26
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Toward Evidence-Based End-of-Life Care.

      1
      The New England journal of medicine

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      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.

          Related collections

          Most cited references4

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

          Regional variation in the association between advance directives and end-of-life Medicare expenditures.

          It is unclear if advance directives (living wills) are associated with end-of-life expenditures and treatments. To examine regional variation in the associations between treatment-limiting advance directive use, end-of-life Medicare expenditures, and use of palliative and intensive treatments. Prospectively collected survey data from the Health and Retirement Study for 3302 Medicare beneficiaries who died between 1998 and 2007 linked to Medicare claims and the National Death Index. Multivariable regression models examined associations between advance directives, end-of-life Medicare expenditures, and treatments by level of Medicare spending in the decedent's hospital referral region. Medicare expenditures, life-sustaining treatments, hospice care, and in-hospital death over the last 6 months of life. Advance directives specifying limits in care were associated with lower spending in hospital referral regions with high average levels of end-of-life expenditures (-$5585 per decedent; 95% CI, -$10,903 to -$267), but there was no difference in spending in hospital referral regions with low or medium levels of end-of-life expenditures. Directives were associated with lower adjusted probabilities of in-hospital death in high- and medium-spending regions (-9.8%; 95% CI, -16% to -3% in high-spending regions; -5.3%; 95% CI, -10% to -0.4% in medium-spending regions). Advance directives were associated with higher adjusted probabilities of hospice use in high- and medium-spending regions (17%; 95% CI, 11% to 23% in high-spending regions, 11%; 95% CI, 6% to 16% in medium-spending regions), but not in low-spending regions. Advance directives specifying limitations in end-of-life care were associated with significantly lower levels of Medicare spending, lower likelihood of in-hospital death, and higher use of hospice care in regions characterized by higher levels of end-of-life spending.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Default options in advance directives influence how patients set goals for end-of-life care.

            Although decisions regarding end-of-life care are personal and important, they may be influenced by the ways in which options are presented. To test this hypothesis, we randomly assigned 132 seriously ill patients to complete one of three types of advance directives. Two types had end-of-life care options already checked-a default choice-but one of these favored comfort-oriented care, and the other, life-extending care. The third type was a standard advance directive with no options checked. We found that most patients preferred comfort-oriented care, but the defaults influenced those choices. For example, 77 percent of patients in the comfort-oriented group retained that choice, while 43 percent of those in the life-extending group rejected the default choice and selected comfort-oriented care instead. Among the standard advance directive group, 61 percent of patients selected comfort-oriented care. Our findings suggest that patients may not hold deep-seated preferences regarding end-of-life care. The findings provide motivation for future research examining whether using default options in advance directives may improve important outcomes, including patients' receipt of wanted and unwanted services, resource use, survival, and quality of life.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Use of the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment Program in the Clinical Setting: A Systematic Review of the Literature

              The Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) form is a palliative care tool that contains standardized, actionable medical orders. It is designed to ensure that patient treatment preferences are elicited, communicated, and honored throughout the healthcare system. A systematic review of the literature was conducted to evaluate what is currently known about the POLST program and identify directions for future research. Twenty-three research studies focused on POLST use in the clinical setting were identified. A majority of studies have been conducted all or in part in Oregon, with chart review the most frequently used methodology. Research suggests that POLST is most commonly used in older, white patients who are near the end of life. A nonphysician facilitator usually prepares the POLST form for the physician to review and sign. The orders documented on POLST reflect a wide degree of individualization, with only approximately one-third of patients having orders reflecting the lowest level of treatment in all POLST form sections. Clinicians have generally positive attitudes regarding use of POLST yet report a wide range of challenges. POLST alters treatment in a way that is consistent with orders. However, evidence that POLST reflects patient or surrogate treatment preferences is lacking. Research is needed to evaluate the quality of POLST decisions, explore the experiences of patients and their surrogates, develop decision-support tools, improve clinician education, and assess the effect of POLST on care outcomes through intervention and population-based studies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                N. Engl. J. Med.
                The New England journal of medicine
                1533-4406
                0028-4793
                Nov 19 2015
                : 373
                : 21
                Affiliations
                [1 ] From the Fostering Improvement in End-of-Life Decision Science (FIELDS) program; the Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics; the Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine; the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy; and the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
                Article
                10.1056/NEJMp1509664
                26465826
                7f4ee808-36d3-4b6c-a114-4f39f6b37f31
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article