POLST recall, concordance, and decision quality outcomes among nursing home residents and surrogate decision-makers.

BACKGROUND: POLST orders are actionable in an emergency, so it is important that the decisions be of high quality and concordant with current preferences. The goal of this study is to determine the relationship between concordance and decision quality outcomes, including decision satisfaction and decisional conflict, among nursing facility residents and surrogates who recall POLST. METHODS: We completed structured interviews in 29 nursing facilities with 275 participants who had previously signed a POLST form. This included residents who were still making their own medical decisions (n = 123) and surrogate decision-makers for residents without decisional capacity (n = 152). POLST recall was defined as remembering talking about and/or completing the POLST form previously signed by the participant. Concordance was determined by comparing preferences elicited during a standardized interview with the POLST form on file. Decisional conflict, decision satisfaction, and conversation quality were assessed with standardized tools. RESULTS: Half of participants (50%) remembered talking about or completing the POLST form, but recall was not associated with the length of time since POLST completion or concordance with existing preferences. In multivariable analyses, there was no association between POLST recall, concordance, and decision quality outcomes, though satisfaction was associated with conversation quality. CONCLUSIONS: Half of the residents and surrogates in this study recalled the POLST they previously signed. Neither the age of the form nor the ability to recall the POLST conversation should be considered indicators of whether existing POLST orders match current preferences. Findings confirm a relationship between POLST conversation quality and satisfaction, underscoring the importance of POLST completion as a communication process.

Reasons for Discordance Between Life-Sustaining Treatment Preferences and Medical Orders in Nursing Facilities Without POLST.

BACKGROUND: Life-sustaining treatment (LST) orders are important communication tools used to ensure preference-concordant care at the end of life. Recent studies reveal concerning rates of discordance between current preferences and documented LST orders, especially in nursing facilities without POLST. Reasons for discordance in facilities using POLST have been explored, however the majority of nursing facilities in the United States do not yet use the POLST form. DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive study using constant comparative analysis. SETTING: Nursing facilities in Indiana (n = 6) not using POLST. PARTICIPANTS: Residents (n = 15) and surrogate decision-makers of residents without decisional capacity (n = 15) with discordance between current preferences and documented LST orders. MEASUREMENTS: Do not resuscitate, do not hospitalize (DNH), and do not intubate (DNI) orders were extracted from medical charts. Current preferences were elicited using the Respecting Choices Advanced Steps model. A semi-structured interview guide was used to explore reasons for discordance between current preferences and LST orders. RESULTS: Reasons for discordance included: (1) inadequate information about the range of available LST options, what each involves, and how to formally communicate preferences; (2) no previous discussion with facility staff; (3) no documentation of previously expressed preferences; and (4) family involvement. CONCLUSION: Reasons for discordance between expressed preferences and LST orders suggest that in facilities without a uniform and systematic LST order documentation strategy like POLST, these conversations may not occur and/or be documented. Staff should be aware that residents and surrogates may have preferences about LSTs that require strategic solicitation and documentation.

Reasons for discordance and concordance between POLST orders and current treatment preferences.

BACKGROUND: The reasons for discordance between advance care planning (ACP) documentation and current preferences are not well understood. The POLST form offers a unique opportunity to learn about the reasons for discordance and concordance that has relevance for POLST as well as ACP generally. DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive including constant comparative analysis within and across cases. SETTING: Twenty-six nursing facilities in Indiana. PARTICIPANTS: Residents (n = 36) and surrogate decision-makers of residents without decisional capacity (n = 37). MEASUREMENTS: A semi-structured interview guide was used to explore the reasons for discordance or concordance between current preferences and existing POLST forms. FINDINGS: Reasons for discordance include: (1) problematic nursing facility practices related to POLST completion; (2) missing key information about POLST treatment decisions; (3) deferring to others; and (4) changes over time. Some participants were unable to explain the discordance due to a lack of insight or inability to remember details of the original POLST conversation. Explanations for concordance include: (1) no change in the resident's medical condition and/or the resident is unlikely to improve; (2) use of the substituted judgment standard for surrogate decision-making; and (3) fixed opinion about what is "right" with little to no insight. CONCLUSION: Participant explanations for discordance between existing POLST orders and current preferences highlight the importance of adequate structures and processes to support high quality ACP in nursing facilities. Residents with stable or poor health may be more appropriate candidates for POLST than residents with a less clear prognosis, though preferences should be revisited periodically as well as when there is a change in condition to help ensure existing documentation is concordant with current treatment preferences.

Factors associated with concordance between POLST orders and current treatment preferences.

BACKGROUND: POLST is widely used to document the treatment preferences of nursing facility residents as orders, but it is unknown how well previously completed POLST orders reflect current preferences (concordance) and what factors are associated with concordance. OBJECTIVES: To describe POLST preference concordance and identify factors associated with concordance. DESIGN: Chart reviews to document existing POLST orders and interviews to elicit current treatment preferences. SETTING: POLST-using nursing facilities (n = 29) in Indiana. PARTICIPANTS: Nursing facility residents (n = 123) and surrogates of residents without decisional capacity (n = 152). MEASUREMENTS: Concordance was determined by comparing existing POLST orders for resuscitation, medical interventions, and artificial nutrition with current treatment preferences. Comfort-focused POLSTs contained orders for do not resuscitate, comfort measures, and no artificial nutrition. RESULTS: Overall, 55.7% (123/221) of residents and 44.7% (152/340) of surrogates participated (total n = 275). POLST concordance was 44%, but concordance was higher for comfort-focused POLSTs (68%) than for non-comfort-focused POLSTs (27%) (p < 0.001). In the unadjusted analysis, increasing resident age (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.07, p < 0.01), better cognitive functioning (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.13, p < 0.01), surrogate as the decision-maker (OR 2.87, OR 1.73-4.75, p < 0.001), and comfort-focused POLSTs (OR 6.01, 95% CI 3.29-11.00, p < 0.01) were associated with concordance. In the adjusted multivariable model, only having an existing comfort-focused POLST was associated with higher odds of POLST concordance (OR 5.28, 95% CI 2.59-10.73, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Less than half of all POLST forms were concordant with current preferences, but POLST was over five times as likely to be concordant when orders reflected preferences for comfort-focused care. Findings suggest a clear need to improve the quality of POLST use in nursing facilities and focus its use among residents with stable, comfort-focused preferences.