[Pre-operative documentation of individual in-patient therapy goals : A medical staff questionnaire]. / Patientenorientierte Therapieziele im Krankenhaus : Eine Fragebogenerhebung an medizinischem Personal.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative care demands consideration of individual treatment goals. We evaluated the attitudes of medical staff towards a short standardized advance directive (SSAD) as a means of improving patient-orientated care at the transition from operating theater to general or intensive care wards. METHOD: Multicenter anonymized standardized multiple-choice questionnaire among physicians and nurses from various operative and anesthesiology departments. Questions addressing demographic parameters and attitudes towards advance directives in acute care settings (eleven 4­stepped Likert items). Univariate analysis of group comparisons using the chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis rank-sum test. Multivariable analysis of significant differences employing ordinal logistic regression. RESULTS: The overall return rate was 28.2 % (169 questionnaires). Of these, 19.5 % said that existing advance directives were regularly reassessed preoperatively. SSAD was expected to provide improved emergency care by 82.3 and 76.6 % thought that it would help to better focus intensive care resources according to patients' needs. DISCUSSION: Our study shows the dilemma of insufficiently structured directives for changing treatment goals as well as a high number of legal procedures to obtain proxy decisions due to missing out-patient advance health planning. From a medical staff perspective there is strong support for the concept of SSAD based on medical, ethical, economic and organizational reasons.

[Preoperative patient-oriented advance planning of emergency and intensive care treatment--Necessary or imposition? : Questionnaire survey]. / Präoperative patientenorientierte Vorausplanung von Notfall- und Intensivbehandlung--Bedarf oder Zumutung? : Fragebogenerhebung.

BACKGROUND: Traditional advance directives can often not be satisfactorily implemented into patient care; therefore, patient-oriented decision-making prior to scheduled interventions and beyond the actual surgery is of particular importance. Data on inpatient advance care planning (ACP) in Germany are lacking. OBJECTIVES: This proof-of-concept study was carried out to determine the needs of inpatients undergoing surgery for advance preoperative planning of emergency care and to assess potential discomfort caused by such a program. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A voluntary and anonymous standardized questionnaire survey was carried out in scheduled surgery inpatients over 50 years old. Data collection was structured in a demographic part and statements dealing with preoperative advance planning of emergency care in hospital evaluated as Likert items. RESULTS: Out of 579 patients (mean age 66 years, 51% male) 43% indicated a basic interest in being informed about advance planning of emergency care individually during the current hospital stay. Desire for patient self-determination represented an independent factor of information needs [p = 0.036, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.027-0.793]. The survey was perceived as a burden by only 7.3% of patients. This perception was independently associated with less concern about perioperative complication risks (p = 0.008, 95% CI 0.144-0.975). CONCLUSION: The results confirmed a substantial interest in patient-oriented advance planning of emergency care in a preoperative setting; however, no demographic group criteria for patients with information requirements could be defined. As the burden evoked by the topic is low, advance planning of emergency and intensive care treatment of inpatients undergoing surgery should be actively provided in the future.

[Survey on the need for information during the preanesthesia visit]. / Fragebogenstudie zum Informationsbedarf in der Prämedikationsambulanz.

BACKGROUND: The preanesthesia informed consent document is regarded mainly as a legal prerequisite but patient autonomy in the authorization of a proposed intervention requires that the relevant information is provided in a suitable and useful way. AIM: The information needs of patients was determined in relation to demographic parameters. This study carried out to evaluate if the expected extent of information regarding anesthesia during the preanesthesia visit was dependent on group-specific variables. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 699 adult patients with forthcoming elective non-cardiac surgery were anonymously interviewed concerning their expectations and informational needs during the preanesthesiavisit. The questionnaire contained 15 demographic variables, one being the question on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The ASA classification was the only patient data assessed by the anesthesiologist after the consultation. In the second part of the questionnaire statements regarding the kind and extent of information (n = 10) as well as structural aspects of the preanesthesia visit (n = 5) could be rated using a four-step Likert scale. Point values from questions 1-10 were added to a sum score of need for information for each patient with 0 to ± 3 allotted for each question according to the direction of the question wording (i.e. more or less information desired) and the individual patient scores on the Likert scale. Variables associated with this score of need for information were assessed by regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the patients, 80.6% were classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II. The HRQoL was rated fair or good by a total of 80%. On average patients were satisfied with the extent and the kind of information offered during the preanesthesia visit with a mean of the sum score of 0 (min. -10 and max. +10, SD ± 3.2). This applied to the written material to prepare for informed consent; however, the consultation was much more appreciated as a source of information. Of the patients, 278 wanted more information and 268 patients wanted less. Linear regression analysis determined education [p = 0.00018, 95% CI: 0.405 (0.194-0.615)], ASA physical status [(p = 0.047, 95% CI: - 0.558 (- 1.107 to - 0.009)] and HRQoL [(p = 0.025, 95% CI: - 0.412 (- 0.771 to - 0.053)] as being independently related to information needs, including perioperative processes as well as rare risks and complications. Interest in being educated about patient autonomy in end of life situations in the hospital was significantly correlated to the score (p < 0.001, r = 0.143). The results of this study demonstrate for the first time in a German surgical cohort a wide acceptance of preoperative healthcare planning (77.4 %). CONCLUSION: Demographic criteria can help to tailor pre-anesthetic information to individual patient needs. The explanatory power of these variables was, however, low. The relationship between self-assessed HRQoL and the demand for information underlines the necessity to adapt the amount and kind of information provided during the consultation to individual patients preferences.

Urgency or Outcome as Guiding Principle for the Allocation of Deceased Donor Livers: A Questionnaire Survey Among Outpatients of a University Medical Department in Germany.

INTRODUCTION: The sickest-first principle has been pursued in the allocation of donor livers for transplantation with the introduction of algorithms based on the model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score. In Germany outcomes of liver transplantation appear to be negatively influenced by the transplantation of patients with very high MELD scores and the use of donor organs with lower quality. Therefore, some have claimed, allocation should be based more on outcome-oriented criteria. METHODS: A survey with binary questions (yes/no) regarding the appreciation of values concerning the allocation of donor livers was performed among general medical outpatients of a university hospital. End-stage liver disease patients were excluded. Two hundred four returned forms were analyzed. Percentages of valid answers are given. RESULTS: In this study, 88%, 73%, and 41% of subjects answered they would be willing to undergo transplantation with an estimated outcome of 20%, 50%, and 80% 1-year mortality rate, respectively, for themselves. Choosing a possible recipient between 2 case examples, 68% of valid answers voted for the case with higher age and urgency and lower long-term survival. Seventy percent said urgency was more important than long-term outcome as a criterion for organ allocation. Under the assumption that urgency-based allocation would decrease average long-term survival of liver transplantation, 58% refused to deny even the sickest patients transplantation. Seventy-eight percent said that patients likely to achieve 50% long-term survival should not be denied liver transplantation. CONCLUSION: In our study a majority of subjects prioritize urgency and granting a chance to avert imminent death over long-term survival per procedure. Equitable distribution of chances for survival may be estimated more than outcome maximization in terms of aggregate life-years gained.