Abstract P399: Do Not Resuscitate Orders in Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Patients. Impact on Mortality

Introduction/background: Do not resuscitate (DNR) orders have been associated with higher mortality in hospitalized patients which the question if they these patients are victims of the self-fulfilling prophecy; that the odds of their survival is made worse by withholding aggressive treatment. In addition, previous reports show that racial and ethnic minorities tend to opt for more aggressive and lifesaving procedures as compared to Whites. Methods: We analyzed the data from Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2005-2014) for all subarachnoid hemorrhage (ICH) patients. DNR code status was identified using the International Classification of Disease, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes. Baseline characteristics, discharge outcomes (mortality, length of stay) were compared between the two groups. DNR code status was compared between different racial groups. Results: Of the 325923 patients with SAH, 20127 (6.17%%) had DNR order. SAH patients with DNR order had higher proportion of females (61.7% versus 59.4%, P=0.0048) and were older (70.9 years versus 58.4 years, P <.0001) compared to SAH patients without DNR. The in-hospital mortality was also higher (66.4% versus 22.4%, p≤.0001) among patients with DNR both univariate and multivariate analysis (OR = 5.05 (4.58 -5.56), p<.0001) after adjusting for potential confounders. Whites have a higher rate (7.59% versus 5.84%, P <.0001) of DNR order as compared to other racial/ethnic groups Conclusions: While there may be other explanations at play, the higher mortality and shorter LOS suggest that early DNR orders do lead to the self-fulfilling prophecy. The lower proportion of DNR orders among minorities suggest a sociocultural aspect in accepting the concept of DNR. These two facts raise concerns about what the real vs perceived meaning of DNR orders.

Abstract P454: Do Not Resuscitate Orders in Intracerebral Hemorrhage Patients. Impact on Mortality

Introduction/background: Do not resuscitate (DNR) orders have been associated with higher mortality in hospitalized patients which the question if they these patients are victims of the self-fulfilling prophecy; that the odds of their survival is made worse by withholding aggressive treatment. In addition, previous reports show that racial and ethnic minorities tend to opt for more aggressive and lifesaving procedures as compared to Whites. Methods: We analyzed the data from Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2005-2014) for all intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) patients. DNR code status was identified using the International Classification of Disease, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes. Baseline characteristics, discharge outcomes (mortality, length of stay) were compared between the two groups. DNR code status was compared between different racial groups. Results: Of the 884379 patients with ICH, 81968 (9.26%%) had DNR order. ICH patients with DNR order had higher proportion of females (55.1% versus 49.1%, P <.0001) and were older (74.2 years versus 66 years, P <.0001) compared to ICH patients without DNR. The in-hospital mortality was also higher (53.4% versus 23.3%, p≤.0001) among patients with DNR both univariate and multivariate analysis (OR = 3.24 (3.07 -3.41), p<.0001) after adjusting for potential confounders. Whites have a higher rate (11.5% versus 8.08%) of DNR order as compared to other racial/ethnic groups Conclusions: While there may be other explanations at play, the higher mortality and shorter LOS suggest that early DNR orders do lead to the self-fulfilling prophecy. The lower proportion of DNR orders among minorities suggest a sociocultural aspect in accepting the concept of DNR. These two facts raise concerns about what the real vs perceived meaning of DNR orders.

Are do-not-resuscitate orders associated with limitations of care beyond their intended purpose in patients with acute intracerebral haemorrhage? Analysis of the ABC-ICH study

Implementation of an acute bundle of care for intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) was associated with a marked improvement in survival at our centre, mediated by a reduction in early (<24 hours) do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders. The aim of this study was to identify possible mechanisms for this mediation. We retrospectively extracted additional data on resuscitation attempts and supportive care. This observational study utilised existing data collected for the Acute Bundle of Care for ICH (ABC-ICH) quality improvement project between from 2013 to 2017. The primary outcome was whether a patient received an early (<24 hours) DNR order. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the adjusted association between clinically meaningful factors, including an indicator for a change in treatment on the introduction of the ABC care bundle. Early DNR orders were associated with a reduced odds of escalation to critical care (OR: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.17, p<0.001). Commencement of palliative care within 72 hours was far more likely (OR: 8.76, 95% CI: 4.74 to 16.61, p<0.001) if an early DNR was in place. The cardiac arrest team were not called for an ICH patient before implementation but were called on five occasions overall during and after implementation. Further qualitative evaluation revealed that on only one occasion was there a cardiac or respiratory arrest with cardiopulmonary resuscitation performed. We found no significant increase in resuscitation attempts after bundle implementation but early DNR orders were associated with less admission to critical care and more early palliation. Early DNR orders are associated with less aggressive supportive care and should be judiciously used in acute ICH.

Evaluating if an Advance Care Planning Intervention Promotes Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders by Facilitating Accurate Prognostic Awareness

Background: Issuing do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders has seldom been an outcome in randomized clinical trials of advance care planning (ACP) interventions. The aim of this study was to examine whether an ACP intervention facilitating accurate prognostic awareness (PA) for patients with advanced cancer was associated with earlier use of DNR orders. Patients and Methods: Participants (n=460) were randomly assigned 1:1 to the experimental and control arms, with 392 deceased participants constituting the final sample of this secondary analysis study. Participants in the intervention and control arms had each received an intervention tailored to their readiness for ACP/prognostic information and symptom-management education, respectively. Effectiveness in promoting a DNR order by facilitating accurate PA was determined by intention-to-treat analysis using multivariate logistic regression with hierarchical linear modeling. Results: At enrollment in the ACP intervention and before death, 9 (4.6%) and 8 (4.1%) participants and 168 (85.7%) and 164 (83.7%) participants in the experimental and control arms, respectively, had issued a DNR order, without significant between-arm differences. However, participants in the experimental arm with accurate PA were significantly more likely than participants in the control arm without accurate PA to have issued a DNR order before death (adjusted odds ratio, 2.264; 95% CI, 1.036–4.951; P=.041). Specifically, participants in the experimental arm who first reported accurate PA 31 to 90 days before death were significantly more likely than their counterparts in the control arm who reported accurate PA to have issued a DNR order in the next wave of assessment (adjusted odds ratio, 13.365; 95% CI, 1.989–89.786; P=.008). Both arms issued DNR orders close to death (median, 5–6 days before death). Conclusions: Our ACP intervention did not promote the overall presence of a DNR order. However, our intervention facilitated the issuance of NDR orders before death among patients with accurate PA, especially those who reported accurate PA 31 to 90 days before death, but it did not facilitate the issuance of DNR orders earlier than their counterparts in the control arm.ClinicalTrial.gov Identification: NCT01912846

Abstract 14583: Palliative Care Services in Patients Admitted With Cardiogenic Shock in the United States: Frequency and Predictors of 30-day Readmission

Introduction: Patients admitted with cardiogenic shock (CS) have high in-patient mortality and readmission rates. Palliative care services (PCS) may be underutilized in this population and the association with 30-day readmission and other predictive factors are unknown. Methods: Using the 2017 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project’s National Readmission Database, we identified index admissions in patients with (1) CS (ICD-10-CM code R57.0) and (2) CS with PCS (ICD-10-CM code Z51.5). Patients with orthotopic heart transplant or left ventricular assist device were excluded. We compared differences in 30-day readmission outcomes and identified readmission predictors using logistic regression analysis. Results: Among 127,045 survey-weighted CS index admissions, inpatient mortality was 37.0%. In those survived (n=80,030), 21.0% (n=16,779) were readmitted within 30 days and 12.3% (n=9,841) had DNR orders (ICD-10-CM code Z66). Of 26,555 CS with PCS index admissions, 72.5% died inpatient. In those survived (n=7,285), 11.6% (n=844) were readmitted within 30 days and 61.2% (n=4,461) had DNR orders. From CS with PCS index admissions, mean age was 70.7; 39.2% were female; 50.0% discharged to skilled nursing facility and 33.9% discharged to home health care. The average time to readmission was 11.8 days with 36% of all readmissions within first 14 days. Primary causes of readmission were cardiac (47.7%) and infectious (13.7%). Predictors of 30-day readmission for CS group versus CS with PCS group are listed in table. Conclusions: Use of PCS in patient admitted with CS remains low at 8.6% in 2017. PCS and DNR orders were associated with lower risk of 30-day readmission. Those receiving PCS during index admission had lower readmission rates at 11.6%. In CS with PCS index admissions, cardiopulmonary and renal diseases were positive predictors while female gender, private insurance, private hospital and higher household income were negative predictors of 30-day readmission.

Nurses’ Opinions on Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders

The aim of this study was to determine nurses’ opinions on Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) orders. This is a descriptive study. A total of 1250 nurses participated in this study. The mean age of participants was 34.5 ± 7.7 years; 92.6% were women; 56.4% had bachelor’s degrees, and 28.8% were intensive care, oncology, or palliative care nurses. Most participants (94.3%) agreed that healthcare professionals involved in DNR decision-making processes should have ethical competence, while they were mostly undecided (43%) about the statement whether or not DNR should be legal. More than half the participants (60.2%) disagreed with the idea that DNR implementation causes an ethical dilemma. Participants’ opinions on DNR decisions significantly differed according to the number of years of employment and unit of duty. The results showed that most of the nurses had positive attitudes towards DNR orders despite it being illegal. Future studies are needed to better understand family members’ and decision makers’ perceptions of DNR orders for patients.

Treatment Restrictions and the Risk of Death in Patients With Ischemic Stroke or Intracerebral Hemorrhage

Background and Purpose: Do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders in the first 24 hours after intracerebral hemorrhage have been associated with an increased risk of early death. This relationship is less certain for ischemic stroke. We assessed the relation between treatment restrictions and mortality in patients with ischemic stroke and in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage. We focused on the timing of treatment restrictions after admission and the type of treatment restriction (DNR order versus more restrictive care). Methods: We retrospectively assessed demographic and clinical data, timing and type of treatment restrictions, and vital status at 3 months for 622 consecutive stroke patients primarily admitted to a Dutch university hospital. We used a Cox regression model, with adjustment for age, sex, comorbidities, and stroke type and severity. Results: Treatment restrictions were installed in 226 (36%) patients, more frequently after intracerebral hemorrhage (51%) than after ischemic stroke (32%). In 187 patients (83%), these were installed in the first 24 hours. Treatment restrictions installed within the first 24 hours after hospital admission and those installed later were independently associated with death at 90 days (adjusted hazard ratios, 5.41 [95% CI, 3.17–9.22] and 5.36 [95% CI, 2.20–13.05], respectively). Statistically significant associations were also found in patients with ischemic stroke and in patients with just an early DNR order. In those who died, the median time between a DNR order and death was 520 hours (interquartile range, 53–737). Conclusions: The strong relation between treatment restrictions (including DNR orders) and death and the long median time between a DNR order and death suggest that this relation may, in part, be causal, possibly due to an overall lack of aggressive care.