Code Status Discussions at Hospital Admission Are Not Associated With Patient and Surrogate Satisfaction With Hospital Care: Results From the Multicenter Hospitalist Study
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online March, 2011
Code Status Discussions at Hospital Admission Are Not Associated With Patient and Surrogate Satisfaction With Hospital Care: Results From the Multicenter Hospitalist Study
Background: Physicians may avoid code status discussions for fear of decreasing patient or surrogate satisfaction. Methods: Charts of patients admitted to medical services at 6 university hospitals were reviewed for documentation of a code status discussion in the first 24 hours of admission. Satisfaction with care provided during the hospitalization was assessed by telephone 1 month after discharge. Results: Of the 11 717 patients with 1-month follow-up, 1090 (9.3%) had a code status discussion documented. Patient or surrogate satisfaction did not differ by whether a discussion was documented. The lack of association persisted after adjusting for patient’s severity of illness and using propensity adjustment for likelihood of having a discussion. Conclusions: Discussing code status on admission to the inpatient setting did not affect patient or surrogate satisfaction.
Barnato AE, Herndon MB, Anthony DL, et al. Are regional variations in end-of-life care intensity explained by patient preferences? A Study of the US Medicare Population. Med Care. 2007; 45(5):386-393.
2.
Kass-Bartelmes BL, Hughes R.Advance care planning: preferences for care at the end of life. J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother. 2004;18(1):87-109.
3.
Steinhauser KE, Christakis NA, Clipp EC, McNeilly M., McIntyre L., Tulsky JAFactors considered important at the end of life by patients, family, physicians, and other care providers. J Am Med Assoc. 2000;284(19):2476-2482.
4.
A controlled trial to improve care for seriously ill hospitalized patients.The Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT). The SUPPORT Principal Investigators. J Am Med Assoc. 1995 ;274(20): 1591-1598.
5.
Angus DC, Barnato AE, Linde-Zwirble WT, et al; Robert Wood JohnsonFoundation ICU End-Of-LifePeer Group.Use of intensive care at the end of life in the United States: an Epidemiologic Study. Crit Care Med. 2004;32(3):638-643.
6.
Teno JM, Hakim RB, Knaus WA, et al. Preferences for cardiopulmonary resuscitation: physician-patient agreement and hospital resource use. The SUPPORT Investigators. J Gen Intern Med. 1995;10(4):179-186.
7.
Covinsky KE, Fuller JD, Yaffe K., et al. Communication and decision-making in seriously ill patients: findings of the SUPPORT project. The Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000;48(5 suppl):S187-S193.
8.
Baggs JGEnd-of-life care for older adults in ICUs. Annu Rev Nurs Res . 2002;20:181-229.
9.
Hanson LC, Tulsky JA, Danis M.Can clinical interventions change care at the end of life? Ann Intern Med. 1997;126(5):381-388.
10.
Mirza A., Kad R., Ellison NMCardiopulmonary resuscitation is not addressed in the admitting medical records for the majority of patients who undergo CPR in the hospital. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2005;22(1):20-25.
11.
Bedell SE, Delbanco TLChoices about cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the hospital. When do physicians talk with patients?N Engl J Med. 1984;310(17):1089-1093.
12.
Shmerling RH , Bedell SE, Lilienfeld A., Delbanco TLDiscussing cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A Study of Elderly Outpatients. J Gen Intern Med. 1988;3(4):317-321.
13.
Reilly BM, Magnussen CR, Ross J., Ash J., Papa L., Wagner M.Can we talk? Inpatient discussions about advance directives in a community hospital. Attending physicians’ attitudes, their inpatients’ wishes, and reported experience. Arch Intern Med. 1994; 154(20):2299-2308.
14.
Hofmann JC, Wenger NS, Davis RB, et al. Patient preferences for communication with physicians about end-of-life decisions. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preference for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment. Ann Intern Med . 1997;127(1):1-12.
15.
Schonwetter RS, Teasdale TA, Taffet G., Robinson BE, Luchi RJEducating the elderly: cardiopulmonary resuscitation decisions before and after intervention. J Am Geriatr Soc . 1991;39(4): 372-377.
16.
Miller DL, Gorbien MJ, Simbartl LA, Jahnigen DWFactors influencing physicians in recommending in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Arch Intern Med. 1993;153(17):1999-2003.
17.
Smucker WD, Ditto PH, Moore KA, Druley JA, Danks JH, Townsend A.Elderly outpatients respond favorably to a physician-initiated advance directive discussion. J Am Board Fam Pract. 1993;6(5):473-482.
18.
Tierney WM, Dexter PR, Gramelspacher GP, Perkins AJ, Zhou XH, Wolinsky FDThe effect of discussions about advance directives on patients’ satisfaction with primary care. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16(1):32-40.
19.
Wright AA, Zhang B., Ray A., et al. Associations between end-of-life discussions, patient mental health, medical care near death, and caregiver bereavement adjustment. J Am Med Assoc. 2008; 300(14):1665-1673.
20.
Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care.2003. http://www.dartmouthatlas.org/index.shtm. Accessed August 2008.
21.
Brown University Facts on Dying.2004. http://www.chcr.brown.edu/dying/2001DATA.HTM# . Accessed July 2008.
22.
Gruneir A., Mor V., Weitzen S., Truchil R., Teno J., Roy J.Where people die: a multilevel approach to understanding influences on site of death in america. Med Care Res Rev. 2007 ;64(4): 351-378.
23.
Guidelines for the appropriate use of do-not-resuscitate orders.Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, American Medical Association. J Am Med Assoc. 1991;265(14):1868-1871.
24.
Auerbach AD, Katz R., Pantilat SZ, et al. Factors associated with discussion of care plans and code status at the time of hospital admission: results from the Multicenter Hospitalist Study. J Hosp Med. 2008;3(6):437-445.
25.
Patient Self Determination Act-1990-2002.
26.
Meltzer D., Manning WG, Morrison J., et al. Effects of physician experience on costs and outcomes on an academic general medicine service: results of a trial of hospitalists. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137(11):866-874.
27.
Ware J. Jr , Kosinski M., Keller SDA 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34(3):220-233.
28.
Auerbach AD, Pantilat SZEnd-of-life care in a voluntary hospitalist model: effects on communication, processes of care, and patient symptoms. Am J Med. 2004;116(10):669-675.
29.
Roccaforte WH, Burke WJ, Bayer BL, Wengel SPValidation of a telephone version of the mini-mental state examination. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1992;40(7):697-702.
30.
Cleary PD, Edgman-Levitan S., Walker JD, Gerteis M., Delbanco TLUsing patient reports to improve medical care: a preliminary report from 10 hospitals. Qual Manag Health Care. 1993;2(1):31-38.
31.
Arora V., Gangireddy S., Mehrotra A., Ginde R., Tormey M., Meltzer D.Ability of hospitalized patients to identify their in-hospital physicians . Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(2):199-201.
32.
Chaudhry S. , Jin L., Meltzer D.Use of a self-report-generated Charlson Comorbidity Index for predicting mortality. Med Care. 2005;43(6):607-615.
33.
Johnson KS, Kuchibhatla M., Tulsky JAWhat explains racial differences in the use of advance directives and attitudes toward hospice care? J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008 ;56(10):1953-1958.
34.
Smith AK, Earle CC, McCarthy EPRacial and ethnic differences in end-of-life care in fee-for-service medicare beneficiaries with advanced cancer. J Am Geriatr Soc.2009;57(1):153-158.
35.
Rosenbaum P. , Dubin D.The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika. 1983; 70(1):41-55.
36.
Rosenbaum P. , Dubin D.Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. J Am Statist Assoc . 1984;79(387):516-524.
37.
Tulsky JA, Chesney MA, Lo B.How do medical residents discuss resuscitation with patients? J Gen Intern Med. 1995;10(8): 436-442.
