Older adults and chronic kidney disease decision making by primary care physicians: a scholarly review and research agenda.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Campbell KH
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2359471 | biostudies-other | 2008 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:Hospitalized patients frequently lack decision-making ability, yet little is known about physicians' approaches to surrogate decision making.To describe physicians' experiences with surrogate communication and decision making for hospitalized adults.Cross-sectional written survey.Two hundred eighty-one physicians who recently cared for adult inpatients in one academic and two community hospitals.Key features of physicians' most recent surrogate decision-making experience, including the nature of the decision, the physician's reaction, physician-surrogate communication and physician-surrogate agreement about the best course of action.Nearly three fourths of physicians (73%, n = 206) had made a major decision with a surrogate during the past month. Although nearly all patients (90%) had a surrogate, physicians reported trouble contacting the surrogate in 21% of cases. Conflict was rare (5%), and a majority of physicians agreed with surrogates about the medical facts (77%), prognosis (72%) and best course of action (65%). After adjustment for patient, physician and decision characteristics, agreement about the best course of action was more common among surrogates for older patients [prevalence ratio (PR) = 1.17 for each decade; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.31], ICU patients (PR = 1.40; CI 1.14-1.51) and patients who had previously discussed their wishes (PR = 1.60; CI 1.30-1.76), and less common when surrogates were difficult to contact (PR = 0.59; CI 0.29-0.92) or when the physician self-identified as Asian (PR = 0.60; CI 0.30-0.94).Surrogate decision making is common among hospitalized adults. Physician-surrogate decision making may be enhanced if patients discuss their preferences in advance and if physician contact with surrogate decision makers is facilitated.
| S-EPMC2726893 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background and aimsThere is increasing clinical and legal interest in discrepancies between decision-making ability and cognition in old age, a stage of life when decisions have major ramifications. We investigated the frequency and correlates of such discrepancies in non-demented older adults participating in a large community-based cohort study of aging, the Rush Memory and Aging Project.MethodsParticipants [n = 689, mean age 81.8 (SD 7.6), mean education 15.2 (SD 3.1), 76.8 % female and 93.3 % white] completed a measure of financial and healthcare decision making (DM) and a battery of 19 neuropsychological tests from which a composite measure of global cognition (COG) was derived.ResultsResults indicated that 23.9 % of the sample showed a significant discrepancy between DM and COG abilities. Of these, 12.9 % showed DM < COG, while 11.0 % showed DM > COG. Logistic regression models showed older age, being non-white, greater temporal discounting, and greater risk aversion were associated with higher odds of being in the DM < COG group. Being male was associated with higher odds of being in the DM > COG group. Education, income, depressive symptoms, and impulsivity were not associated with a discrepancy. Only demographic associations (age, sex, and race) remained significant in a fully adjusted model with terms included for all factors.ConclusionThese results support the consideration of decision making and cognition as potentially separate constructs.
| S-EPMC4654982 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo provide high-quality healthcare, it is essential to understand values that guide the healthcare decisions of older adults. We investigated the types of values that culturally diverse older adults incorporate in medical decision making.MethodsFocus groups were held with older adults who varied in cognitive status (mildly impaired versus those with normal cognition) and ethnicity (Hispanic and non-Hispanic). Investigators used a qualitative descriptive approach to analyze transcripts and identify themes.ResultsForty-nine individuals (49% with cognitive impairment; 51% Hispanic) participated. Participants expressed a wide range of values relating to individual factors, familial/cultural beliefs and expectations, balancing risks and benefits, receiving decisional support, and considering values other than their own. Participants emphasized that values are individual-specific, influenced by aging, and change throughout life course. Participants described barriers and facilitators that interfere with or promote value solicitation and incorporation during medical encounters.ConclusionStudy findings highlight that in older adults with various health experiences, cognitive and physical health status, and sociocultural backgrounds, medical decisions are influenced by a variety of values.Practical implicationsClinicians should take time to elicit, understand, and reassess the different types of values of older adults.
| S-EPMC8980797 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesWhile patients' health priorities should inform healthcare, strategies for doing so are lacking for patients with multiple conditions. We describe challenges to, and strategies that support, patients' priorities-aligned decision-making.DesignParticipant observation qualitative study.SettingPrimary care and cardiology practices in Connecticut.ParticipantsTen primary care clinicians, five cardiologists, and the Patient Priorities implementation team (four geriatricians, physician expert in clinician training, behavioral medicine expert). The patients discussed were ? 66 years with >3 chronic conditions and ?10 medications or saw ? two specialists.ExposureFollowing initial training and experience in providing Patient Priorities Care, the clinicians and Patient Priorities implementation team participated in 21 case-based, group discussions (10 face-to-face;11 telephonic). Using emergent learning (i.e. learning which arises from interactions among the participants), participants discussed challenges, posed solutions, and worked together to determine how to align care options with the health priorities of 35 patients participating in the Patient Priorities Care pilot.Main outcomesChallenges to, and strategies for, aligning decision-making with patient's health priorities.ResultsCategories of challenges discussed among participants included uncertainty, complexity, and multiplicity of problems and treatments; difficulty switching to patients' priorities as the focus of decision-making; and differing perspectives between patients and clinicians, and among clinicians. Strategies identified to support patient priorities-aligned decision-making included starting with one thing that matters most to each patient; conducting serial trials of starting, stopping, or continuing interventions; focusing on function (i.e. achieving patient's desired activities) rather than eliminating symptoms; basing communications, decision-making, and effectiveness on patients' priorities not solely on diseases; and negotiating shared decisions when there are differences in perspectives.ConclusionsThe discrete set of challenges encountered and the implementable strategies identified suggest that patient priorities-aligned decision-making in the care of patients with multiple chronic conditions is feasible, albeit complicated. Findings require replication in additional settings and determination of their effect on patient outcomes.
| S-EPMC6557523 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To evaluate the effects of a shared decision making (SDM) intervention for older adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). A pragmatic trial evaluated the effects of the SDMMCC intervention, existing of SDM training for nine geriatricians in two hospitals and a preparatory tool for patients. A prospective pre-intervention post-intervention multi-center clinical study was conducted in which an usual care group of older patients with MCC and their informal caregivers was included before the implementation of the intervention and a new cohort of patients and informal caregivers after the implementation of the intervention. SDM was observed using the OPTIONMCC during video-recorded consultations. Patient- and caregivers reported outcomes regarding their role in SDM, involvement, perceived SDM and decisional conflict were measured. The differences between groups regarding the level of observed SDM (OPTIONMCC) were analyzed with a mixed model analysis. Dichotomous patient-reported outcomes were analyzed with a logistic mixed model. From two outpatient geriatric clinics 216 patients with MCCs participated. The mean age was 77.3 years, and 56.3% of patients were female. No significant difference was found in the overall level of SDM as measured with the OPTIONMCC or in patient-reported outcomes. However, at item level the items discussing 'goals', 'options', and 'decision making' significantly improved after the intervention. The items discussing 'partnership' and 'evaluating the decision-making process' showed a significant decrease. Fifty-two percent of the patients completed the preparatory tool, but the results were only discussed in 12% of the consultations. This study provides scope for improvement of SDM in geriatrics. Engaging older adults with MCCs and informal caregivers in the decision making process should be an essential part of SDM training for geriatricians, beyond the SDM steps of explaining options, benefits and harms. More attention should be paid to the integration of preparatory work in the consultation.
| S-EPMC9976432 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeAlthough comorbidities, frailty, and functional impairment are common in older adults (OA) with cancer, little is known about how these factors are considered during the treatment decision-making process by OAs, their families, and health care providers. Our aim was to better understand the treatment decision process from all these perspectives.MethodsA mixed methods multi-perspective longitudinal study using semi-structured interviews and surveys with 29 OAs aged ?70 years with advanced prostate, breast, colorectal, or lung cancer, 24 of their family members,13 oncologists, and 15 family physicians was conducted. The sample was stratified on age (70-79 and 80+). All interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis.ResultsThere was no difference in the treatment decision-making experience based on age. Most OAs felt that they should have the final say in the treatment decision, but strongly valued their oncologists' opinion. "Trust in my oncologist" and "chemotherapy as the last resort to prolong life" were the most important reasons to accept treatment. Families indicated a need to improve communication between them, the patient and the specialist, particularly around goals of treatment. Comorbidity and potential side-effects did not play a major role in the treatment decision-making for patients, families, or oncologists. Family physicians reported no involvement in decisions but desired to be more involved.ConclusionThis first study using multiple perspectives showed neither frailty nor comorbidity played a role in the treatment decision-making process. Efforts to improve communication were identified as an opportunity that may enhance quality of care. In a mixed methods study multiple perspective study with older adults with cancer, their family members, their oncologist and their family physician we explored the treatment decision making process and found that most older adults were satisfied with their decision. Comorbidity, functional status and frailty did not impact the older adult's or their family members' decision.
| S-EPMC5266767 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IMPORTANCE:Hospitalized older adults often lack decisional capacity, but outside of the intensive care unit and end-of-life care settings, little is known about the frequency of decision making by family members or other surrogates or its implications for hospital care. OBJECTIVE:To describe the scope of surrogate decision making, the hospital course, and outcomes for older adults. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:Prospective, observational study conducted in medicine and medical intensive care unit services of 2 hospitals in 1 Midwestern city in 1083 hospitalized older adults identified by their physicians as requiring major medical decisions. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:Clinical characteristics, hospital outcomes, nature of major medical decisions, and surrogate involvement. RESULTS:According to physician reports, at 48 hours of hospitalization, 47.4% (95% CI, 44.4%-50.4%) of older adults required at least some surrogate involvement, including 23.0% (20.6%-25.6%) with all decisions made by a surrogate. Among patients who required a surrogate for at least 1 decision within 48 hours, 57.2% required decisions about life-sustaining care (mostly addressing code status), 48.6% about procedures and operations, and 46.9% about discharge planning. Patients who needed a surrogate experienced a more complex hospital course with greater use of ventilators (2.5% of patients who made decisions and 13.2% of patients who required any surrogate decisions; P <?.001), artificial nutrition (1.7% of patients and 14.4% of surrogates; P <?.001), and length of stay (median, 6 days for patients and 7 days for surrogates; P <?.001). They were more likely to be discharged to an extended-care facility (21.2% with patient decisions and 40.9% with surrogate decisions; P <?.001) and had higher hospital mortality (0.0% patients and 5.9% surrogates; P <?.001). Most surrogates were daughters (58.9%), sons (25.0%), or spouses (20.6%). Overall, only 7.4% had a living will and 25.0% had a health care representative document in the medical record. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:Surrogate decision making occurs for nearly half of hospitalized older adults and includes both complete decision making by the surrogate and joint decision making by the patient and surrogate. Surrogates commonly face a broad range of decisions in the intensive care unit and the hospital ward setting. Hospital functions should be redesigned to account for the large and growing role of surrogates, supporting them as they make health care decisions.
| S-EPMC3947481 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEngagement in healthcare decision making has been recognized as an important, and often lacking, aspect of care, especially in the care of older adults who are major users of the healthcare system.ObjectiveWe aimed to conduct a review of available knowledge on engagement in healthcare decision making with a focus on older patients and their caregivers.MethodsWe conducted a realist synthesis focusing on strategies for engagement of older patients and their caregivers in healthcare decision making. The synthesis encompassed theoretical frameworks and both peer-reviewed and grey literature. Expert consultations included interviews (n = 2) with academics and group consultations (n = 3) with older adults and their caregivers. Abstracts that reported description, assessment, or evaluation of strategies for engagement of adult patients, families, or caregivers (i.e., that report on actual experiences of engagement) were included.ResultsThe search generated 15,683 articles, 663 of which were pertinent to healthcare decision making. Theoretical and empirical work identified a range of strategies and levels of engagement of older patients and their families in healthcare decision making. The importance of communication emerged as a key recommendation for meaningful engagement among providers and patients and their caregivers. The principles developed in this study should be implemented with consideration of the context in which care is being provided.ConclusionsWe have developed a framework that promotes the engagement of patients and their caregivers as equal partners in healthcare decision making. Future research should implement and test the framework in various clinical settings.
| S-EPMC5021754 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In two experiments, younger and older adults performed decision-making tasks in which reward values available were either independent of or dependent on the previous sequence of choices made. The choice-independent task involved learning and exploiting the options that gave the highest rewards on each trial. In this task, the stability of the expected reward for each option was not influenced by the previous choices participants made. The choice-dependent task involved learning how each choice influenced future rewards for two options and making the best decisions based on that knowledge. Younger adults performed better when rewards were independent of choice, whereas older adults performed better when rewards were dependent on choice. These findings suggest a fundamental difference in the way in which younger adults and older adults approach decision-making situations. We discuss the results in the context of prominent decision-making theories and offer possible explanations based on neurobiological and behavioral changes associated with aging.
| S-EPMC3212636 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:The objectives of this study were threefold: (1) to empirically test the conceptual model proposed by the Lichtenberg Financial Decision-making Rating Scale (LFDRS); (2) to examine the psychometric properties of the LFDRS contextual factors in financial decision-making by investigating both the reliability and convergent validity of the subscales and total scale, and (3) extending previous work on the scale through the collection of normative data on financial decision-making. METHODS:A convenience sample of 200 independent function and community dwelling older adults underwent cognitive and financial management testing and were interviewed using the LFDRS. Confirmatory factor analysis, internal consistency measures, and hierarchical regression were used in a sample of 200 community-dwelling older adults, all of whom were making or had recently made a significant financial decision. RESULTS:Results confirmed the scale's reliability and supported the conceptual model. Convergent validity analyses indicate that as hypothesized, cognition is a significant predictor of risk scores. Financial management scores, however, were not predictive of decision-making risk scores. CONCLUSIONS:The psychometric properties of the LFDRS support the scale's use as it was proposed. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS:The LFDRS instructions and scale are provided for clinicians to use in financial capacity assessments.
| S-EPMC5766370 | biostudies-literature