Richard D Urman1,2,3, Elizabeth J Lilley3,4, Marguerite Changala5, Charlotta Lindvall3,6,7, David L Hepner1,3,8, Angela M Bader1,3. 1. 1 Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital , Boston, Massachusetts. 2. 2 Center for Perioperative Research, Brigham and Women's Hospital , Boston, Massachusetts. 3. 3 Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital , Boston, Massachusetts. 4. 4 Department of Surgery, Rutgers-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School , New Brunswick, New Jersey. 5. 5 School of Medicine, University of California San Francisco , San Francisco, California. 6. 6 Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute , Boston, Massachusetts. 7. 7 Division of Palliative Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital , Boston, Massachusetts. 8. 8 Ariadne Labs, Brigham and Women's Hospital and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health , Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Periprocedural providers are encountering more patients with code status limitations (CSLs) regarding their preferences for resuscitation and life-sustaining treatment who choose to undergo palliative procedures. Surgical and anesthesia guidelines for preprocedural reconsideration of CSLs have been available for several years, but it is not known whether they are being followed in practice. OBJECTIVE: We assessed compliance with existing guidelines for patients undergoing venting gastrostomy tube (VGT) for malignant bowel obstruction (MBO), serving as an example of a palliative procedure received by patients near the end of life. DESIGN: Code status was determined at admission and throughout the hospitalization by chart review. Documentation of code status discussions (CSDs) was identified from provider notes and compared with existing guidelines. SETTING/ SUBJECTS: An institutional database retrospectively identified patients who underwent VGT placement for MBO at two academic hospitals (2014-2015). MEASUREMENTS: We identified 53 patients who underwent VGT placement for MBO. Interventional radiologists performed 88% of these procedures. Other periprocedural providers involved in these cases included surgeons, gastroenterologists, anesthesiologists, and sedation nurses. RESULTS: CSLs were documented before the procedure in only 43% of cases, and a documented CSD with a periprocedural provider was identified in only 22% of CSL cases. Of all VGT placements performed in patients with CSLs before the procedure, only 13% were compliant with the guidelines of preprocedural reconsideration of CSLs. CONCLUSIONS: Increased compliance with guidelines published by the American Society of Anesthesiologists, the American College of Surgeons, and the Association of Perioperative Registered Nurses is necessary to ensure goal-concordant care of patients with CSLs who undergo a procedure. Efforts should be made to incorporate these guidelines into the training of all periprocedural providers.
BACKGROUND: Periprocedural providers are encountering more patients with code status limitations (CSLs) regarding their preferences for resuscitation and life-sustaining treatment who choose to undergo palliative procedures. Surgical and anesthesia guidelines for preprocedural reconsideration of CSLs have been available for several years, but it is not known whether they are being followed in practice. OBJECTIVE: We assessed compliance with existing guidelines for patients undergoing venting gastrostomy tube (VGT) for malignant bowel obstruction (MBO), serving as an example of a palliative procedure received by patients near the end of life. DESIGN: Code status was determined at admission and throughout the hospitalization by chart review. Documentation of code status discussions (CSDs) was identified from provider notes and compared with existing guidelines. SETTING/ SUBJECTS: An institutional database retrospectively identified patients who underwent VGT placement for MBO at two academic hospitals (2014-2015). MEASUREMENTS: We identified 53 patients who underwent VGT placement for MBO. Interventional radiologists performed 88% of these procedures. Other periprocedural providers involved in these cases included surgeons, gastroenterologists, anesthesiologists, and sedation nurses. RESULTS: CSLs were documented before the procedure in only 43% of cases, and a documented CSD with a periprocedural provider was identified in only 22% of CSL cases. Of all VGT placements performed in patients with CSLs before the procedure, only 13% were compliant with the guidelines of preprocedural reconsideration of CSLs. CONCLUSIONS: Increased compliance with guidelines published by the American Society of Anesthesiologists, the American College of Surgeons, and the Association of Perioperative Registered Nurses is necessary to ensure goal-concordant care of patients with CSLs who undergo a procedure. Efforts should be made to incorporate these guidelines into the training of all periprocedural providers.
Entities:
Keywords:
code status; documentation; palliative; procedure; surgery