Communication and decision-making in seriously Ill patients: Findings of the support project

Kenneth E. Covinsky, Jon D. Fuller, Kristine Yaffe, C. Bree Johnston, Mary Beth Hamel, Joanne Lynn, Joan Teno, Russell S. Phillips

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

251 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT) represents one of the largest and most comprehensive efforts to describe patient preferences in seriously ill patients, and to evaluate how effectively patient preferences are communicated. Our objective was to review findings from SUPPORT describing the communication of seriously ill patients' preferences for end-of-life care. METHODS: We identified published reports from SUPPORT describing patient preferences and the communication of those preferences. We abstracted findings that addressed each of the following questions: What patient characteristics predict patient preferences for end of life care? How well do physicians, nurses, and surrogates understand their patients' preferences, and what variables are correlated with this understanding? Does increasing the documentation of existing advance directives result in care more consistent with patients' preferences? RESULTS: Patients who are older, have cancer, are women, believe their prognoses are poor, and are more dependent in ADL function are less likely to want CPR. However, there is considerable variability and geographic variation in these preferences. Physician, nurse, and surrogate understanding of their patient's preferences is only moderately better than chance. Most patients do not discuss their preferences with their physicians, and only about half of patients who do not wish to receive CPR receive DNR orders. Factors other than the patients' preferences and prognoses, including the patient's age, the physician's specialty, and the geographic site of care were strong determinants of whether DNR orders were written. In SUPPORT patients, there was no evidence that increasing the rates of documentation of advance directives results in care that is more consistent with patients' preferences. CONCLUSIONS: SUPPORT documents that physicians and surrogates are often unaware of seriously ill patients' preferences. The care provided to patients is often not consistent with their preferences and is often associated with factors other than preferences or prognoses. Improving these deficiencies in end-of-life care may require systematic change rather than simple interventions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)S187-S193
JournalJournal of the American Geriatrics Society
Volume48
Issue numberS1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2000
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Patient Preference
Decision Making
Communication
Terminal Care
Physicians
Advance Directives
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
Documentation
Nurses
Activities of Daily Living

Keywords

  • advance directives
  • cardiopulmonary resuscitation
  • communication
  • decision making
  • physician-patient relations
  • terminal care

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Geriatrics and Gerontology

Cite this

Covinsky, K. E., Fuller, J. D., Yaffe, K., Johnston, C. B., Hamel, M. B., Lynn, J., ... Phillips, R. S. (2000). Communication and decision-making in seriously Ill patients: Findings of the support project. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 48(S1), S187-S193. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2000.tb03131.x

Communication and decision-making in seriously Ill patients : Findings of the support project. / Covinsky, Kenneth E.; Fuller, Jon D.; Yaffe, Kristine; Johnston, C. Bree; Hamel, Mary Beth; Lynn, Joanne; Teno, Joan; Phillips, Russell S.

In: Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, Vol. 48, No. S1, 01.01.2000, p. S187-S193.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Covinsky, Kenneth E. ; Fuller, Jon D. ; Yaffe, Kristine ; Johnston, C. Bree ; Hamel, Mary Beth ; Lynn, Joanne ; Teno, Joan ; Phillips, Russell S. / Communication and decision-making in seriously Ill patients : Findings of the support project. In: Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2000 ; Vol. 48, No. S1. pp. S187-S193.
@article{0ee2f2c36b364412b3303968f4e318fe,
title = "Communication and decision-making in seriously Ill patients: Findings of the support project",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: The Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT) represents one of the largest and most comprehensive efforts to describe patient preferences in seriously ill patients, and to evaluate how effectively patient preferences are communicated. Our objective was to review findings from SUPPORT describing the communication of seriously ill patients' preferences for end-of-life care. METHODS: We identified published reports from SUPPORT describing patient preferences and the communication of those preferences. We abstracted findings that addressed each of the following questions: What patient characteristics predict patient preferences for end of life care? How well do physicians, nurses, and surrogates understand their patients' preferences, and what variables are correlated with this understanding? Does increasing the documentation of existing advance directives result in care more consistent with patients' preferences? RESULTS: Patients who are older, have cancer, are women, believe their prognoses are poor, and are more dependent in ADL function are less likely to want CPR. However, there is considerable variability and geographic variation in these preferences. Physician, nurse, and surrogate understanding of their patient's preferences is only moderately better than chance. Most patients do not discuss their preferences with their physicians, and only about half of patients who do not wish to receive CPR receive DNR orders. Factors other than the patients' preferences and prognoses, including the patient's age, the physician's specialty, and the geographic site of care were strong determinants of whether DNR orders were written. In SUPPORT patients, there was no evidence that increasing the rates of documentation of advance directives results in care that is more consistent with patients' preferences. CONCLUSIONS: SUPPORT documents that physicians and surrogates are often unaware of seriously ill patients' preferences. The care provided to patients is often not consistent with their preferences and is often associated with factors other than preferences or prognoses. Improving these deficiencies in end-of-life care may require systematic change rather than simple interventions.",
keywords = "advance directives, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, communication, decision making, physician-patient relations, terminal care",
author = "Covinsky, {Kenneth E.} and Fuller, {Jon D.} and Kristine Yaffe and Johnston, {C. Bree} and Hamel, {Mary Beth} and Joanne Lynn and Joan Teno and Phillips, {Russell S.}",
year = "2000",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1532-5415.2000.tb03131.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "48",
pages = "S187--S193",
journal = "Journal of the American Geriatrics Society",
issn = "0002-8614",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "S1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Communication and decision-making in seriously Ill patients

T2 - Findings of the support project

AU - Covinsky, Kenneth E.

AU - Fuller, Jon D.

AU - Yaffe, Kristine

AU - Johnston, C. Bree

AU - Hamel, Mary Beth

AU - Lynn, Joanne

AU - Teno, Joan

AU - Phillips, Russell S.

PY - 2000/1/1

Y1 - 2000/1/1

N2 - OBJECTIVES: The Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT) represents one of the largest and most comprehensive efforts to describe patient preferences in seriously ill patients, and to evaluate how effectively patient preferences are communicated. Our objective was to review findings from SUPPORT describing the communication of seriously ill patients' preferences for end-of-life care. METHODS: We identified published reports from SUPPORT describing patient preferences and the communication of those preferences. We abstracted findings that addressed each of the following questions: What patient characteristics predict patient preferences for end of life care? How well do physicians, nurses, and surrogates understand their patients' preferences, and what variables are correlated with this understanding? Does increasing the documentation of existing advance directives result in care more consistent with patients' preferences? RESULTS: Patients who are older, have cancer, are women, believe their prognoses are poor, and are more dependent in ADL function are less likely to want CPR. However, there is considerable variability and geographic variation in these preferences. Physician, nurse, and surrogate understanding of their patient's preferences is only moderately better than chance. Most patients do not discuss their preferences with their physicians, and only about half of patients who do not wish to receive CPR receive DNR orders. Factors other than the patients' preferences and prognoses, including the patient's age, the physician's specialty, and the geographic site of care were strong determinants of whether DNR orders were written. In SUPPORT patients, there was no evidence that increasing the rates of documentation of advance directives results in care that is more consistent with patients' preferences. CONCLUSIONS: SUPPORT documents that physicians and surrogates are often unaware of seriously ill patients' preferences. The care provided to patients is often not consistent with their preferences and is often associated with factors other than preferences or prognoses. Improving these deficiencies in end-of-life care may require systematic change rather than simple interventions.

AB - OBJECTIVES: The Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT) represents one of the largest and most comprehensive efforts to describe patient preferences in seriously ill patients, and to evaluate how effectively patient preferences are communicated. Our objective was to review findings from SUPPORT describing the communication of seriously ill patients' preferences for end-of-life care. METHODS: We identified published reports from SUPPORT describing patient preferences and the communication of those preferences. We abstracted findings that addressed each of the following questions: What patient characteristics predict patient preferences for end of life care? How well do physicians, nurses, and surrogates understand their patients' preferences, and what variables are correlated with this understanding? Does increasing the documentation of existing advance directives result in care more consistent with patients' preferences? RESULTS: Patients who are older, have cancer, are women, believe their prognoses are poor, and are more dependent in ADL function are less likely to want CPR. However, there is considerable variability and geographic variation in these preferences. Physician, nurse, and surrogate understanding of their patient's preferences is only moderately better than chance. Most patients do not discuss their preferences with their physicians, and only about half of patients who do not wish to receive CPR receive DNR orders. Factors other than the patients' preferences and prognoses, including the patient's age, the physician's specialty, and the geographic site of care were strong determinants of whether DNR orders were written. In SUPPORT patients, there was no evidence that increasing the rates of documentation of advance directives results in care that is more consistent with patients' preferences. CONCLUSIONS: SUPPORT documents that physicians and surrogates are often unaware of seriously ill patients' preferences. The care provided to patients is often not consistent with their preferences and is often associated with factors other than preferences or prognoses. Improving these deficiencies in end-of-life care may require systematic change rather than simple interventions.

KW - advance directives

KW - cardiopulmonary resuscitation

KW - communication

KW - decision making

KW - physician-patient relations

KW - terminal care

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034063575&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034063575&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2000.tb03131.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2000.tb03131.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 10809474

AN - SCOPUS:0034063575

VL - 48

SP - S187-S193

JO - Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

JF - Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

SN - 0002-8614

IS - S1

ER -