Literature DB >> 20357283

Advance directives and outcomes of surrogate decision making before death.

Maria J Silveira1, Scott Y H Kim, Kenneth M Langa.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent discussions about health care reform have raised questions regarding the value of advance directives.
METHODS: We used data from survey proxies in the Health and Retirement Study involving adults 60 years of age or older who had died between 2000 and 2006 to determine the prevalence of the need for decision making and lost decision-making capacity and to test the association between preferences documented in advance directives and outcomes of surrogate decision making.
RESULTS: Of 3746 subjects, 42.5% required decision making, of whom 70.3% lacked decision-making capacity and 67.6% of those subjects, in turn, had advance directives. Subjects who had living wills were more likely to want limited care (92.7%) or comfort care (96.2%) than all care possible (1.9%); 83.2% of subjects who requested limited care and 97.1% of subjects who requested comfort care received care consistent with their preferences. Among the 10 subjects who requested all care possible, only 5 received it; however, subjects who requested all care possible were far more likely to receive aggressive care as compared with those who did not request it (adjusted odds ratio, 22.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.45 to 115.00). Subjects with living wills were less likely to receive all care possible (adjusted odds ratio, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.56) than were subjects without living wills. Subjects who had assigned a durable power of attorney for health care were less likely to die in a hospital (adjusted odds ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.93) or receive all care possible (adjusted odds ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.86) than were subjects who had not assigned a durable power of attorney for health care.
CONCLUSIONS: Between 2000 and 2006, many elderly Americans needed decision making near the end of life at a time when most lacked the capacity to make decisions. Patients who had prepared advance directives received care that was strongly associated with their preferences. These findings support the continued use of advance directives. 2010 Massachusetts Medical Society

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20357283      PMCID: PMC2880881          DOI: 10.1056/NEJMsa0907901

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  16 in total

Review 1.  The history of advance directives. A literature review.

Authors:  Barbara A Brown
Journal:  J Gerontol Nurs       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 1.254

2.  Enough. The failure of the living will.

Authors:  Angela Fagerlin; Carl E Schneider
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  2004 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.683

3.  Withholding and withdrawal of life support from the critically ill.

Authors:  N G Smedira; B H Evans; L S Grais; N H Cohen; B Lo; M Cooke; W P Schecter; C Fink; E Epstein-Jaffe; C May
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1990-02-01       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  'Do not resuscitate' decisions. A prospective study at three teaching hospitals.

Authors:  B Lo; G Saika; W Strull; E Thomas; J Showstack
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1985-06

5.  A prospective study of advance directives for life-sustaining care.

Authors:  M Danis; L I Southerland; J M Garrett; J L Smith; F Hielema; C G Pickard; D M Egner; D L Patrick
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1991-03-28       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Preparing for the end of life: preferences of patients, families, physicians, and other care providers.

Authors:  K E Steinhauser; N A Christakis; E C Clipp; M McNeilly; S Grambow; J Parker; J A Tulsky
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 3.612

7.  Association between advance directives and quality of end-of-life care: a national study.

Authors:  Joan M Teno; Andrea Gruneir; Zachary Schwartz; Aman Nanda; Terrie Wetle
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 5.562

8.  Brief communication: the relationship between having a living will and dying in place.

Authors:  Howard B Degenholtz; YongJoo Rhee; Robert M Arnold
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2004-07-20       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Family perspectives on end-of-life care at the last place of care.

Authors:  Joan M Teno; Brian R Clarridge; Virginia Casey; Lisa C Welch; Terrie Wetle; Renee Shield; Vincent Mor
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-01-07       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  How strictly do dialysis patients want their advance directives followed?

Authors:  A Sehgal; A Galbraith; M Chesney; P Schoenfeld; G Charles; B Lo
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1992-01-01       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  347 in total

1.  Half of older Americans seen in emergency department in last month of life; most admitted to hospital, and many die there.

Authors:  Alexander K Smith; Ellen McCarthy; Ellen Weber; Irena Stijacic Cenzer; John Boscardin; Jonathan Fisher; Kenneth Covinsky
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 6.301

2.  Learned helplessness among families and surrogate decision-makers of patients admitted to medical, surgical, and trauma ICUs.

Authors:  Donald R Sullivan; Xinggang Liu; Douglas S Corwin; Avelino C Verceles; Michael T McCurdy; Drew A Pate; Jennifer M Davis; Giora Netzer
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 9.410

3.  Accuracy of a decision aid for advance care planning: simulated end-of-life decision making.

Authors:  Benjamin H Levi; Steven R Heverley; Michael J Green
Journal:  J Clin Ethics       Date:  2011

4.  A Group Visit Initiative Improves Advance Care Planning Documentation among Older Adults in Primary Care.

Authors:  Hillary D Lum; Rebecca L Sudore; Daniel D Matlock; Elizabeth Juarez-Colunga; Jacqueline Jones; Molly Nowels; Robert S Schwartz; Jean S Kutner; Cari R Levy
Journal:  J Am Board Fam Med       Date:  2017 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.657

5.  Patient-centered and efficacious advance care planning in cancer: Protocol and key design considerations for the PEACe-compare trial.

Authors:  Judith M Resick; Robert M Arnold; Rebecca L Sudore; David Farrell; Shane Belin; Andrew D Althouse; Betty Ferrell; Bernard J Hammes; Edward Chu; Douglas B White; Kimberly J Rak; Yael Schenker
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2020-07-31       Impact factor: 2.226

6.  Evaluation of Quality Improvement Initiatives to Improve and Sustain Advance Care Planning Completion and Documentation.

Authors:  Regina M Fink; Elizabeth Somes; Hareklia Brackett; Prajakta Shanbhag; Ashley N Anderson; Hillary D Lum
Journal:  J Hosp Palliat Nurs       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 1.918

7.  Outcomes That Define Successful Advance Care Planning: A Delphi Panel Consensus.

Authors:  Rebecca L Sudore; Daren K Heyland; Hillary D Lum; Judith A C Rietjens; Ida J Korfage; Christine S Ritchie; Laura C Hanson; Diane E Meier; Steven Z Pantilat; Karl Lorenz; Michelle Howard; Michael J Green; Jessica E Simon; Mariko A Feuz; John J You
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 3.612

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

Authors:  Scott D Halpern; George Loewenstein; Kevin G Volpp; Elizabeth Cooney; Kelly Vranas; Caroline M Quill; Mary S McKenzie; Michael O Harhay; Nicole B Gabler; Tatiana Silva; Robert Arnold; Derek C Angus; Cindy Bryce
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 6.301

9.  Variation in decisions to forgo life-sustaining therapies in US ICUs.

Authors:  Caroline M Quill; Sarah J Ratcliffe; Michael O Harhay; Scott D Halpern
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 9.410

Review 10.  The Voice Is As Mighty As the Pen: Integrating Conversations into Advance Care Planning.

Authors:  Kunal Bailoor; Leslie H Kamil; Ed Goldman; Laura M Napiewocki; Denise Winiarski; Christian J Vercler; Andrew G Shuman
Journal:  J Bioeth Inq       Date:  2018-03-17       Impact factor: 1.352

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.