Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Hospital Sírio-Libanês, São Paulo, Brazil.
BMC Med Educ. 2023 Oct 12;23(1):761. doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04714-2.
Life expectancy in recent decades has increased the prevalence of chronic diseases in the population, requiring an approach to new health topics, such as discussions on quality of life and expectations about death and dying. The concept of advance directives (ADs) gives individuals the opportunity to make known their decisions about the treatments they would like to receive at the end of life. Despite the recognition of relevance in clinical practice, the applicability of the concept presents challenges, including establishing the appropriate prognosis for each patient and the ideal time to approach the patient. Some prognostic tools were developed, such as the surprise question (SQ): "Would you be surprised if your patient died in 12 months?", which is used in some clinical settings to predict patient deaths and to make decisions regarding ADs. The main objective of the present study was to evaluate the behavior of second-year resident physicians (PGY-2) when the SQ was applied.
In our observational study, from July 1, 2016, to February 28, 2017, (PGY-2) in the Internal Medicine Residency Program (IMRP) applied SQ to all patients with multiple and varied chronic no communicable comorbidities, who were followed up at the general medicine outpatient clinic (GMOC) of a tertiary university hospital in São Paulo- Brazil. The frequency of the outcome (death or non-death within 12 months) was analyzed by correlating it with the clinical data (impact of the studied variables).
Eight hundred forty patients entered the study. Fitfty-two of them (6.2%) died within one year. PGY-2 predicted that two hundred and fourteen patients (25.5% of total) would die within a year (answer No to SQ), of which, 32 (14.9%) did so. The correct residents' prognosis for the subgroup of 626 patients (answer "Yes" to SQ) was NPV = 96.8% (CI = 95.4%-98.2%) and PPV = 14.9% (CI 10.1%-19, 6%). Answering "Yes" to SQ correlated negatively to addressing AD while the outcomes death and the answer No to SQ were positively correlated, according to the number of comorbidities.
The SQ, in addition to care, contributed to health education, communication and care planning shared by the doctor and patient.
近几十年来,预期寿命的延长导致人群中慢性病的患病率增加,这就需要采用新的健康主题方法,例如讨论生活质量以及对死亡和临终的期望。预先指示(AD)的概念使个人有机会表达他们对生命末期想要接受的治疗的决定。尽管在临床实践中认识到其相关性,但该概念的适用性存在挑战,包括为每位患者确定适当的预后以及接近患者的理想时间。已经开发了一些预后工具,例如“惊讶问题”(SQ):“如果您的患者在 12 个月内死亡,您会感到惊讶吗?”,该问题用于某些临床环境来预测患者的死亡并做出有关 AD 的决策。本研究的主要目的是评估第二年住院医师(PGY-2)应用 SQ 时的行为。
在我们的观察性研究中,从 2016 年 7 月 1 日至 2017 年 2 月 28 日,内科住院医师培训计划(IMRP)中的 PGY-2 将 SQ 应用于所有患有多种慢性非传染性合并症的患者,这些患者在巴西圣保罗一所三级大学医院的普通内科门诊(GMOC)接受随访。通过将结局(12 个月内死亡或未死亡)与临床数据(研究变量的影响)相关联,对结局的频率进行了分析。
844 名患者进入研究。其中 52 名(6.2%)在一年内死亡。PGY-2 预测 214 名患者(占总数的 25.5%)将在一年内死亡(SQ 回答否),其中 32 名(14.9%)确实如此。对于 SQ 回答“是”的 626 名患者亚组,正确的居民预测为阴性预测值(NPV)=96.8%(CI=95.4%-98.2%)和阳性预测值(PPV)=14.9%(CI 10.1%-19.6%)。回答 SQ 为“是”与处理 AD 呈负相关,而结局死亡和 SQ 回答“否”与并发症数量呈正相关。
SQ 除了提供护理外,还促进了医患之间的健康教育、沟通和护理计划的共享。