubMed and CINAHL databases using names of POLST programs to identify research on POLST. We abstracted study information and assessed study design quality. Study outcomes were categorized using the international ACP Outcomes Framework: Process, Action, Quality of Care, Health Status, and Healthcare Utilization.

RESULTS

Of 94 POLST studies identified, 38 (40%) had at least a moderate level of study design quality and 15 (16%) included comparisons between POLST vs non-POLST patient groups. There was a significant difference between groups for 40 of 70 (57%) ACP outcomes. The highest proportion of significant outcomes was in Quality of Care (15 of 19 or 79%). In subdomain analyses of Quality of Care, POLST use was significantly associated with concordance between treatment and documentation (14 of 18 or 78%) and preferences concordant with documentation (1 of 1 or 100%). The Action outcome domain had the second highest positive rate among outcome domains; 9 of 12 (75%) Action outcomes were significant. Healthcare Utilization outcomes were the most frequently assessed and approximately half (16 of 35 or 46%) were significant. Health Status outcomes were not significant (0 of 4 or 0%), and no Process outcomes were identified.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Findings of this review indicate that POLST use is significantly associated with a Quality of Care and Action outcomes, albeit in nonrandomized studies. Future research on POLST should focus on prospective mixed methods studies and high-quality pragmatic trials that assess a broad range of person and health system-level outcomes.

Recent Trends in the Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Treatment in Patients with Acute Cerebrovascular Disease : 2017-2021

OBJECTIVE

The Act on Life-Sustaining Treatment (LST) decisions for end-of-life patients has been effective since February 2018. An increasing number of patients and their families want to withhold or withdraw from LST when medical futility is expected. This study aimed to investigate the status of the Act on LST decisions for patients with acute cerebrovascular disease at a single hospital.

METHODS

Between January 2017 and December 2021, 227 patients with acute cerebrovascular diseases, including hemorrhagic stroke (n=184) and ischemic stroke (n=43), died at the hospital. The study period was divided into the periods before and after the Act.

RESULTS

The duration of hospitalization decreased after the Act was implemented compared to before (15.9±16.1 vs. 11.2±18.6 days, p=0.127). The rate of obtaining consent for the LST plan tended to increase after the Act (139/183 [76.0%] vs. 27/44 [61.4%], p=0.077). Notably, none of the patients made an LST decision independently. Ventilator withdrawal was more frequently performed after the Act than before (52/183 [28.4%] vs. 0/44 [0%], p<0.001). Conversely, the rate of organ donation decreased after the Act was implemented (5/183 [2.7%] vs. 6/44 [13.6%], p=0.008). Refusal to undergo surgery was more common after the Act was implemented than before (87/149 [58.4%] vs. 15/41 [36.6%], p=0.021) among the 190 patients who required surgery.

CONCLUSION

After the Act on LST decisions was implemented, the rate of LST withdrawal increased in patients with acute cerebrovascular disease. However, the decision to withdraw LST was made by the patient's family rather than the patient themselves. After the execution of the Act, we also observed an increased rate of refusal to undergo surgery and a decreased rate of organ donation. The Act on LST decisions may reduce unnecessary treatments that prolong end-of-life processes without a curative effect. However, the widespread application of this law may also reduce beneficial treatments and contribute to a decline in organ donation.

Preferences Elicited and Respected for Seriously Ill Veterans through Enhanced Decision-Making (PERSIVED): a protocol for an implementation study in the Veterans Health Administration

BACKGROUND

Empirical evidence supports the use of structured goals of care conversations and documentation of life-sustaining treatment (LST) preferences in durable, accessible, and actionable orders to improve the care for people living with serious illness. As the largest integrated healthcare system in the USA, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) provides an excellent environment to test implementation strategies that promote this evidence-based practice. The Preferences Elicited and Respected for Seriously Ill Veterans through Enhanced Decision-Making (PERSIVED) program seeks to improve care outcomes for seriously ill Veterans by supporting efforts to conduct goals of care conversations, systematically document LST preferences, and ensure timely and accurate communication about preferences across VA and non-VA settings.

METHODS

PERSIVED encompasses two separate but related implementation projects that support the same evidence-based practice. Project 1 will enroll 12 VA Home Based Primary Care (HBPC) programs and Project 2 will enroll six VA Community Nursing Home (CNH) programs. Both projects begin with a pre-implementation phase during which data from diverse stakeholders are gathered to identify barriers and facilitators to adoption of the LST evidence-based practice. This baseline assessment is used to tailor quality improvement activities using audit with feedback and implementation facilitation during the implementation phase. Site champions serve as the lynchpin between the PERSIVED project team and site personnel. PERSIVED teams support site champions through monthly coaching sessions. At the end of implementation, baseline site process maps are updated to reflect new steps and procedures to ensure timely conversations and documentation of treatment preferences. During the sustainability phase, intense engagement with champions ends, at which point champions work independently to maintain and improve processes and outcomes. Ongoing process evaluation, guided by the RE-AIM framework, is used to monitor Reach, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance outcomes. Effectiveness will be assessed using several endorsed clinical metrics for seriously ill populations.

DISCUSSION

The PERSIVED program aims to prevent potentially burdensome LSTs by consistently eliciting and documenting values, goals, and treatment preferences of seriously ill Veterans. Working with clinical operational partners, we will apply our findings to HBPC and CNH programs throughout the national VA healthcare system during a future scale-out period.

The influence of POLST on treatment intensity at the end of life: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Despite its widespread implementation, it is unclear whether Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) are safe and improve the delivery of care that patients desire. We sought to systematically review the influence of POLST on treatment intensity among patients with serious illness and/or frailty.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of POLST and similar programs using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database for Systematic Reviews, and PsycINFO, from inception through February 28, 2020. We included adults with serious illness and/or frailty with life expectancy <1 year. Primary outcomes included place of death and receipt of high-intensity treatment (i.e., hospitalization in the last 30- and 90-days of life, ICU admission in the last 30-days of life, and number of care setting transitions in last week of life).

RESULTS

Among 104,554 patients across 20 observational studies, 27,090 had POLST. No randomized controlled trials were identified. The mean age of POLST users was 78.7 years, 55.3% were female, and 93.0% were white. The majority of POLST users (55.3%) had orders for comfort measures only. Most studies showed that, compared to full treatment orders on POLST, treatment limitations were associated with decreased in-hospital death and receipt of high-intensity treatment, particularly in pre-hospital settings. However, in the acute care setting, a sizable number of patients likely received POLST-discordant care. The overall strength of evidence was moderate based on eight retrospective cohort studies of good quality that showed a consistent, similar direction of outcomes with moderate-to-large effect sizes.

CONCLUSION

We found moderate strength of evidence that treatment limitations on POLST may reduce treatment intensity among patients with serious illness. However, the evidence base is limited and demonstrates potential unintended consequences of POLST. We identify several important knowledge gaps that should be addressed to help maximize benefits and minimize risks of POLST.

End-of-Life Care Terminology: A Scoping Review

The purpose of this scoping review is to present an overview of terms found in publications associated with end-of-life care management that can impact decision making by patients, health care providers, and researchers. Connotative terminology and syntax can influence the decision-making approach and process. We examined 49 publications for positive, negative, and neutral connotations. We consistently found negative terminology in the publications. To advance the development of nursing knowledge regarding end-of-life care, researchers should be aware of their biases of terminology and syntax use. We propose modifications to language used in end-of-life care planning models and literature can improve care congruency.