Mi-Kyung Song1, Sandra E Ward, Feng-Chang Lin. 1. School of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA. songm@email.unc.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that surrogate decision makers may be too optimistic about their end-of-life decision making abilities for loved ones. We examined surrogates' decision making confidence with an emphasis on its linkages to their understandings of patients' values and goals for end-of-life care. METHODS: We used baseline data from a randomized trial with 58 dyads of African-American dialysis patients and their surrogates who separately completed the Values of Life-Sustaining Treatment Outcomes and the Goals of Care documents. Surrogates also completed a Surrogate Decision Making Confidence Scale. RESULTS: Overall, 60% of surrogates were unsure how their loved ones would feel about continuing life-sustaining treatment, including dialysis, in at least one of the four outcomes presented in the Values of Life-Sustaining Treatment Outcomes. For goals of care near end of life, 67.2% to 69.0% of patients preferred comfort care only, but only 20 (34.5%) surrogates were congruent with patients on Goals of Care. Nonetheless, surrogates' confidence was high (M=3.23 out of 4.0). Surrogates' confidence was positively associated with dyad congruence in values for life-sustaining treatment at only a small magnitude (Spearman's rho=.31, p=.02), but not with dyad congruence in goals of care (χ(2)=2.13, df=1, p=.19). CONCLUSIONS: Surrogates' confidence had little association with their actual understanding of patients' values and goals. Interventions to prepare patients and surrogates for end-of-life decision making may need to address overconfidence and help surrogates recognize their limited understanding of patients' values and goals.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that surrogate decision makers may be too optimistic about their end-of-life decision making abilities for loved ones. We examined surrogates' decision making confidence with an emphasis on its linkages to their understandings of patients' values and goals for end-of-life care. METHODS: We used baseline data from a randomized trial with 58 dyads of African-American dialysis patients and their surrogates who separately completed the Values of Life-Sustaining Treatment Outcomes and the Goals of Care documents. Surrogates also completed a Surrogate Decision Making Confidence Scale. RESULTS: Overall, 60% of surrogates were unsure how their loved ones would feel about continuing life-sustaining treatment, including dialysis, in at least one of the four outcomes presented in the Values of Life-Sustaining Treatment Outcomes. For goals of care near end of life, 67.2% to 69.0% of patients preferred comfort care only, but only 20 (34.5%) surrogates were congruent with patients on Goals of Care. Nonetheless, surrogates' confidence was high (M=3.23 out of 4.0). Surrogates' confidence was positively associated with dyad congruence in values for life-sustaining treatment at only a small magnitude (Spearman's rho=.31, p=.02), but not with dyad congruence in goals of care (χ(2)=2.13, df=1, p=.19). CONCLUSIONS: Surrogates' confidence had little association with their actual understanding of patients' values and goals. Interventions to prepare patients and surrogates for end-of-life decision making may need to address overconfidence and help surrogates recognize their limited understanding of patients' values and goals.
Authors: Etienne Phipps; Gala True; Diana Harris; Umi Chong; William Tester; Stephen I Chavin; Leonard E Braitman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-02-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Daniel P Sulmasy; Mark T Hughes; Gayane Yenokyan; Joan Kub; Peter B Terry; Alan B Astrow; Julie A Johnson; Grace Ho; Marie T Nolan Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2017-07-14 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Mi-Kyung Song; Sandra E Ward; Jason P Fine; Laura C Hanson; Feng-Chang Lin; Gerald A Hladik; Jill B Hamilton; Jessica C Bridgman Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2015-06-30 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: J Nicholas Dionne-Odom; Danny G Willis; Marie Bakitas; Beth Crandall; Pamela J Grace Journal: Nurs Outlook Date: 2014-10-13 Impact factor: 3.250
Authors: Daniel Y Lam; Jennifer S Scherer; Mark Brown; Vanessa Grubbs; Jane O Schell Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2019-02-06 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Mi-Kyung Song; Sandra E Ward; Laura C Hanson; Feng-Chang Lin; Jill B Hamilton; Gerald Hladik; Jason P Fine; Jessica C Bridgman; Summer K Sun; Margaret S Miles Journal: J Nephrol Soc Work Date: 2012
Authors: Mi-Kyung Song; Sandra E Ward; Feng-Chang Lin; Jill B Hamilton; Laura C Hanson; Gerald A Hladik; Jason P Fine Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Fahad Saeed; Catherine R Butler; Carlyn Clark; Kristen O'Loughlin; Ruth A Engelberg; Paul L Hebert; Danielle C Lavallee; Elizabeth K Vig; Manjula Kurella Tamura; J Randall Curtis; Ann M O'Hare Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2021-09-10 Impact factor: 8.237