Literature DB >> 19084893

Factors associated with discussion of care plans and code status at the time of hospital admission: results from the Multicenter Hospitalist Study.

Andrew D Auerbach1, Rebecca Katz, Steven Z Pantilat, Rachelle Bernacki, Jeffrey Schnipper, Peter Kaboli, Tosha Wetterneck, David Gonzales, Vineet Arora, James Zhang, David Meltzer.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Hospital admission is a time when patients are sickest and also often encountering an entirely new set of caregivers. As a result, understanding and documenting a patient's care preferences at hospital admission is critically important.
OBJECTIVE: To understand factors associated with documentation of care planning discussions in patients admitted to general medical services at 6 academic medical centers.
DESIGN: Observational cohort study using data collected during the Multicenter Hospitalist Study, conducted between July 1, 2002 and June 30, 2004.
SETTING: Prospective trial enrolling patients admitted to general medicine services at 6 university-based teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: Patients were eligible for this study if they were 18 years of age or older, admitted to a hospitalist or nonhospitalist physician, and able to give informed consent. MEASUREMENTS: Presence of chart documentation that the admitting team had discussed care plans with the patient within the first 24 hours of hospitalization. Notations such as "full code" were not counted as a discussion, whereas notations such as "discussed care wishes and plan with patient" were counted.
RESULTS: A total of 17,097 patients over the age of 18 gave informed consent and completed an interview and chart abstraction; of these, 1776 (10.3%) had a code status discussion (CD) documented in the first 24 hours of their admission. Patients with a CD were older (69 years vs. 56 years, P < 0.0001), more often white (52.8% vs. 43.3%, P < 0.0001), and more likely to have cancer (19.8% vs. 11.4%, P < 0.0001), or depression (35.1% vs. 30.9%, P < 0.0001). There was marked variability in CD documentation across sites of enrollment (2.8%-24.9%, P < 0.0001). Despite strong associations seen in unadjusted comparisons, in multivariable models many socioeconomic factors, functional status, comorbid illness, and documentation of a surrogate decision maker were only moderately associated with a CD (adjusted odds ratios all less than 2.0). However, patients' site of enrollment (odds ratios 1.74-5.14) and informal notations describing prehospital care wishes (eg, orders for "do not resuscitate"/"do not intubate;" odds ratios 3.22-11.32 compared with no preexisting documentation) were powerfully associated with CD documentation. Site remained a powerful influence even in patients with no documented prehospital wishes. LIMITATIONS: Our results are derived from a relatively small number of academic sites, and we cannot connect documentation differences to differences in patient outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Documentation of a CD at admission was more strongly associated with informal documentation of prehospital care wishes and where the patient was hospitalized than legal care planning documents (such as durable power of attorney), or comorbid illnesses. Efforts to improve communication between hospitalists and their patients might target local documentation practices and culture. (c) 2008 Society of Hospital Medicine.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19084893      PMCID: PMC3049295          DOI: 10.1002/jhm.369

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Hosp Med        ISSN: 1553-5592            Impact factor:   2.960


  24 in total

1.  Evaluating the efficiency of california providers in caring for patients with chronic illnesses.

Authors:  John E Wennberg; Elliott S Fisher; Laurence Baker; Sandra M Sharp; Kristen K Bronner
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2005 Jul-Dec       Impact factor: 6.301

Review 2.  Physician staffing patterns and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients: a systematic review.

Authors:  Peter J Pronovost; Derek C Angus; Todd Dorman; Karen A Robinson; Tony T Dremsizov; Tammy L Young
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-11-06       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Systematic implementation of an advance directive program in nursing homes: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  D W Molloy; G H Guyatt; R Russo; R Goeree; B J O'Brien; M Bédard; A Willan; J Watson; C Patterson; C Harrison; T Standish; D Strang; P J Darzins; S Smith; S Dubois
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000-03-15       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 4.  The hospitalist movement 5 years later.

Authors:  Robert M Wachter; Lee Goldman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002 Jan 23-30       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Implementation of a voluntary hospitalist service at a community teaching hospital: improved clinical efficiency and patient outcomes.

Authors:  Andrew D Auerbach; Robert M Wachter; Patricia Katz; Jonathan Showstack; Robert B Baron; Lee Goldman
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2002-12-03       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Effects of physician experience on costs and outcomes on an academic general medicine service: results of a trial of hospitalists.

Authors:  David Meltzer; Willard G Manning; Jeanette Morrison; Manish N Shah; Lei Jin; Todd Guth; Wendy Levinson
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2002-12-03       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Factors considered important at the end of life by patients, family, physicians, and other care providers.

Authors:  K E Steinhauser; N A Christakis; E C Clipp; M McNeilly; L McIntyre; J A Tulsky
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000-11-15       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Choices about cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the hospital. When do physicians talk with patients?

Authors:  S E Bedell; T L Delbanco
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1984-04-26       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  End-of-life care in a voluntary hospitalist model: effects on communication, processes of care, and patient symptoms.

Authors:  Andrew D Auerbach; Steven Z Pantilat
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2004-05-15       Impact factor: 4.965

10.  Discussing cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a study of elderly outpatients.

Authors:  R H Shmerling; S E Bedell; A Lilienfeld; T L Delbanco
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1988 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.128

View more
  13 in total

1.  Making progress with code status documentation.

Authors:  Rashmi K Sharma; Anthony C Breu
Journal:  J Hosp Med       Date:  2015-04-15       Impact factor: 2.960

2.  Timing of do-not-resuscitate orders for hospitalized older adults who require a surrogate decision-maker.

Authors:  Alexia M Torke; Greg A Sachs; Paul R Helft; Sandra Petronio; Christianna Purnell; Siu Hui; Christopher M Callahan
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2011-07-07       Impact factor: 5.562

3.  Do hospitalists affect clinical outcomes and efficiency for patients with acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH)?

Authors:  Jorge T Go; Mary Vaughan-Sarrazin; Andrew Auerbach; Jeffrey Schnipper; Tosha B Wetterneck; David Gonzalez; David Meltzer; Peter J Kaboli
Journal:  J Hosp Med       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.960

4.  Sequence patterns in the resolution of clinical instabilities in community-acquired pneumonia and association with outcomes.

Authors:  Gavin W Hougham; Sandra A Ham; Gregory W Ruhnke; Elizabeth Schulwolf; Andrew D Auerbach; Jeffrey L Schnipper; Peter J Kaboli; Tosha B Wetterneck; David Gonzalez; Vineet M Arora; David O Meltzer
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2013-10-03       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Processes of code status transitions in hospitalized patients with advanced cancer.

Authors:  Areej El-Jawahri; Kelsey Lau-Min; Ryan D Nipp; Joseph A Greer; Lara N Traeger; Samantha M Moran; Sara M D'Arpino; Ephraim P Hochberg; Vicki A Jackson; Barbara J Cashavelly; Holly S Martinson; David P Ryan; Jennifer S Temel
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2017-09-07       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Code status discussions between attending hospitalist physicians and medical patients at hospital admission.

Authors:  Wendy G Anderson; Rebecca Chase; Steven Z Pantilat; James A Tulsky; Andrew D Auerbach
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2010-11-20       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Physician use of advance care planning discussions in a diverse hospitalized population.

Authors:  Sonali P Kulkarni; Leah S Karliner; Andrew D Auerbach; Eliseo J Pérez-Stable
Journal:  J Immigr Minor Health       Date:  2011-06

8.  Challenges to code status discussions for pediatric patients.

Authors:  Katherine E Kruse; Jason Batten; Melissa L Constantine; Saraswati Kache; David Magnus
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-02       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Bereavement support for family caregivers: The gap between guidelines and practice in palliative care.

Authors:  Samar M Aoun; Bruce Rumbold; Denise Howting; Amanda Bolleter; Lauren J Breen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-10-04       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Association of code status discussion with invasive procedures among advanced-stage cancer and noncancer patients.

Authors:  Akinori Sasaki; Eiji Hiraoka; Yosuke Homma; Osamu Takahashi; Yasuhiro Norisue; Koji Kawai; Shigeki Fujitani
Journal:  Int J Gen Med       Date:  2017-07-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.