3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Association of Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment With ICU Admission Among Patients Hospitalized Near the End of Life

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          For patients with treatment-limiting Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) hospitalized near the end of life, how often is their inpatient care consistent with POLST-ordered limitations? In this retrospective cohort study of 1818 decedents with POLSTs who were hospitalized within 6 months of death, rates of intensive care unit (ICU) admission differed significantly by POLST order for medical interventions (31% for those who indicated “comfort measures only,” 46% for those who indicated “limited additional interventions,” and 62% for those who indicated “full treatment”). For patients hospitalized near the end of life, treatment-limiting POLSTs were associated with significantly lower rates of ICU admission compared with full-treatment POLSTs, although many patients with treatment-limiting POLSTs received care that was potentially discordant with their POLST. Patients with chronic illness frequently use Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) to document treatment limitations. To evaluate the association between POLST order for medical interventions and intensive care unit (ICU) admission for patients hospitalized near the end of life. Retrospective cohort study of patients with POLSTs and with chronic illness who died between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017, and were hospitalized 6 months or less before death in a 2-hospital academic health care system. POLST order for medical interventions (“comfort measures only” vs “limited additional interventions” vs “full treatment”), age, race/ethnicity, education, days from POLST completion to admission, histories of cancer or dementia, and admission for traumatic injury. The primary outcome was the association between POLST order and ICU admission during the last hospitalization of life; the secondary outcome was receipt of a composite of 4 life-sustaining treatments: mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, dialysis, and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. For evaluating factors associated with POLST-discordant care, the outcome was ICU admission contrary to POLST order for medical interventions during the last hospitalization of life. Among 1818 decedents (mean age, 70.8 [SD, 14.7] years; 41% women), 401 (22%) had POLST orders for comfort measures only, 761 (42%) had orders for limited additional interventions, and 656 (36%) had orders for full treatment. ICU admissions occurred in 31% (95% CI, 26%-35%) of patients with comfort-only orders, 46% (95% CI, 42%-49%) with limited-interventions orders, and 62% (95% CI, 58%-66%) with full-treatment orders. One or more life-sustaining treatments were delivered to 14% (95% CI, 11%-17%) of patients with comfort-only orders and to 20% (95% CI, 17%-23%) of patients with limited-interventions orders. Compared with patients with full-treatment POLSTs, those with comfort-only and limited-interventions orders were significantly less likely to receive ICU admission (comfort only: 123/401 [31%] vs 406/656 [62%], aRR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.45-0.62]; limited interventions: 349/761 [46%] vs 406/656 [62%], aRR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.71-0.87]). Across patients with comfort-only and limited-interventions POLSTs, 38% (95% CI, 35%-40%) received POLST-discordant care. Patients with cancer were significantly less likely to receive POLST-discordant care than those without cancer (comfort only: 41/181 [23%] vs 80/220 [36%], aRR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.43-0.85]; limited interventions: 100/321 [31%] vs 215/440 [49%], aRR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.51-0.78]). Patients with dementia and comfort-only orders were significantly less likely to receive POLST-discordant care than those without dementia (23/111 [21%] vs 98/290 [34%], aRR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.29-0.67]). Patients admitted for traumatic injury were significantly more likely to receive POLST-discordant care (comfort only: 29/64 [45%] vs 92/337 [27%], aRR, 1.52 [95% CI, 1.08-2.14]; limited interventions: 51/91 [56%] vs 264/670 [39%], aRR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.09-1.68]). In patients with limited-interventions orders, older age was significantly associated with less POLST-discordant care (aRR, 0.93 per 10 years [95% CI, 0.88-1.00]). Among patients with POLSTs and with chronic life-limiting illness who were hospitalized within 6 months of death, treatment-limiting POLSTs were significantly associated with lower rates of ICU admission compared with full-treatment POLSTs. However, 38% of patients with treatment-limiting POLSTs received intensive care that was potentially discordant with their POLST. This cohort study uses electronic health record (EHR) data to evaluate the association between Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) and intensive care unit (ICU) admission and the incidence of and risk factors for POLST-discordant intensive care among adult patients hospitalized 6 months or less before death.

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          End-of-life discussions, goal attainment, and distress at the end of life: predictors and outcomes of receipt of care consistent with preferences.

          Physicians have an ethical obligation to honor patients' values for care, including at the end of life (EOL). We sought to evaluate factors that help patients to receive care consistent with their preferences. This was a longitudinal multi-institutional cohort study. We measured baseline preferences for life-extending versus symptom-directed care and actual EOL care received in 325 patients with advanced cancer. We also measured associated sociodemographic, health, and communication characteristics, including EOL discussions between patients and physicians. Preferences were assessed a median of 125 days before death. Overall, 68% of patients (220 of 325 patients) received EOL care consistent with baseline preferences. The proportion was slightly higher among patients who recognized they were terminally ill (74%, 90 of 121 patients; P = .05). Patients who recognized their terminal illness were more likely to prefer symptom-directed care (83%, 100 of 121 patients; v 66%, 127 of 191 patients; P = .003). However, some patients who were aware they were terminally ill wished to receive life-extending care (17%, 21 of 121 patients). Patients who reported having discussed their wishes for EOL care with a physician (39%, 125 of 322 patients) were more likely to receive care that was consistent with their preferences, both in the full sample (odds ratio [OR] = 2.26; P < .0001) and among patients who were aware they were terminally ill (OR = 3.94; P = .0005). Among patients who received no life-extending measures, physical distress was lower (mean score, 3.1 v 4.1; P = .03) among patients for whom such care was consistent with preferences. Patients with cancer are more likely to receive EOL care that is consistent with their preferences when they have had the opportunity to discuss their wishes for EOL care with a physician.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Use of intensive care at the end of life in the United States: an epidemiologic study.

            Despite concern over the appropriateness and quality of care provided in an intensive care unit (ICU) at the end of life, the number of Americans who receive ICU care at the end of life is unknown. We sought to describe the use of ICU care at the end of life in the United States using hospital discharge data from 1999 for six states and the National Death Index. Retrospective analysis of administrative data to calculate age-specific rates of hospitalization with and without ICU use at the end of life, to generate national estimates of end-of-life hospital and ICU use, and to characterize age-specific case mix of ICU decedents. All nonfederal hospitals in the states of Florida, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Virginia, and Washington. All inpatients in nonfederal hospitals in the six states in 1999. None. We found that there were 552,157 deaths in the six states in 1999, of which 38.3% occurred in hospital and 22.4% occurred after ICU admission. Using these data to project nationwide estimates, 540,000 people die after ICU admission each year. The age-specific rate of ICU use at the end of life was highest for infants (43%), ranged from 18% to 26% among older children and adults, and fell to 14% for those >85 yrs. Average length of stay and costs were 12.9 days and $24,541 for terminal ICU hospitalizations and 8.9 days and $8,548 for non-ICU terminal hospitalizations. One in five Americans die using ICU services. The doubling of persons over the age of 65 yrs by 2030 will require a system-wide expansion in ICU care for dying patients unless the healthcare system pursues rationing, more effective advanced care planning, and augmented capacity to care for dying patients in other settings.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Family Perspectives on Aggressive Cancer Care Near the End of Life.

              Patients with advanced-stage cancer are receiving increasingly aggressive medical care near death, despite growing concerns that this reflects poor-quality care.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA
                JAMA
                American Medical Association (AMA)
                0098-7484
                February 16 2020
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Cambia Palliative Care Center of Excellence, University of Washington, Seattle
                [2 ]Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, Harborview Medical Center, University of Washington, Seattle
                [3 ]Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle
                [4 ]Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand
                [5 ]Department of Biobehavioral Nursing and Health Informatics, University of Washington, Seattle
                [6 ]Department of Bioinformatics and Medical Education, University of Washington, Seattle
                [7 ]School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle
                [8 ]Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland
                [9 ]Health Services Research and Development, Veterans Affairs Portland Health Care System, Portland, Oregon
                [10 ]Department of Bioethics and Humanities, University of Washington, Seattle
                Article
                10.1001/jama.2019.22523
                7042829
                32062674
                5a1b522b-b095-4c2c-8e72-46556132577b
                © 2020
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article