Teno J M, Licks S, Lynn J, Wenger N, Connors A F, Phillips R S, O'Connor M A, Murphy D P, Fulkerson W J, Desbiens N, Knaus W A
Center to Improve Care of the Dying, George Washington University Medical Center, Washington, DC 20037, USA.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997 Apr;45(4):508-12. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1997.tb05179.x.
To evaluate whether the lack of effect of advance directives (ADs) on decision-making in SUPPORT might arise, in part, from the content of the actual documents.
Advance directives placed in the medical records were abstracted for date of completion and content of additional written instructions. We examined directives with instructions to forgo life-sustaining treatment in the current state of health to determine whether care given was consistent with preferences noted in those directives.
Five teaching hospitals in the United States.
A total of 4804 patients with at least one of nine serious illnesses were admitted to five teaching hospitals in the 2 years following implementation of the Patient Self-Determination Act. Patients were part of a randomized controlled trial to improve decision-making and outcomes.
From the medical records of 4804 patients, a total of 688 directives were collected from 569 patients. The majority of these directives (66%) were durable powers of attorney; in addition, 31% were standard living wills or other forms of written instructions (3%). Only 90 documents (13%) provided additional instructions for medical care beyond naming a proxy or stating the preferences of a standard living will. Only 36 contained specific instructions about the use of life-sustaining medical treatment, and only 22 of these directed forgoing life-sustaining treatment in the patient's current situation. For these, the treatment course was consistent with the instruction for nine patients. In two cases, patients may have changed an inconsistent directive after discussion with hospital staff.
Advance directives placed in the medical records of seriously ill patients often did not guide medical decision-making beyond naming a healthcare proxy or documenting general preferences in a standard living will format. Even when specific instructions were present, care was potentially inconsistent in half of the cases.
评估预先指示(ADs)在“支持计划”(SUPPORT)中对决策缺乏影响是否可能部分源于实际文件的内容。
提取病历中的预先指示,记录完成日期和其他书面指示的内容。我们检查了指示在当前健康状况下放弃维持生命治疗的预先指示,以确定所提供的护理是否与这些预先指示中注明的偏好一致。
美国的五家教学医院。
在《患者自我决定权法案》实施后的两年内,共有4804名患有九种严重疾病中至少一种的患者入住了五家教学医院。患者是一项旨在改善决策和结果的随机对照试验的一部分。
从4804名患者的病历中,共收集到来自569名患者的688份预先指示。这些预先指示中的大多数(66%)是持久授权书;此外,31%是标准生前遗嘱或其他形式的书面指示(3%)。只有90份文件(13%)提供了除指定代理人或陈述标准生前遗嘱偏好之外的医疗护理附加指示。只有36份包含关于使用维持生命医疗治疗的具体指示,其中只有22份指示在患者当前情况下放弃维持生命治疗。对于这些,治疗过程与九名患者的指示一致。在两例中,患者在与医院工作人员讨论后可能改变了不一致的预先指示。
重病患者病历中的预先指示通常除了指定医疗保健代理人或按标准生前遗嘱格式记录一般偏好外,并未指导医疗决策。即使存在具体指示,在一半的情况下护理仍可能不一致。