Evan Walker1, Ryan McMahan2, Deborah Barnes3, Mary Katen4, Daniela Lamas5, Rebecca Sudore6. 1. Department of Medicine, UCSF, San Francisco, California. Electronic address: Evan.Walker@ucsf.edu. 2. UCSF School of Medicine, San Francisco, California. 3. San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California; Department of Psychiatry, UCSF, San Francisco, California; Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, UCSF, San Francisco, California. 4. Division of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, UCSF, San Francisco, California. 5. Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Ariadne Labs at Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard T.H. Chen School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts. 6. San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California; Division of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, UCSF, San Francisco, California.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Documenting patients' advance care planning (ACP) wishes is essential to providing value-aligned care, as is having this documentation readily accessible. Little is known about ACP documentation practices in the electronic health record. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to describe ACP documentation practices and the accessibility of documented discussions in the electronic health record. METHODS: Participants were primary care patients at the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, were ≥60 years old, and had ≥2 chronic/serious health conditions. In this cross-sectional study, we assessed the prevalence of ACP documentation, including any legal forms/orders and discussions in the prior five years. We also determined accessibility of discussions (i.e., accessible centralized posting vs. inaccessible free text in progress notes). RESULTS: The mean age of 414 participants was 71 years (SD ± 8), 9% were women, 43% were nonwhite, and 51% had documented ACP including 149 (36%) with forms/orders and 138 (33%) with discussions. Seventy-four participants (50%) with forms/orders lacked accompanying explanatory documentation. Most (55%) discussions were not easily accessible, including 70% of those documenting changes in treatment preferences from prior forms/orders. CONCLUSION: Half of chronically ill, older participants had documented ACP, including one-third with documented discussions. However, half of the patients with completed legal forms/orders had no accompanying documented explanatory discussions, and the majority of documented discussions were not easily accessible, even when wishes had changed. Ensuring that patients' preferences are documented and easily accessible is an important patient safety and quality improvement target to ensure patients' wishes are honored.
CONTEXT: Documenting patients' advance care planning (ACP) wishes is essential to providing value-aligned care, as is having this documentation readily accessible. Little is known about ACP documentation practices in the electronic health record. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to describe ACP documentation practices and the accessibility of documented discussions in the electronic health record. METHODS:Participants were primary care patients at the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, were ≥60 years old, and had ≥2 chronic/serious health conditions. In this cross-sectional study, we assessed the prevalence of ACP documentation, including any legal forms/orders and discussions in the prior five years. We also determined accessibility of discussions (i.e., accessible centralized posting vs. inaccessible free text in progress notes). RESULTS: The mean age of 414 participants was 71 years (SD ± 8), 9% were women, 43% were nonwhite, and 51% had documented ACP including 149 (36%) with forms/orders and 138 (33%) with discussions. Seventy-four participants (50%) with forms/orders lacked accompanying explanatory documentation. Most (55%) discussions were not easily accessible, including 70% of those documenting changes in treatment preferences from prior forms/orders. CONCLUSION: Half of chronically ill, older participants had documented ACP, including one-third with documented discussions. However, half of the patients with completed legal forms/orders had no accompanying documented explanatory discussions, and the majority of documented discussions were not easily accessible, even when wishes had changed. Ensuring that patients' preferences are documented and easily accessible is an important patient safety and quality improvement target to ensure patients' wishes are honored.
Authors: Ladislav Volicer; Michael D Cantor; Arthur R Derse; Denise Murray Edwards; Angela M Prudhomme; Dorothy C Rasinski Gregory; James E Reagan; James A Tulsky; Ellen Fox Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Daren K Heyland; Doris Barwich; Deb Pichora; Peter Dodek; Francois Lamontagne; John J You; Carolyn Tayler; Pat Porterfield; Tasnim Sinuff; Jessica Simon Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2013-05-13 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Rebecca L Sudore; John Boscardin; Mariko A Feuz; Ryan D McMahan; Mary T Katen; Deborah E Barnes Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Hillary D Lum; Jacqueline Jones; Daniel D Matlock; Russell E Glasgow; Ingrid Lobo; Cari R Levy; Robert S Schwartz; Rebecca L Sudore; Jean S Kutner Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Kuldeep N Yadav; Nicole B Gabler; Elizabeth Cooney; Saida Kent; Jennifer Kim; Nicole Herbst; Adjoa Mante; Scott D Halpern; Katherine R Courtright Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Anna Kata; Irena Cenzer; Rebecca L Sudore; Kenneth E Covinsky; Victoria L Tang Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-05-04 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Deepshikha Charan Ashana; Noah D'Arcangelo; Priscilla K Gazarian; Avni Gupta; Stephen Perez; Amanda J Reich; Jennifer Tjia; Scott D Halpern; Joel S Weissman; Keren Ladin Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2022-02-03 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Tanja Moilanen; Mari Sivonen; Kirsi Hipp; Hanna Kallio; Oili Papinaho; Minna Stolt; Riitta Turjamaa; Arja Häggman-Laitila; Mari Kangasniemi Journal: Glob Qual Nurs Res Date: 2022-07-07
Authors: Laura P Gelfman; Rebecca L Sudore; Harriet Mather; Karen McKendrick; Mathew D Hutchinson; Rachel J Lampert; Hannah I Lipman; Daniel D Matlock; Keith M Swetz; Sean P Pinney; R Sean Morrison; Nathan E Goldstein Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2020-09-02 Impact factor: 8.790
Authors: Rebecca L Sudore; Dean Schillinger; Mary T Katen; Ying Shi; W John Boscardin; Stacy Osua; Deborah E Barnes Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Hillary D Lum; Deborah E Barnes; Mary T Katen; Ying Shi; John Boscardin; Rebecca L Sudore Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2018-06-27 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Claire Sokas; Irene M Yeh; Kathleen Coogan; Rachelle Bernacki; Susan Mitchell; Angela Bader; Keren Ladin; Jennifer A Palmer; James A Tulsky; Zara Cooper Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2020-10-07 Impact factor: 3.612