Susan E Hickman1,2, Rebecca L Sudore3, Greg A Sachs2,4,5, Alexia M Torke2,4,5, Anne L Myers1, Qing Tang6,7, Giorgos Bakoyannis6,7, Bernard J Hammes8. 1. Department of Community and Health Systems, School of Nursing, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana. 2. Research in Palliative and End-of-Life Communication and Training (RESPECT) Signature Center, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, Indiana. 3. School of Medicine, Division of Geriatrics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California. 4. Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, School of Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana. 5. Regenstrief Institute, Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana, Indianapolis, Indiana. 6. Department of Biostatistics, School of Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana. 7. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana. 8. Respecting Choices, A Division of C-TAC Innovations, La Crosse, Wisconsin.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the use of the Indiana Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form to record nursing home (NH) resident treatment preferences and associated practices. DESIGN: Survey. SETTING: Indiana NHs. PARTICIPANTS: Staff responsible for advance care planning in 535 NHs. MEASUREMENTS: Survey about use of the Indiana POST, related policies, and educational activities. METHODS: NHs were contacted by telephone or email. Nonresponders were sent a brief postcard survey. RESULTS: Ninety-one percent (n=486) of Indiana NHs participated, and 79% had experience with POST. Of the 65% of NHs that complete POST with residents, 46% reported that half or more residents had a POST form. POST was most often completed at the time of admission (68%). Only 52% of participants were aware of an existing facility policy regarding use of POST; 80% reported general staff education on POST. In the 172 NHs not using POST, reasons for not using it included unfamiliarity with the tool (23%) and lack of facility policies (21%). CONCLUSION: Almost 3 years after a grassroots campaign to introduce the voluntary Indiana POST program, a majority of NHs were using POST to support resident care. Areas for improvement include creating policies on POST for all NHs, training staff on POST conversations, and considering processes that may enhance the POST conversation, such as finding an optimal time to engage in conversations about treatment preferences other than a potentially rushed admission process.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the use of the Indiana Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form to record nursing home (NH) resident treatment preferences and associated practices. DESIGN: Survey. SETTING: Indiana NHs. PARTICIPANTS: Staff responsible for advance care planning in 535 NHs. MEASUREMENTS: Survey about use of the Indiana POST, related policies, and educational activities. METHODS: NHs were contacted by telephone or email. Nonresponders were sent a brief postcard survey. RESULTS: Ninety-one percent (n=486) of Indiana NHs participated, and 79% had experience with POST. Of the 65% of NHs that complete POST with residents, 46% reported that half or more residents had a POST form. POST was most often completed at the time of admission (68%). Only 52% of participants were aware of an existing facility policy regarding use of POST; 80% reported general staff education on POST. In the 172 NHs not using POST, reasons for not using it included unfamiliarity with the tool (23%) and lack of facility policies (21%). CONCLUSION: Almost 3 years after a grassroots campaign to introduce the voluntary Indiana POST program, a majority of NHs were using POST to support resident care. Areas for improvement include creating policies on POST for all NHs, training staff on POST conversations, and considering processes that may enhance the POST conversation, such as finding an optimal time to engage in conversations about treatment preferences other than a potentially rushed admission process.
Authors: Susan E Hickman; Christine A Nelson; Nancy A Perrin; Alvin H Moss; Bernard J Hammes; Susan W Tolle Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Kathleen T Unroe; Arif Nazir; Laura R Holtz; Helen Maurer; Ellen Miller; Susan E Hickman; Michael A La Mantia; Merih Bennett; Greg Arling; Greg A Sachs Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2014-12-23 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Susan E Hickman; Kathleen T Unroe; Mary T Ersek; Bryce Buente; Arif Nazir; Greg A Sachs Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2016-09-27 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Susan E Hickman; Bernard J Hammes; Alexia M Torke; Rebecca L Sudore; Greg A Sachs Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2016-11-01 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Susan E Hickman; Christine A Nelson; Alvin H Moss; Bernard J Hammes; Allison Terwilliger; Ann Jackson; Susan W Tolle Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Neil S Wenger; Judy Citko; Kate O'Malley; Allison Diamant; Karl Lorenz; Victor Gonzalez; Derjung M Tarn Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2012-08-10 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Susan E Hickman; Alexia M Torke; Greg A Sachs; Rebecca L Sudore; Anne L Myers; Qing Tang; Giorgos Bakoyannis; Bernard J Hammes Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2019-03-07 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Susan E Hickman; Alexia M Torke; Greg A Sachs; Rebecca L Sudore; Qing Tang; Giorgos Bakoyannis; Nicholette Heim Smith; Anne L Myers; Bernard J Hammes Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2021-03-24 Impact factor: 7.538
Authors: Lee A Jennings; Neil S Wenger; Li-Jung Liang; Punam Parikh; David Powell; Jose J Escarce; David Zingmond Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2022-03-11 Impact factor: 7.538
Authors: Susan E Hickman; Alexia M Torke; Greg A Sachs; Rebecca L Sudore; Qing Tang; Giorgos Bakoyannis; Nicholette Heim Smith; Anne L Myers; Bernard J Hammes Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-10-27 Impact factor: 5.128