Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to J Lynn.
The range of complementary therapies available has increased. The treatments offered may improve the 'whole' person but not the 'part' which is diseased. Inquiry into the length and type of training of therapists is needed to ensure ethical practice. Recognition of the usefulness of some complementary therapies by orthodox medical practitioners is slowly increasing. Caution should continue to be exercised.
Reflexology is a treatment based on massage of the feet to relieve symptoms in other parts of the body. Reflexology is slowly gaining acceptance by some practitioners of conventional medicine. Several training courses and registered bodies for reflexology exist.
Acupuncture is a traditional Chinese healing system designed to achieve and maintain harmony. Needles are applied to points in 12 meridians, each of which links to an organ. Nurses are often asked about complementary therapies and need to be familiar with the theory.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a simple prognostic scoring system to identify patients in nontraumatic coma at high risk for poor outcomes using data available early in the hospital course. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Five geographically diverse academic medical centers. PATIENTS: A total of 596 patients in nontraumatic coma enrolled in the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT), including 247 in the model derivation set and 349 in the model validation set. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Death and severe disability by 2 months. MAIN RESULTS: For the 596 patients studied (median age, 67 years; 52% female), the primary cause of coma was cardiac arrest in 31% and cerebral infarction or intracerebral hemorrhage in 36%. At 2 months 69% had died, 20% had survived with known severe disability, 8% were known to have survived without severe disability, and 3% survived with unknown functional status. Five clinical variables available on day 3 after enrollment were associated independently with 2-month mortality: abnormal brain stem response (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 3.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 8.1), absent verbal response (OR = 4.6; 95% CI, 1.8 to 11.7), absent withdrawal response to pain (OR = 4.3; 95% CI, 1.7 to 10.8), creatinine level greater than or equal to 132.6 mumol/L (1.5 mg/dL) (OR = 4.5; 95% CI, 1.8 to 11.0), and age of 70 years or older (OR = 5.1; 95% CI, 2.2 to 12.2). Mortality at 2 months for patients with four or five of these risk factors was 97% (58/60; 95% CI, 88% to 100%) in the validation set. Brain stem and motor responses best predicted death or severe disability by 2 months. For patients with either an abnormal brain stem response or absent motor response to pain, the rate of death or severe disability at 2 months was 96% (185/193; 95% CI, 92% to 98%) in the validation set. CONCLUSIONS: Five readily available clinical variables identify a large subgroup of patients in nontraumatic coma at high risk for poor outcomes. This risk stratification approach offers physicians, patients, and patients' families information that may prove useful in patient care decisions and resource allocation.
OBJECTIVE: To develop a model estimating the probability of an adult patient having severe functional limitations 2 months after being hospitalized with one of nine serious illnesses. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Five teaching hospitals in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 1746 patients (model development) who survived 2 months and completed an interview, selected from 4301 patients in the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT); independent validation sample of 2478 patients. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN OUTCOMES: Patient function 2 months after admission categorized as absence or presence of severe functional limitations (defined as Sickness Impact Profile scores > or = 30 or as activities of daily living scores > or = 4 [levels that require near-constant personal assistance]). A logistic regression model was constructed to predict severe functional limitation. RESULTS: One third (n = 590) of patients who were interviewed at 2 months had severe functional limitations. Changes in functional status were common: Of those with no baseline dependencies (not dependent on personal assistance), 21% were severely limited at 2 months; of those with 4 or more baseline limitations, 30% had improved. The patient's ability to do activities of daily living was the most important predictor of functional status. Physiologic abnormalities, diagnosis, days in hospital, age, quality of life, and previous exercise capacity also contributed substantially. Model performance, assessed using receiver-operating characteristic curves, was 0.79 for the development sample and 0.75 for the validation sample. The model was well calibrated for the entire risk range. CONCLUSIONS: Functional outcome varied substantially after hospitalization for a serious illness. A small amount of readily available clinical information can estimate the probability of severe functional limitations.
OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a prognostic model that estimates survival over a 180-day period for seriously ill hospitalized adults (phase I of SUPPORT [Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments]) and to compare this model's predictions with those of an existing prognostic system and with physicians' independent estimates (SUPPORT phase II). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: 5 tertiary care academic centers in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 4301 hospitalized adults were selected for phase I according to diagnosis and severity of illness; 4028 patients were evaluated from phase II. MEASUREMENTS: A survival model was developed using the following predictor variables: diagnosis, age, number of days in the hospital before study entry, presence of cancer, neurologic function, and 11 physiologic measures recorded on day 3 after study entry. Physicians were interviewed on day 3. Patients were followed for survival for 180 days after study entry. RESULTS: The area under the receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curve for prediction of surviving 180 days was 0.79 in phase I, 0.78 in the phase II independent validation, and 0.78 when the acute physiology score from the APACHE (Acute Physiology, Age, Chronic Health Evaluation) III prognostic scoring system was substituted for the SUPPORT physiology score. For phase II patients, the SUPPORT model had equal discrimination and slightly improved calibration compared with physician's estimates. Combining the SUPPORT model with physician's estimates improved both predictive accuracy (ROC curve area = 0.82) and the ability to identify patients with high probabilities of survival or death. CONCLUSIONS: A limited amount of readily available clinical information can provide a foundation for long-term survival estimates that are as accurate as physicians' estimates. The best survival estimates combine an objective prognosis with a physician's clinical estimate.
BACKGROUND: Seriously or terminally ill patients are frequently incapacitated and unable to express their preferences regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). In this situation, family members or other surrogate decision makers are often asked whether they believe the patient would want to be resuscitated. We evaluated the concordance of patient CPR preferences and surrogate perceptions of the patient preferences in the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT), a large, multicenter study of seriously ill hospitalized patients. METHODS: We compared patient preferences and surrogate perceptions in 1226 pairings in which both patient and surrogate responded to CPR decision questions. We also examined factors that might influence patient-surrogate concordance. RESULTS: Twenty-nine percent of patients with paired data did not want to be resuscitated; 26% of surrogates did not believe the patient they represented would want to be resuscitated. Within pairs, the overall exact agreement with respect to CPR decisions was 74%. For patients favoring CPR, only 16% of the surrogates misconstrued the patient's wishes. For patients who did not want to be resuscitated, however, 50% of the surrogates did not reflect the patient's wishes. If patients reported telling surrogates their CPR preference, concordance was significantly improved if the surrogate believed the patient did not want to be resuscitated and was significantly worsened if the surrogate believed the patient wanted CPR. This finding is likely an artifact of patients being more likely to report their preference to surrogates if that preference was not to be resuscitated. CONCLUSIONS: Surrogates' perceptions of patient CPR preferences are often inaccurate, particularly for those patients who do not want to be resuscitated. Methods to improve communication between patients and surrogates on CPR preferences should be developed and evaluated.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the association between hospital resource utilization and physicians' knowledge of patient preferences for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) among seriously ill hospitalized adult patients. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Five U.S. academic medical center, 1989-1991. PATIENTS: A sample of 2,636 patients with self- or surrogate interviews and matching physician interviews describing patient preferences for CPR, from a cohort of 4,301 patients with life-threatening illnesses enrolled in the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT). MEASURES: Patient, surrogate, and physician reports of preferences for resuscitation, and resource use derived from the Therapeutic Intensity Scoring System and hospital length of stay, converted into 1990 dollars. RESULTS: Nearly one-third of the patients preferred to forego resuscitation. Of the 2,636 paired physician-patient answers, nearly one-third did not agree about preferences for resuscitation. The physicians' views of the patients' preferences and those preferences themselves were both associated with resource use. Standardized adjusted hospital resource consumption, expressed as average cost in dollars during the enrollment hospitalization, was lowest when the physician agreed with the patient preference for a do-not-resuscitate order ($20,527), and highest when the patient did not have a preference and the physician believed the patient wanted resuscitation in the case of a cardiopulmonary arrest ($34,829). Hospital resource use was intermediate when patient-physician pairs evidenced either lack of agreement or communication, or awareness of options about resuscitation. CONCLUSIONS: Both physician and patient preferences for CPR influence total hospital resource consumption. Physician misunderstanding of patient preferences to forego CPR was associated with increased use of hospital resources, and could have led to a course of care at odds with patients' expressed preferences in the event of cardiac arrest. Increasing physicians' knowledge of patient preferences, and increasing communication to help patients understand that options for medical care that include foregoing resuscitation efforts, might reduce hospital expenditures for the seriously ill.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The prognosis of patients with metastatic adrenal cortical carcinoma is poor, and their disabling symptoms are usually unresponsive to conventional therapy. A patient with Cushing's syndrome secondary to a secretory adrenal cortical carcinoma was treated with octreotide, endocrine therapy and chemotherapy having failed. Treatment led to a dramatic relief of her symptoms with a fall in corticosteroid secretion. Somatostatin analogue therapy for this tumour should be encouraged in view of the lack of alternative palliative treatment.
MediCaring is a feasibility project that aims to develop an alternative benefit for comprehensive, supportive, home-based care to individuals who are enrolled in Medicare. Will Medicare-eligible consumers be willing to relinquish acute care benefits to finance supportive, home-based care?
Linking survival time to an array of prognostic variables through a powerful statistical model can provide reliable, valid and potentially useful information for patient care. We present a summary of the recently developed SUPPORT model [Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment] for estimating survival time of seriously ill adult inpatients and illustrate the possible clinical use of such a model. This model is then translated into counseling. Clinicians are positioned to evaluate the relevance and validity of any model and to understand their persistent shortcomings.
There is conflict between properly controlled studies and the mass media presentation of HRT. Nurses need to exercise caution when administering and recommending such drugs.
The process of designing research protocols for testing treatment effects and reporting the results of such research demands both explicit and implicit value judgments. When measuring the effects of alternative treatments, those judgments can include decisions about what outcomes to measure and for which persons they should be measured, how to aggregate disparate outcomes, and how to decide whether differences are substantial enough to differentiate between treatments. Researchers and reviewers often do not acknowledge problems of this sort, and default solutions are based on common usage rather than any epistemologic justification. Acknowledging the value commitments inherent in choices about research methods should serve to increase variation in methods rather than constrain them within conventional patterns. Especially with research intended to shape policy and practice, more thoughtful choices, humility in recognizing the limits of available methods, and flexibility in establishing the thresholds for significant differences for each study seem to be justified. The choices researchers make should be documented and the reasons for those choices should be given explicitly in publications and presentations so that readers and other users of the information are enabled and expected to bear more responsibility for interpreting and applying the findings appropriately.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of illness on the families of seriously ill adults and to determine the correlates of adverse economic impact. DESIGN: Data were collected during the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment (SUPPORT), a prospective cohort study of outcomes, preferences, and decision making in seriously ill hospitalized adults and their families. SETTING: Five tertiary care hospitals in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: The 2661 seriously ill patients in nine diagnostic categories who survived their index hospitalization and were discharged home were eligible for this analysis. Surrogate and/or patient interviews about the impact of illness on the family were obtained for 2129 (80%) of these patients (mean age, 62 years; 43% women; 6-month survival, 75%). OUTCOME MEASURES: Surrogates and patients were surveyed to determine the frequency of adverse caregiving and economic burdens. Multivariable analyses were performed to determine correlates of loss of family savings. RESULTS: One third (34%) of patients required considerable caregiving assistance from a family member. In 20% of cases, a family member had to quit work or make another major life change to provide care for the patient. Loss of most or all of the family savings was reported by 31% of families, whereas 29% reported loss of the major source of income. Patient factors independently associated with loss of the family's savings on multivariable analysis included poor functional status (odds ratio [OR], 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10 to 1.78 for patients needing assistance with three or more activities of daily living), lower family income (OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.21 for those with annual incomes below $25,000), and young age (OR, 2.85; 95% CI, 2.13 to 3.82 for those younger than 45 years compared with those 65 years or older). CONCLUSIONS: Many families of seriously ill patients experience severe caregiving and financial burdens. Families of younger, poorer, and more functionally dependent patients are most likely to report loss of most or all of the family's savings.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the appropriateness of hospitalization as the time to elicit patients' medical care preferences, the authors evaluated the capability of seriously ill patients to participate in decision making early in hospitalization and their decision making capacity two weeks before hospital entry. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study with retrospective evaluation of preadmission decision making capacity. SETTING: Five acute care teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: Four thousand three hundred one acutely ill hospitalized adults meeting predetermined severity of illness criteria in nine specific disease categories. MEASUREMENTS: Surrogate decision makers' estimates of the prior mental capacities of patients unable to be interviewed early in hospitalization about care preferences due to intubation, coma, or cognitive impairment. Comparison of the demographics, degrees of sickness at admission, and outcomes of interviewable vs noninterviewable patients. MAIN RESULTS: Forty percent of the patients were not interviewable concerning preferences. Of these, 83% could have participated in treatment decisions two weeks prior to hospitalization. The patients who were not interviewable were more acutely ill, had less chronic disease, and were more likely to die during hospitalization than the interviewable patients. CONCLUSIONS: Many acutely ill patients likely to die in the hospital lost their ability to make medical care decisions around the time of hospital admission. Preferences for care and advance directives should be discussed in the outpatient setting or very early in hospital admission.