Dataset Information

Association between Do Not Resuscitate/Do Not Intubate Status and Resident Physician Decision-making. A National Survey.

ABSTRACT:

Rationale

Compared with their Full Code counterparts, patients with do not resuscitate/do not intubate (DNR/DNI) status receive fewer interventions and have higher mortality than predicted by clinical characteristics.

Objectives

To assess whether internal medicine residents, the front-line providers for many hospitalized patients, would manage hypothetical patients differently based on code status. We hypothesized respondents would be less likely to provide a variety of interventions to DNR/DNI patients than to Full Code patients.

Methods

Cross-sectional, randomized survey of U.S. internal medicine residents. We created two versions of an internet survey, each containing four clinical vignettes followed by questions regarding possible interventions; the versions were identical except for varying code status of the vignettes. Residency programs were randomly allocated between the two versions.

Results

Five hundred thirty-three residents responded to the survey. As determined by Chi-squared and Fisher's exact test, decisions to intubate or perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation were largely dictated by patient code status (>94% if Full Code, <5% if DNR/DNI; P < 0.0001 for all scenarios). Resident proclivity to deliver noninvasive interventions (e.g., blood cultures, medications, imaging) was uniformly high (>90%) and unaffected by code status. However, decisions to pursue other aggressive or invasive options (e.g., dialysis, bronchoscopy, surgical consultation, transfer to intensive care unit) differed significantly based on code status in most vignettes.

Conclusions

Residents appear to assume that patients who would refuse cardiopulmonary resuscitation would prefer not to receive other interventions. Without explicit clarification of the patient's goals of care, potentially beneficial care may be withheld against the patient's wishes.

SUBMITTER: Stevenson EK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5427717 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia can be treated with intensive chemotherapy, low-intensity therapy such as low-dose aracytine or hypomethylating agents, or best supportive care. The choice between these treatments is a function of many patient-related and disease-related factors. We investigated how physicians' behavioral characteristics affect medical decision-making between intensive and non-intensive therapy in this setting. A nationwide cross-sectional online survey of hematologists collected data on medical decision-making for 6 clinical vignettes involving older acute myeloid leukemia patients that were representative of routine practice. Questionnaires elicited physicians' demographic and occupational characteristics along with their individual behavioral characteristics according to a decision theory framework. From the pattern of responses to the vignettes, a K-means clustering algorithm was used to distinguish those who were likely to prescribe more intensive therapy and those who were likely to prescribe less intensive or no therapy. Multivariate analyses were used to identify physician's characteristics predictive of medical decision-making. We obtained 230 assessable answers, which represented an adjusted response rate of 45.4%. A multivariate model (n=210) revealed that physicians averse to uncertainty recommend significantly more intensive chemotherapy: Odds Ratio (OR) [95% Confidence Interval (CI)]: 1.15 [1.01;1.30]; P=0.039. Male physicians who do not conform to the expected utility model (assumed as economically irrational) recommend more intensive chemotherapy [OR (95% CI) = 3.45 (1.34; 8.85); P=0.01]. Patient volume per physician also correlated with therapy intensity [OR (95% CI)=0.98 (0.96; 0.99); P=0.032]. The physicians' medical decision-making was not affected by their age, years of experience, or hospital facility. The significant association between medical decision and individual behavioral characteristics of the physician identifies a novel non-biological factor that may affect acute myeloid leukemia patients' outcomes and explain variations in clinical practice. It should also encourage the use of validated predictive models and the description of novel bio-markers to best select patients for intensive chemotherapy or low-intensity therapy.

Project description:BackgroundGoal attainment of guideline-recommended low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is suboptimal. Little is known about how patient factors influence physicians' treatment decision-making in hypercholesterolemia. We examined physicians' treatment recommendations in high-risk patients whose LDL-C remained uncontrolled despite statin monotherapy.MethodsPhysicians completed a questionnaire prior to randomization into period I of a two-period randomized controlled trial evaluating LDL-C goal attainment in patients whose LDL-C remained ≥100 mg/dL after 5 weeks' treatment with atorvastatin 10 mg/day (NCT01154036). Physicians' treatment recommendations were surveyed for two hypothetical and one real scenario: (1) LDL-C presumed near goal (between 100-105 mg/dL), (2) LDL-C presumed far from goal (~120 mg/dL), and (3) observed baseline LDL-C of enrolled patients. Prognostic factors considered during decision-making were identified by regression analysis. Observed lipid outcomes at the end of period I (following 6 weeks' treatment with ezetimibe 10 mg plus atorvastatin 10 mg, atorvastatin 20 mg, or rosuvastatin 10 mg) were compared with estimated LDL-C outcomes for physicians' treatment recommendations after 6 weeks (based on individual patients' pre-randomization LDL-C and expected incremental change).ResultsQuestionnaires were completed for 1,534 patients. No change in therapy, or double atorvastatin dose, were frequently recommended, even when LDL-C was far from goal (6.5% and 52.2% of patients, respectively). Double atorvastatin dose was commonly recommended in all scenarios (43-52% of patients). More intensive LDL-C-lowering regimens were recommended infrequently e.g. double atorvastatin dose and add ezetimibe only <12% in all scenarios. Overall, cardiovascular risk factors and desire to achieve a more aggressive LDL-C goal were prominent factors in decision-making for treatment. Comparison of observed and estimated LDL-C levels showed that physicians tended to overestimate the effectiveness of their recommendations.ConclusionsThis study provides insight into physicians' perspectives on clinical management of hypercholesterolemia and highlights a gap in knowledge translation from guidelines to clinical practice. The need for lower LDL-C and cardiovascular risk were key drivers in clinical decision-making, but physicians' treatment choices were more conservative than guideline recommendations, potentially resulting in poorer LDL-C reduction. When compared with actual outcomes, projected LDL-C control was better if physicians used more comprehensive strategies rather than simply doubling the statin dose.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov: NCT01154036.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Due to a low birth rate and an aging population, Japan faces an increase in the number of elderly people without children living in single households. These elderly without a spouse and/or children encounter a lack of caregivers because most sources of care for the elderly in Japan are not provided by private agencies but by family members. However, family caregivers not only help with daily living but are also key participants in treatment decision making. The effect of family absence on treatment decision making has not been elucidated, although more elderly people will not have family members to make surrogate decisions on their behalf. OBJECTIVE:The aim is to understand the influence of family absence on treatment decision making by physicians through a cross-sectional online survey with three hypothetical vignettes of patients. METHODS:We conducted a cross-sectional online survey among Japanese physicians using three hypothetical vignettes. The first vignette was about a 65-year-old man with alcoholic liver cirrhosis and the second was about a 78-year-old woman with dementia, both of whom developed pneumonia with consciousness disturbance. The third vignette was about a 70-year-old woman with necrosis of her lower limb. Participants were randomly assigned to either of the two versions of the questionnaires-with family or without family-but methods were identical otherwise. Participants chose yes or no responses to questions about whether they would perform the presented medical procedures. RESULTS:Among 1112 physicians, 454 (40.8%) completed the survey; there were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between groups. Significantly fewer physicians had a willingness to perform dialysis (odds ratio [OR] 0.55, 95% CI 0.34-0.80; P=.002) and artificial ventilation (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.35-0.75; P<.001) for a patient from vignette 1 without family. In vignette 2, fewer physicians were willing to perform artificial ventilation (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39-0.90; P=.02). In vignette 3, significantly fewer physicians showed willingness to perform wound treatment (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.31-0.84; P=.007), surgery (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.22-0.57; P<.001), blood transfusion (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.31-0.66; P<.001), vasopressor (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.34-0.72; P<.001), dialysis (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.24-0.59; P<.001), artificial ventilation (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.15-0.40; P<.001), and chest compression (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.18-0.47; P<.001) for a patient without family. CONCLUSIONS:Elderly patients may have treatments withheld because of the absence of family, highlighting the potential importance of advance care planning in the era of an aging society with a declining birth rate.

Project description:BackgroundAdvance directives and end of life care are difficult discussions for both patients and health-care providers (HCPs). A HCP requires an accurate understanding of advanced directives to educate patients and their family members to allow them to make an appropriate decision. Misinterpretations of the do not resuscitate (DNR), do not intubate (DNI), and the Physicians Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) form result in ineffective communication and confusion between patients, family members, and HCPs.MethodologyAn anonymous, multiple choice online and paper survey was distributed to patients, family members of patients (PFMs), and HCPs from December 12, 2012 to March 6, 2013. Data regarding demographics, the accuracy of determining the correct definition of DNR and DNI, the familiarity of the POLST form and if a primary care physician had discussed advanced directives with the participants were collected.ResultsA total of 687 respondents participated in the survey. Patients and PFMs could not distinguish the definition of DNR (95% confidence interval [CI] [1.453-2.804]) or DNI (95% CI (1.216-2.334)) 52% of the time while HCPs 35% and 39% of the time (P < 0.0005). Regarding the POLST form, 86% of patients and PFMs and 50% of HCPs were not familiar with the POLST form. Sixty-nine percent of patients and family members reported that their primary care physician had not discussed advance directives with them. Twenty-four percent of patients and family members reported that they had previous health-care experience and this was associated with increased knowledge of the POLST form (P < 0.0005). An association was also seen between the type of HCP taking the survey and the ability to correctly identify the correct definition of DNR (P < 0.0005).ConclusionDiscussion of end of life care is difficult for patients and their family members. Often times multiple discussions are required in order to effectively communicate the definition of DNR, DNI, and the POLST form. Education of patients, family members, and HCPs is required to bridge the knowledge gap of advance directives.

Project description:RationalePulmonologists frequently encounter indeterminate pulmonary nodules in practice, but it is unclear what clinical factors they rely on to guide the diagnostic evaluation.ObjectivesTo assess the current approach to the management of indeterminate pulmonary nodules and to determine the extent to which the addition of a hypothetical diagnostic blood test will influence clinical decision making.MethodsSelected pulmonologists practicing in the United States were invited to participate in a conjoint exercise based on 20 randomly generated cases of varying age, smoking history, and nodule size. Some cases included the result of a hypothetical blood test. Each respondent chose from among three diagnostic options for a patient: noninvasive monitoring (i.e., serial CT or positron emission tomography scan), a minor procedure (i.e., biopsy or bronchoscopy), or a major procedure (i.e., video-assisted thorascopic surgery or thoracotomy). Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the impact of the three risk factors and the diagnostic blood test on decision making.Measurements and main resultsFour hundred nineteen physicians participated (response rate, 10%). One hundred fifty-three physician surveys met predetermined criteria and were analyzed (4% of all invitees). A diagnostic procedure was recommended for 23% of 6-mm nodules, versus 54, 66, 77, and 84% of nodules 10, 14, 18, and 22 mm, respectively (P?<?0.001). Older age limited recommendations for invasive testing: 54% of 80-year-olds versus 61, 64, 63, and 61% of patients 71, 62, 53, and 44 years of age, respectively (P?<?0.001). In multivariate analyses, nodule size, smoking history, age, and the blood test each influenced decision making (P?<?0.001).ConclusionsThe pulmonologists who participated in this survey were more likely to proceed with invasive testing, instead of observation or additional imaging, as the size of the nodule increased. The use of a hypothetical blood test resulted in significant alterations in the decision to pursue invasive testing.