Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

J Lynn

Publications and source records attributed to J Lynn.

At least 127 records · Page 7Linked to original sources
PubMed1997

The illusion of end-of-life resource savings with advance directives. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Would increasing the documentation of advance directives (ADs) lead to a reduction in resource utilization? We examined this question by conducting three secondary analyses: (1) we tested for a change in resource use among those who died in the hospital at a time before and after an intervention that increased the documentation of ADs in the medical record; (2) we replicated analyses of published studies that reported an association of chart documentation of ADs and hospital resource use; and (3) we examined whether a potential explanation of the observed association is biased documentation of ADs among patients who have completed an AD. DESIGN: Replication of analysis of previous published studies using data from a prospective cohort study and block-randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Five teaching hospitals in the United States. PATIENTS: A total of 9105 seriously ill patients were enrolled in the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT), including 4301 patients in the 2 years (1989-91) before the Patient Self-Determination Act (PSDA) and 4804 in the 2 years (1992-94) after the PSDA implementation, with 2652 patients receiving the intervention and 2152 serving as controls. INTERVENTIONS: The SUPPORT intervention provided a nurse to facilitate communication among patients, surrogates, and physicians about preferences for and outcomes of treatments. Documenting existing advance directives was also one of this nurse's tasks. The Patient Self-Determination Act required that health care institutions inquire about and document existing advance directives at the time of hospital admission. MEASUREMENT: Hospital resource use was derived from the Therapeutic Intensity Scoring System and hospital length of stay, converted into 1994 dollars. RESULTS: Chart documentation of existing advance directives at the time of study admission increased with both the PSDA and the SUPPORT intervention. We found that intervention patients were more likely to have pre-existing ADs documented. Despite this increase, there was no corresponding change in hospital resource use for those who died during the enrollment hospitalization. Replication of analyses from published studies using data from the block randomized controlled trial found that ADs documented by the third day of serious illness were associated with a 23% reduction in hospital resource use among control patients ($21,284 with ADs documented compared with $26,127 without, 95% CI 1-48% reduction). However, this association was not observed among intervention patients, who had more pre-existing ADs documented in the medical record. Intervention patients with early documentation of ADs showed a trend toward greater cost ($28,017 compared with $24,178 among those without AD documentation, 95% CI 0-25% increase). The rate of documentation and characteristics of those with documentation differed between control and intervention patients. Intervention patients were more likely (as reported by patient or surrogate interview) to have ADs documented in the medical record by the third day (55% vs 32%, P < .001). In contrast to intervention patients, control patients who were older, less wealthy, less educated, more likely to prefer to forgo CPR, and more likely to want life-sustaining treatment limited had their ADs documented. These associations were not found among intervention patients when comparison was made between those with and those without an AD documented in the medical record. CONCLUSION: Increasing the documentation of pre-existing ADs was not associated with a reduction in hospital resource use. ADs documented without further intervention by the third day of a serious illness were associated with decreased hospital resource use. However, we did not find this association with an intervention that increased AD documentation. One potential explanation of these findings is that classification of those with an AD was based on cha

Advance Directives↗
PubMed1997

Prognoses of seriously ill hospitalized patients on the days before death: implications for patient care and public policy.

Troubling aspects of the experiences of patients at the ends of their lives have fueled interest in special benefits or privileges for this group. There is a presumption that being "at the end of life" is discernible. This study examines this presumption using data from two previously collected databases: the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT) and the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III (APACHE III). Both studies generated multivariable estimates of survival prognosis for hospitalized patients. SUPPORT included 9,105 patients with one of nine serious illnesses in five hospitals over 4 yrs, of whom 2,360 died in the hospital and 4,537 died within 180 days of entry into the study. The APACHE III database describes 2,750 deaths in 16,622 ICU patients in 40 hospitals. The relationship of median estimates with time to death were examined for each source of data, for different diseases, and for ICU settings of care. In SUPPORT, the median predicted chance of survival for 2 months on the day before actual death was .17 (interquartile range, .02-.40) and was .51 (.31-.66) 1 wk before death. Median prognoses varied substantially among diseases: the median for congestive heart failure patients was a .62 chance of living 2 months on the day before death, while lung cancer had only a .17 chance and coma patients only an .11 chance. Median prognostication estimates were not much different when given by physicians and were only a little more pessimistic in APACHE (median estimate for hospital survival on the day before death was .14 and 7 days before was .45). To make plans about care and to optimally support most dying persons and families, conversations must occur while the patient still has a considerable chance of surviving the current episode of illness. Using statistical estimates of prognosis to designate a category of "terminally ill" patients for public policy purposes is unavoidably arbitrary, will often be contested, and will have differential effects upon those dying with differing diseases.

APACHE↗
PubMed1997

Defining and measuring outcomes in end-stage dementia.

Dementia is a life-defining illness that impacts both patients and their loved ones. For dying patients with dementia, there are important and meaningful outcomes that reflect the quality of care. The authors propose 13 domains to examine the quality of care and make the argument that for these patients and their families, measures of satisfaction and patient or family reports of specific events may be the most important markers of the quality of care.

Aged↗
PubMed1996

The effectiveness of right heart catheterization in the initial care of critically ill patients. SUPPORT Investigators.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between the use of right heart catheterization (RHC) during the first 24 hours of care in the intensive care unit (ICU) and subsequent survival, length of stay, intensity of care, and cost of care. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Five US teaching hospitals between 1989 and 1994. SUBJECTS: A total of 5735 critically ill adult patients receiving care in an ICU for 1 of 9 prespecified disease categories. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Survival time, cost of care, intensity of care, and length of stay in the ICU and hospital, determined from the clinical record and from the National Death Index. A propensity score for RHC was constructed using multivariable logistic regression. Case-matching and multivariable regression modeling techniques were used to estimate the association of RHC with specific outcomes after adjusting for treatment selection using the propensity score. Sensitivity analysis was used to estimate the potential effect of an unidentified or missing covariate on the results. RESULTS: By case-matching analysis, patients with RHC had an increased 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.49). The mean cost (25th, 50th, 75th percentiles) per hospital stay was $49 300 ($17 000, $30 500, $56 600) with RHC and $35 700 ($11 300, $20 600, $39 200) without RHC. Mean length of stay in the ICU was 14.8 (5, 9, 17) days with RHC and 13.0 (4, 7, 14) days without RHC. These findings were all confirmed by multivariable modeling techniques. Subgroup analysis did not reveal any patient group or site for which RHC was associated with improved outcomes. Patients with higher baseline probability of surviving 2 months had the highest relative risk of death following RHC. Sensitivity analysis suggested that a missing covariate would have to increase the risk of death 6-fold and the risk of RHC 6-fold for a true beneficial effect of RHC to be misrepresented as harmful. CONCLUSION: In this observational study of critically ill patients, after adjustment for treatment selection bias, RHC was associated with increased mortality and increased utilization of resources. The cause of this apparent lack of benefit is unclear. The results of this analysis should be confirmed in other observational studies. These findings justify reconsideration of a randomized controlled trial of RHC and may guide patient selection for such a study.

APACHE↗
PubMed1996

Factors associated with do-not-resuscitate orders: patients' preferences, prognoses, and physicians' judgments. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Medical treatment decisions should be based on the preferences of informed patients or their proxies and on the expected outcomes of treatment. Because seriously ill patients are at risk for cardiac arrest, examination of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) practices affecting them provides useful insights into the associations between various factors and medical decision making. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between patients' preferences for resuscitation (along with other patient and physician characteristics) and the frequency and timing of DNR orders. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: 5 teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: 6802 seriously ill hospitalized patients enrolled in the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment (SUPPORT) between 1989 and 1994. MEASUREMENTS: Patients and their surrogates were interviewed about patients' cardiopulmonary resuscitation preferences, medical records were reviewed to determine disease severity, and a multivariable regression model was constructed to predict the time to the first DNR order. RESULTS: The patients' preference for cardiopulmonary resuscitation was the most important predictor of the timing of DNR orders, but only 52% of patients who preferred not to be resuscitated actually had DNR orders written. The probability of surviving for 2 months was the next most important predictor of the timing of DNR orders. Although DNR orders were not linearly related to the probability of surviving for 2 months, they were written earlier and more frequently for patients with a 50% or lower probability of surviving for 2 months. Orders were written more quickly for patients older than 75 years of age, regardless of prognosis. After adjustment for these and other influential patient characteristics, the use and timing of DNR orders varied significantly among physician specialties and among hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' preferences and short-term prognoses are associated with the timing of DNR orders. However, the substantial variation seen among hospital sites and among physician specialties suggests that there is room for improvement. In this study, DNR orders were written earlier for patients older than 75 years of age, regardless of prognosis. This finding suggests that physicians may be using age in a way that is inconsistent with the reported association between age and survival. The process for making decisions about DNR orders needs to be improved if such orders are to routinely and accurately reflect patients' preferences and probable outcomes.

Aged↗
PubMed1996

Factors associated with change in resuscitation preference of seriously ill patients. The SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments.

BACKGROUND: During serious illness, patient preferences regarding life-sustaining treatments play an important role in medical decisions. However, little is known about life-sustaining preference stability in this population or about factors associated with preference change. METHODS: We evaluated 2-month cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) preference stability in a cohort of 1590 seriously ill hospitalized patients at 5 acute care teaching hospitals. Using multiple logistic regression, we measured the association of patient demographic and health-related factors (quality of life, function, depression, prognosis, and diagnostic group) with change in CPR preference between interviews. RESULTS: Of 1590 patients analyzed, 73% of patients preferred CPR at baseline interview and 70% chose CPR at follow-up. Preference stability was 80% overall-85% in patients initially preferring CPR and 69% in those initially choosing do not resuscitate (DNR). For patients initially preferring CPR, older age, non-African American race, and greater depression at baseline were independently associated with a change to preferring DNR at follow-up. For patients initially preferring DNR, younger age, male gender, less depression at baseline, improvement in depression between interviews, and an initial admission diagnosis of acute respiratory failure or multiorgan system failure were associated with a change to preferring CPR at follow-up. For patients initially preferring DNR, patients with substantial improvements in depression score between interviews were more than 5 times as likely to change preference to CPR than were patients with substantial worsening in depression score. CONCLUSIONS: More than two thirds of seriously ill patients prefer CPR for cardiac arrest and 80% had stable preferences over 2 months. Factors associated with preference change suggest that depression may lead patients to refuse life-sustaining care. Providers should evaluate mood state when eliciting patients' preferences for life-sustaining treatments.

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation↗
PubMed1996

Surgical clips in planning the electron boost in breast cancer: a qualitative and quantitative evaluation.

PURPOSE: To evaluate, qualitatively and quantitatively, the role of surgical clips in planning the tumor bed electron boost in patients undergoing breast conserving surgery and radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In 50 patients, the excision cavity boundaries were marked by clips at surgery. The electron boost field was first planned using clinical information, aiming to achieve a margin of 2 cm, and its accuracy evaluated by screening the surgical clips and, if necessary, adjusting the field to encompass all clips with 2 cm margins. Orthogonal radiographs were take with solder wire delineating the clinical and screened fields and the scar. Hypothetical clinical and radiological fields, with 1 and 3 cm margins, were reconstructed on the radiographs. RESULTS: The clinical field was inadequate in 34 patients (68%). The precision of each clinical setup was quantified by two indices. The Normal Tissue Index defined the percentage of the clinical field comprised of tissue, beyond the tumor bed, not at high risk of local recurrence, and gave an estimate of potential spring of normal tissue: median 14.6% (range 0-83.0), 17 out of 50 > 25%; median 13% (range 0-70.7), 12 out of 50 > 25%; median 9.7% (range 0-59.8), 10 out of 50 > 25%, for 1, 2, and 3 cm margins, respectively. The Geographical Miss Index defined the percentage of the radiologically defined field, at high risk of local recurrence, not predicted by the clinical field, and gave an estimate of the extent of geographical miss: median 32.9% (range 0-83.5), 28 out of 50 > 25%; median 26.1% (range 0-69.8%), 26 out of 50 > 25%; median 18.6% (range 0-60.3), 20 out of 50 > 25%, for 1, 2, and 3 cm margins, respectively. The median distance from the scar midpoint to the furthest clip was 3.8 (range 1.2-8.1) cm. The median maximal clip depth was 3.1 (range 1.4-5.2) cm. CONCLUSION: (a) Electron boost field planning by clinical landmarks alone was inaccurate in 68% of cases. (b) Quantitative measures, based on margins of 1, 2, and 3 cm, revealed that in 20-34% of patients more than one-quarter of the clinical field covered tissue at low risk of local recurrence, and in 40-56% of patients less than three-quarters of the final radiological field was predicted clinically. (c) The relative positions of the scar and clips may be widely disparate. (d) Clip depth measurements reveal a significant risk of underdosing at depth.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed1996

Screening for cognitive dysfunction in multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: With the use of comprehensive neuro-psychological assessments, a substantial proportion of patients with multiple sclerosis have been found to have substantial cognitive impairment. Although data generated from comprehensive examinations are useful in making recommendations for treatment interventions and compensatory strategies, the cost of such assessments prohibits their use with all patients. OBJECTIVE: To develop a screening battery to detect cognitive impairment in patients with multiple sclerosis that is sensitive, specific, brief, and cost-effective, and could identify patients who might benefit from a more comprehensive neuropsychological examination. DESIGN: On the basis of a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment battery, the presence of significant cognitive impairment was determined in patients with multiple sclerosis. The screening battery consisted of a subset of tests from the comprehensive battery. Performance on the screening battery was then used to predict presence of cognitive impairment on the comprehensive battery in validation and cross-validation samples. Severity of impairment on the screening battery was also regressed on ratings of functional impairment derived from the Expanded Disability Status Scale. RESULTS: In the validation sample, the screening battery had 100% sensitivity, 80% specificity, and 88.1% overall diagnostic accuracy. In the cross-validation sample, the screening battery had 100% sensitivity, 81.8% specificity, and an overall diagnostic accuracy rate of 90.7%. chi 2 tests showed that the accuracy of the screening battery was significantly better than chance in both samples. Performance on the screening battery also predicted the level of disability ratings on the Expanded Disability Status Scale and functional systems scales. CONCLUSIONS: The screening battery had a high degree of sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy, while maintaining a brief administration time and high cost-effectiveness. The screening battery also predicted higher levels of disability and functional impairment as assessed by the Expanded Disability Status Scale, thereby enhancing its clinical utility. Despite its advantages, the findings do not suggest that the screening battery may be an effective substitute for a more detailed examination.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Generalizability of clinical studies conducted at tertiary care medical centers: a population-based analysis.

The Marshfield Epidemiologic Study Area (MESA), a geographically defined population registry at one of the participating sites in SUPPORT (a multicenter study of the care of seriously ill hospitalized patients) permitted assessment of generalizability in that study. On the basis of age- and sex-specific rates of enrollment of SUPPORT patients in MESA, we estimate that about 400,000 patients per year would fulfill SUPPORT eligibility criteria in the United States. However, an estimated 925,000 patients, particularly the elderly and those with impairments in their activities of daily living (ADLs), have SUPPORT-like illnesses annually, but do not receive the aggressive care required for study enrollment. The absence of patients not interested in aggressive care in tertiary care-based studies is compounded by the overrepresentation of patients referred from distant areas to the tertiary care center. Such patients tended to be older and to have different diseases than patients in MESA. Care should be taken in generalizing results from clinical and epidemiologic studies conducted at tertiary care centers.

Aged↗
PubMed1996

Choices of seriously ill patients about cardiopulmonary resuscitation: correlates and outcomes. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments.

PURPOSE: For patients hospitalized with serious illnesses, we identified factors associated with a stated preference to forgo cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), examined physician-patient communication about these issues, and determined the relationship of patients' preferences to intensity of care and survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was a cross-sectional evaluation of patient preferences. The setting was five geographically diverse academic acute-care medical centers participating in the SUPPORT (Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments) project. Study participants were hospitalized patients > or = 18 years of age with 1 of 9 serious illnesses who were interviewed between days 3 and 6 after qualifying for the study. Using standardized interviews, patients provided information on demographics, preferences for CPR and other treatments, quality of life, functional status, perceptions of prognosis, and whether the patient had discussed CPR preferences with his or her physician. Data abstracted from the medical record included physiologic measures, therapeutic intensity, whether CPR was provided, and whether there was a do-not-resuscitate order. RESULTS: Of 1,995 eligible patients, 84% were interviewed (mean age 62 years, 58% men, inhospital mortality 7%, 6-month mortality 33%). Of the respondents, 28% did not want CPR. Factors associated independently with not wanting CPR included: hospital site; diagnosis; being older; being more functionally impaired; and patient perception of a worse prognosis. Only 29% of patients had discussed their preferences with their physician; 48% of those who did not want CPR reported such discussions. After adjusting for illness severity and factors associated with CPR preferences, patients not wanting CPR had lower intensity of care; similar inhospital mortality; and higher mortality at 2 and 6 months following study entry. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis, patients' perception of the prognosis, and hospital site were significantly associated with patients' resuscitation preferences after adjusting for patient demographics, severity of illness, and functional status. The rate of discussing CPR was low even for patients who did not want CPR. Patient preferences not to receive CPR were associated with a small decrease in intensity of care but no difference in hospital survival.

Aged↗
PubMed1996

Pain and satisfaction with pain control in seriously ill hospitalized adults: findings from the SUPPORT research investigations. For the SUPPORT investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatmentm.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the pain experience of seriously ill hospitalized patients and their satisfaction with control of pain during hospitalization. To understand the relationship of level of pain and dissatisfaction with pain control to demographic, psychological, and illness-related variables. DESIGN: Prospective, cohort study. SETTING: Five teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: Patients for whom interviews were available about pain (n = 5,176) from a total of 9,105 patients in the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients were interviewed after study enrollment about their experiences with pain. When patients could not be interviewed due to illness, we used surrogate (usually a family member) responses calibrated to patient responses (from the subset of interviews with both patient and surrogate responses). Ordinal logistic regression was used to study the association of variables with level of pain and satisfaction with its control. Nearly 50% of patients reported pain. Nearly 15% reported extremely severe pain or moderately severe pain occurring at least half of the time, and nearly 15% of those patients with pain were dissatisfied with its control. After adjustment for confounding variables, older and sicker patients reported less pain, while patients with more dependencies in activities of daily living, more comorbid conditions, more depression, more anxiety, and poor quality of life reported more pain. Patients with colon cancer reported more pain than patients in other disease categories. Levels of reported pain varied among the five hospitals and also by physician specialty. After adjustment for confounding variables, dissatisfaction with pain control was more likely among patients with more severe pain, greater anxiety, depression, and alteration of mental status, and lower reported income; dissatisfaction with pain control also varied among study hospitals and by physician specialty. CONCLUSIONS: Pain is common among severely ill hospitalized patients. The most important variables associated with pain and satisfaction with pain control were patient demographics and those variables that reflected the acute illness. Pain and satisfaction with pain control varied significantly among study sites, even after adjustment for many potential confounders. Better pain management strategies are needed for patients with the serious and common illnesses studied in SUPPORT.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Seriously ill hospitalized adults: do we spend less on older patients? Support Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preference for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of age on hospital resource use for seriously ill adults, and to explore whether age-related differences in resource use are explained by patients' severity of illness and preferences for life-extending care. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Five geographically diverse academic acute care medical centers participating in the SUPPORT Project. PATIENTS: A total of 4301 hospitalized adults with at least one of nine serious illnesses associated with an average 6-month mortality of 50%. MEASUREMENTS: Resource utilization was measured using a modified version of the Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System (TISS); the performance of three invasive procedures (major surgery, dialysis, and right heart catheter placement); and estimated hospital costs. RESULTS: The median patient age was 65; 43% were female, and 48% died within 6 months. After adjustment for severity of illness, prior functional status, and study site, when compared with patients younger than 50, patients 80 years or older were less likely to undergo major surgery (adjusted odds ratio .46), dialysis (.19), and right heart catheter placement (.59) and had median TISS scores and estimated hospital costs that were 3.4 points and $ 71.61 lower, respectively. These differences persisted after further adjustment for patients' preferences for life-extending care. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with similar younger patients, seriously ill older patients receive fewer invasive procedures and hospital care that is less resource-intensive and less costly. This preferential allocation of hospital services to younger patients is not based on differences in patients' severity of illness or general preferences for life-extending care.

Academic Medical Centers↗