TRIAD XI: Utilizing simulation to evaluate the living will and POLST ability to achieve goal concordant care when critically ill or at end‐of‐life — The Realistic Interpretation of Advance Directives

Author(s):  
Ferdinando Mirarchi ◽  
Kristin Juhasz ◽  
Timothy Cooney ◽  
Daniel Desiderio
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 162-162
Author(s):  
Megan Shepherd-Banigan ◽  
Cassie Ford ◽  
Emmanuelle Belanger ◽  
Courtney Van Houtven

Abstract Advanced care planning (ACP) leads to better end-of-life (EoL) care. Yet, some care-partners are unaware of the person with dementia’s (PwD) preferences. Care-partners play an important role in urging PwD to consider their EoL care wishes early in their disease course and to document those wishes. However, it is unknown whether discussions between care-partners and PwD are associated with documenting EoL care plans. We apply generalized linear models to baseline data from the CARE-IDEAS study which includes a sample of patients who received an amyloid PET scan and their care-partners (n=1,672). We examine the association between PwD report of having discussed EoL care with their care-partner and PwD report of having documented their plans through an advanced directive, a living will, or designating a health care proxy. PwD who reported speaking with their care-partners about EoL care were 10% (marginal probability (MP) 0.10; 95% CI: 0.8, 0.13) more likely to have documented their EoL care wishes. Furthermore, if PwD and care-partners agreed that they had discussed EoL care, PwD were 7% (MP 0.7; 95% CI 0.04, 0.10) more likely to report that they documented their EoL care plans. The positive association between communicating with care-partners about EoL care and having formal EoL care plans suggests that the ACP process could be a systematic approach to increase the care-partner’s knowledge of PwD EoL wishes. These results also suggest that increasing involvement of care partners in ACP may encourage patients to document their wishes at end of life.


Author(s):  
Marianne F Ivey ◽  
Tyler A Vest ◽  
David A Zilz

Disclaimer In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 441-441
Author(s):  
Catheryn Koss

Abstract Advance directives (AD) help to ensure patients’ wishes are honored and contribute to improved end-of-life care. According to normative life course theory, retirement is a significant role change that signals a transition into the third age and its socially prescribed activities. To the extent that ACP is viewed as something to do when one reaches a more advanced stage in life, retirement may spark recognition that planning for incapacity and the end of life is now personally relevant and appropriate. This study tested whether transitioning from work to retirement prompted AD completion. The sample included Health and Retirement Study participants 65 and older who, in 2012, had no ADs and were not completely retired (N = 919). Retirement was operationalized as both a categorical status and as a multistep process. Three waves of data were analyzed using multinomial logistic regression to test associations between retirement transition and advance directive completion. By 2014, 21% had completed ADs and another 17% completed them by 2016. Those who completely retired between 2012 and 2014 were almost twice as likely to complete ADs between 2014 and 2016. Graduated increase in level of retirement between 2012 and 2014 was associated with higher odds of new AD possession in 2016, but did not reach statistical significance at p < .05. These results suggest the period following retirement may be an optimal time to encourage patients and clients who have not already done so to complete advance directives.


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 362-369 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amelia Barwise ◽  
Young J. Juhn ◽  
Chung-Il Wi ◽  
Paul Novotny ◽  
Carolina Jaramillo ◽  
...  

Background: Socioeconomic status (SES) is an important determinant of disparities in health care and may play a role in end-of-life care and decision-making. The SES is difficult to retrospectively abstract from current electronic medical records and data sets. Objective: Using a validated SES measuring tool derived from home address, the HOUsing-based SocioEconomic Status index, termed HOUSES we wanted to determine whether SES is associated with differences in end-of-life care and decision-making. Design/Setting/Participants: This cross-sectional study utilized a cohort of Olmsted County adult residents admitted to 7 intensive care units (ICUs) at Mayo Rochester between June 1, 2011, and May 31, 2014. Measurements: Multiple variables that reflect decision-making and care at end of life and during critical illness were evaluated, including presence of advance directives and discharge disposition. The SES was measured by individual housing-based SES index (HOUSES index; a composite index derived from real property as a standardized z-score) at the date of admission to the ICU which was then divided into 4 quartiles. The greater HOUSES, the higher SES, outcomes were adjusted for age, 24-hour Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III score, sex, race/ethnicity, and insurance. Results: Among the eligible 4134 participants, the addresses of 3393 (82%) were successfully geocoded and formulated into HOUSES. The adjusted odds ratios comparing HOUSES 1 versus 2, 3, and 4 demonstrated lower likelihood of advance directives −0.77(95% CI: 0.63-0.93) and lower likelihood of discharge to home −0.60(95% CI: 1.0.5-0.72). Conclusion: Lower SES, derived from a composite index of housing attributes, was associated with lower rates of advance directives and lower likelihood of discharge to home.


2007 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 300-307 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellen W. Bernal ◽  
Catherine A. Marco ◽  
Sue Parkins ◽  
Nancy Buderer ◽  
Sister Dorothy Thum

2006 ◽  
Vol 62 (6) ◽  
pp. 1552-1563 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mette L. Rurup ◽  
Bregje D. Onwuteaka-Philipsen ◽  
Agnes van der Heide ◽  
Gerrit van der Wal ◽  
Dorly J.H. Deeg

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document