Factors promoting completion of advance directives in the hospital.

BACKGROUND: The 1991 Patient Self-Determination Act required health care providers to give patients information about advance directives. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether the requirement to distribute information to hospital patients increased completion of the health care proxy. To also explore factors that might influence use of advance directives, including demographic variables and methods of informing patients about the directives. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We interviewed 419 randomly selected patients who were admitted for a planned admission to two tertiary care, teaching hospitals. Patients at one hospital received proxy information before the day of admission, at a pretesting visit, or by mail. The other hospital distributed the proxy information only on the day of admission. RESULTS: Before receiving hospital materials, 17% of all patients had completed proxies. After receiving hospital proxy forms, an additional 40% completed proxies at the hospital that distributed forms before the day of admission. Only 4% of the patients completed proxies at the hospital that distributed information only on the day of admission. The most frequently cited barrier to completion of a proxy was not seeing the form. Few patients said they did not want to think about the subject. CONCLUSIONS: Completion rates for advance directives may be markedly improved by altering the time for distributing information to patients admitted to the hospital for a planned admission. Patients were more likely to complete a proxy in the hospital that distributed the form in advance of the day of admission, a result that was unexplained by other variables in the study. Although many patients would prefer to receive information about advance directives during an office visit with a physician, hospitalization can provide a valuable opportunity for many patients to complete directives.

Withdrawing and withholding treatment: policies in long-term care facilities.

The Task Force on Life and the Law conducted a survey of nursing homes in New York State in 1986 and 1988. The survey examined the existence of policies on decisions about life-sustaining treatment, the process to determine which residents have decision-making capacity, the prevalence of ethics committees or other vehicles to resolve disputes, and policies on advance directives such as living wills and durable powers of attorney. Comparison of responses in 1986 and 1988 shows an increase in the number of facilities that have established explicit policies and institutional vehicles to address the dilemmas associated with decisions to withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatment.

Moral and religious objections by hospitals to withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment.

A patient's right to decide about life-sustaining treatment may conflict with the policies of health care facilities that refuse on the basis or religious or moral convictions to honor certain decisions to forgo treatment. The New York State Task Force on Life and the Law examined the prevalence and nature of facility conscience objections to the refusal of life-sustaining treatment by conducting a survey of New York hospitals. Written questionnaires were distributed to hospitals in New York State. Fifty-eight percent of the New York State hospitals responded. Twenty-nine percent of the respondents indicated that their hospital would object on grounds of conscience either to withholding or to withdrawing life-sustaining treatment in at least one of the twelve hypothetical cases presented. Hospitals were more likely to have "no policy" for withdrawing than for withholding treatment. Only 10% of the hospitals that would object to decisions to forgo treatment on religious or moral grounds had stated the objections in writing. The patient's medical condition and the type of life-sustaining treatment to be withdrawn or withheld are important factors in determining whether a hospital will object on grounds of conscience. The imminence of death appeared more decisive than the degree of debilitation or disability as a factor in the willingness to accept decisions to forgo life-sustaining treatment. Hospitals should establish clear, written policies about their objections to forgoing treatment so that patients and their families can evaluate whether the facility meets their needs.

Gastric mucosal mast cells in atopic subjects.

Intragastral allergen provocation under endoscopic control (IPEC) allows direct observation of gastric mucosa reactions after contact with inhalant allergens that reach the stomach. We selected patients with proved atopy to Parietaria but without clinical and endoscopic signs of gastric disease, and we tested them with the specific inhalant allergen during IPEC, recording gastric macroscopic reaction and mucosal mast-cell changes in biopsy specimens. All atopic patients showed visible changes in gastric mucosa quantified as IPEC score. Mast-cell numbers detected in atopic patients (135.4 +/- 102.6/mm2 of stromal area) were significantly higher than in nonatopic subjects (59.8 +/- 25.4/mm2; P < 0.03) and were positively correlated to atopic IPEC score (P < 0.01). In addition, 6/12 atopics who had both higher mast-cell counts and IPEC score showed an intraepithelial distribution of gastric mast cells which displayed ultrastructural features of partial degranulation. It is likely that changes observed in our patients with allergy to Parietaria reflect a subclinical activation of mast cells in the gastric mucosa.