Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 33
Filter
1.
Alzheimers Dement (Amst) ; 16(1): e12527, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38496716

ABSTRACT

Patients living with advanced dementia (PLADs) face several challenges to attain the goal of avoiding prolonged dying with severe suffering. One is how to determine when PLADs' current suffering becomes severe enough to cease all life-sustaining treatments, including withdrawing assistance with oral feeding and hydrating, a controversial order. This article broadens the concept of suffering by including suffering that cannot be observed contemporaneously and the suffering of loved ones. Four paradigm shifts operationalize these concepts. During advance care planning, patients can judge which future clinical conditions would cause severe suffering. To decide when to allow patients to die, treating physicians/providers only need to assess if patients have reached patients' previously judged, qualifying conditions. Questions: Will this protocol prevent PLADs' prolonged dying with suffering? Deter early-stage dementia patients from committing preemptive suicide? Sway decision-making surrogates from withholding life-sustaining treatments from patients with middle-stage dementia? Provoke providers' resistance to relinquish their traditional, unilateral authority to determine patients' suffering?

3.
N Engl J Med ; 389(19): 1766-1777, 2023 Nov 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37815935

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Nursing home residents are at high risk for infection, hospitalization, and colonization with multidrug-resistant organisms. METHODS: We performed a cluster-randomized trial of universal decolonization as compared with routine-care bathing in nursing homes. The trial included an 18-month baseline period and an 18-month intervention period. Decolonization entailed the use of chlorhexidine for all routine bathing and showering and administration of nasal povidone-iodine twice daily for the first 5 days after admission and then twice daily for 5 days every other week. The primary outcome was transfer to a hospital due to infection. The secondary outcome was transfer to a hospital for any reason. An intention-to-treat (as-assigned) difference-in-differences analysis was performed for each outcome with the use of generalized linear mixed models to compare the intervention period with the baseline period across trial groups. RESULTS: Data were obtained from 28 nursing homes with a total of 28,956 residents. Among the transfers to a hospital in the routine-care group, 62.2% (the mean across facilities) were due to infection during the baseline period and 62.6% were due to infection during the intervention period (risk ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96 to 1.04). The corresponding values in the decolonization group were 62.9% and 52.2% (risk ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.88), for a difference in risk ratio, as compared with routine care, of 16.6% (95% CI, 11.0 to 21.8; P<0.001). Among the discharges from the nursing home in the routine-care group, transfer to a hospital for any reason accounted for 36.6% during the baseline period and for 39.2% during the intervention period (risk ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.12). The corresponding values in the decolonization group were 35.5% and 32.4% (risk ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.88 to 0.96), for a difference in risk ratio, as compared with routine care, of 14.6% (95% CI, 9.7 to 19.2). The number needed to treat was 9.7 to prevent one infection-related hospitalization and 8.9 to prevent one hospitalization for any reason. CONCLUSIONS: In nursing homes, universal decolonization with chlorhexidine and nasal iodophor led to a significantly lower risk of transfer to a hospital due to infection than routine care. (Funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; Protect ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03118232.).


Subject(s)
Anti-Infective Agents, Local , Asymptomatic Infections , Chlorhexidine , Cross Infection , Nursing Homes , Povidone-Iodine , Humans , Administration, Cutaneous , Administration, Intranasal , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/administration & dosage , Anti-Infective Agents, Local/therapeutic use , Baths , Chlorhexidine/administration & dosage , Chlorhexidine/therapeutic use , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Cross Infection/therapy , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Nursing Homes/statistics & numerical data , Patient Transfer/statistics & numerical data , Povidone-Iodine/administration & dosage , Povidone-Iodine/therapeutic use , Skin Care/methods , Asymptomatic Infections/therapy
5.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 44(9): 1490-1493, 2023 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37325907

ABSTRACT

Standardized observation of bed baths and showers for 100 residents in 8 nursing homes revealed inadequate cleansing of body sites (88%-100% failure) and >90% process failure involving lather, firm massage, changing dirty wipes or cloths, and following clean-to-dirty sequence. Insufficient water warmth affected 86% of bathing opportunities. Bathing training and adequate resources are needed.


Subject(s)
Baths , Nursing Homes , Humans , Skilled Nursing Facilities
8.
BMC Med Ethics ; 23(1): 100, 2022 10 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36203173

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The terminal illness of late-stage (advanced) Alzheimer's and related dementias is progressively cruel, burdensome, and can last years if caregivers assist oral feeding and hydrating. Options to avoid prolonged dying are limited since advanced dementia patients cannot qualify for Medical Aid in Dying. Physicians and judges can insist on clear and convincing evidence that the patient wants to die-which many advance directives cannot provide. Proxies/agents' substituted judgment may not be concordant with patients' requests. While advance directives can be patients' last resort to attain a peaceful and timely dying consistent with their lifelong values, success depends on their being effective and acceptable. A single flaw can provide opponents justification to refuse the directive's requests to cease assisted feeding. AIM: This article considers 24 common advance directive flaws in four categories. Process flaws focus on how patients express their end-of-life wishes. Content flaws reflect drafters' selection of conditions and interventions, and how they are described. Inherent flaws can make advance directives unacceptable to authorities concerned about premature dying. Strategies are needed to compel physicians to write needed orders and to prevent third parties from sabotaging these orders after they are  implemented. The article includes excerpts from "dementia-specific" directives or supplements that exemplify each flaw-mostly from the US and Europe. No directive critiqued here included an effective strategy to resolve this long-debated bioethical conflict: the past directive requests "Cease assisted feeding" but the incapacitated patient apparently expresses the desire to "Continue assisted feeding." Some opponents to the controversial request, cease assisted feeding, use this conflict as a conceptual wedge to practice hard paternalism. This article proposes a protocol to prevent this conflict from emerging. These strategies may prevent authorities from requiring patients to fulfill authorities' additional clinical criteria as a prerequisite to honor the requests in patients directives. CONCLUSION: This critique of flaws may serve as a guide to drafting and to selecting effective and acceptable advance directives for dementia. It also poses several bioethical and clinical questions to those in authority: Does your paternalistic refusal to honor patients' wishes respect their self-determination? Protect vulnerable patients from harm? Force patients to endure prolonged suffering? Violate the principles of bioethics? Violate the very foundation of patient-centered care?


Subject(s)
Dementia , Advance Directives , Humans , Paternalism , Personal Autonomy , Proxy
9.
Ann Pharmacother ; 56(8): 878-887, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34963317

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Assessing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) severity is challenging in nursing home (NH) residents due to incomplete symptom assessments and exacerbation history. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to predict COPD severity in NH residents using the Minimum Data Set (MDS), a clinical assessment of functional capabilities and health needs. METHODS: A cohort analysis of prospectively collected longitudinal data was conducted. Residents from geographically varied Medicare-certified NHs with age ≥60 years, COPD diagnosis, and ≥6 months NH residence at enrollment were included. Residents with severe cognitive impairment were excluded. Demographic characteristics, medical history, and MDS variables were extracted from medical records. The care provider-completed COPD Assessment Test (CAT) and COPD exacerbation history were used to categorize residents by Global Initiative for Chronic Lung Disease (GOLD) A to D groups. Multivariate multinomial logit models mapped the MDS to GOLD A to D groups with stepwise selection of variables. RESULTS: Nursing home residents (N = 175) were 64% women and had a mean age of 77.9 years. Among residents, GOLD B was most common (A = 13.1%; B = 44.0%; C = 5.7%; D = 37.1%). Any long-acting bronchodilator (LABD) use and any dyspnea were significant predictors of GOLD A to D groups. The predicted MDS-GOLD group (A = 6.9%; B = 52.6%; C = 4.6%; D = 36.0%) showed good model fit (correctly predicted = 60.6%). Nursing home residents may underuse group-recommended LABD treatment (no LABD: B = 53.2%; C = 80.0%; D = 40.0%). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: The MDS, completed routinely for US NH residents, could potentially be used to estimate COPD severity. Predicted COPD severity with additional validation could provide a map to evidence-based treatment guidelines and may help to individualize treatment pathways for NH residents.


Subject(s)
Nursing Homes , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Aged , Bronchodilator Agents/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Male , Medicare , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/drug therapy , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/epidemiology , Severity of Illness Index , United States/epidemiology
10.
J Am Med Dir Assoc ; 22(8): 1672-1677, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34029523

ABSTRACT

POLST (Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) is a medical order form used to document preferences about cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), medical interventions such as hospitalization, care in the intensive care unit, and/or ventilation, as well as artificial nutrition. Programs based on the POLST paradigm are used in virtually every state under names that include POST (Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment), MOLST (Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment), and MOST (Medical Orders for Scope of Treatment), and these forms are used in the care of hundreds of thousands of geriatric patients every year. Although POLST is intended for persons who are at risk of a life-threatening clinical event due to a serious life-limiting medical condition, some nursing homes and residential care settings use POLST to document CPR preferences for all residents, resulting in potentially inappropriate use with patients who are ineligible because they are too healthy. This article focuses on reasons that POLST is used as a default code status order form, the risks associated with this practice, and recommendations for nursing homes to implement appropriate use of POLST.


Subject(s)
Advance Care Planning , Terminal Care , Advance Directives , Aged , Humans , Long-Term Care , Nursing Homes , Resuscitation Orders
12.
J Am Med Dir Assoc ; 2021 Jan 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33441269

ABSTRACT

This article has been withdrawn at the request of the author(s) and/or editor. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal.

14.
J Am Med Dir Assoc ; 22(2): 334-339.e2, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33246840

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether medical orders within Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) forms reflect patients' preferences for care at the end of life. DESIGN: This cross-sectional study assessed the agreement between medical orders in POLST forms and the free-form text documentation of an advance care planning conversation performed by an independent researcher during a single episode of hospitalization. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Inpatients at a single public university hospital, aged 21 years or older, and for whom one of their attending physicians provided a negative answer to the following question: "Would I be surprised if this patient died in the next year?" Data collection occurred between October 2016 and September 2017. MEASURES: Agreement between medical orders in POLST forms and the free-form text documentation of an advance care planning conversation was measured by kappa statistics. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were interviewed. Patients' median (interquartile range) age was 62 (56-70) years, and 21 patients (34%) were women. Overall, in 7 (11%) cases, disagreement in at least 1 medical order for life-sustaining treatment was found between POLST forms and the content of the independent advance care planning conversation. The kappa statistic for cardiopulmonary resuscitation was 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.82-1.00]; for level of medical intervention, 0.90 (95% CI: 0.81-0.99); and for artificially administered nutrition, 0.87 (95% CI: 0.75-0.98). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The high level of agreement between medical orders in POLST forms and the documentation in an independent advance care planning conversation offers further support for the POLST paradigm. In addition, the finding that the agreement was not 100% underscores the need to confirm frequently that POLST medical orders accurately reflect patients' current values and preferences of care.


Subject(s)
Advance Care Planning , Physicians , Terminal Care , Advance Directives , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Death , Female , Humans , Life Support Care , Middle Aged , Patient Preference , Resuscitation Orders
15.
J Am Med Dir Assoc ; 21(12): 1759-1766, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33256956

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Nursing homes became epicenters of COVID-19 in the spring of 2020. Due to the substantial case fatality rates within congregate settings, federal agencies recommended restrictions to family visits. Six months into the COVID-19 pandemic, these largely remain in place. The objective of this study was to generate consensus guidance statements focusing on essential family caregivers and visitors. DESIGN: A modified 2-step Delphi process was used to generate consensus statements. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The Delphi panel consisted of 21 US and Canadian post-acute and long-term care experts in clinical medicine, administration, and patient care advocacy. METHODS: State and federal reopening statements were collected in June 2020 and the panel voted on these using a 3-point Likert scale with consensus defined as ≥80% of panel members voting "Agree." The consensus statements then informed development of the visitor guidance statements. RESULTS: The Delphi process yielded 77 consensus statements. Regarding visitor guidance, the panel made 5 strong recommendations: (1) maintain strong infection prevention and control precautions, (2) facilitate indoor and outdoor visits, (3) allow limited physical contact with appropriate precautions, (4) assess individual residents' care preferences and level of risk tolerance, and (5) dedicate an essential caregiver and extend the definition of compassionate care visits to include care that promotes psychosocial well-being of residents. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has seen substantial regulatory changes without strong consideration of the impact on residents. In the absence of timely and rigorous research, the involvement of clinicians and patient care advocates is important to help create the balance between individual resident preferences and the health of the collective. The results of this evidence-based Delphi process will help guide policy decisions as well as inform future research.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Consensus , Nursing Homes , Visitors to Patients , Canada , Delphi Technique , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Organizational Policy , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
17.
J Am Med Dir Assoc ; 21(12): 1937-1943.e2, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32553489

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Determine the prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. (VRE), extended-spectrum beta-lactamase producing organisms (ESBLs), and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) among residents and in the environment of nursing homes (NHs). DESIGN: Point prevalence sampling of residents and environmental sampling of high-touch objects in resident rooms and common areas. SETTING: Twenty-eight NHs in Southern California from 2016 to 2017. PARTICIPANTS: NH participants in Project PROTECT, a cluster-randomized trial of enhanced bathing and decolonization vs routine care. METHODS: Fifty residents were randomly sampled per NH. Twenty objects were sampled, including 5 common room objects plus 5 objects in each of 3 rooms (ambulatory, total care, and dementia care residents). RESULTS: A total of 2797 swabs were obtained from 1400 residents in 28 NHs. Median prevalence of multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) carriage per NH was 50% (range: 24%-70%). Median prevalence of specific MDROs were as follows: MRSA, 36% (range: 20%-54%); ESBL, 16% (range: 2%-34%); VRE, 5% (range: 0%-30%); and CRE, 0% (range: 0%-8%). A median of 45% of residents (range: 24%-67%) harbored an MDRO without a known MDRO history. Environmental MDRO contamination was found in 74% of resident rooms and 93% of common areas. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: In more than half of the NHs, more than 50% of residents were colonized with MDROs of clinical and public health significance, most commonly MRSA and ESBL. Additionally, the vast majority of resident rooms and common areas were MDRO contaminated. The unknown submerged portion of the iceberg of MDRO carriers in NHs may warrant changes to infection prevention and control practices, particularly high-fidelity adoption of universal strategies such as hand hygiene, environmental cleaning, and decolonization.


Subject(s)
Cross Infection , Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus , Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci , Cross Infection/drug therapy , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial , Humans , Nursing Homes , Prevalence
19.
JAMA Netw Open ; 2(4): e192036, 2019 04 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30977852

ABSTRACT

Importance: Despite its spread in much of the United States and increased international interest, the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) paradigm still lacks supporting evidence. The interrater reliability of the POLST form to translate patients' values and preferences into medical orders for care at the end of life remains to be studied. Objective: To assess the interrater reliability of the medical orders documented in POLST forms. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study was conducted in a public university hospital in southeastern Brazil. Two independent researchers interviewed the same patients or decision-making surrogates (n = 64) during a single episode of hospitalization within a time frame of 1 to 7 days. Eligible participants were hospitalized adults aged 21 years or older who were expected to remain hospitalized for at least 4 days and whose attending physician responded no to the question, Would I be surprised if this patient died in the next year? Data collection occurred between November 1, 2015, and September 20, 2016, and first data analyses were performed on October 3, 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures: Interrater reliability as measured by κ statistics. Results: Of the 64 participants interviewed in the study, 53 (83%) were patients and 11 (17%) were surrogates. Patients' mean (SD) age was 64 (14) years, and 35 patients (55%) and 8 surrogates (73%) were women. Overall, in 5 cases (8%), disagreement in at least 1 medical order for life-sustaining treatment was found in the POLST form, changing from the first interview to the second interview. The κ statistic for cardiopulmonary resuscitation was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.80-1.00); for level of medical intervention, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.76-1.00); and for artificially administered nutrition, 0.92 (95% CI, 0.83-1.00). Conclusions and Relevance: The high interrater reliability of the medical orders in POLST forms appears to offer further support for this advance care planning paradigm; in addition, the finding that this interrater reliability was not 100% underscores the need to ensure that patients or their surrogates have decision-making capacity and to confirm that the content of POLST forms accurately reflects patients' current treatment preferences.


Subject(s)
Advance Care Planning/standards , Attitude to Death , Life Support Care/psychology , Patient Preference/psychology , Terminal Care/standards , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Brazil , Cross-Sectional Studies , Decision Making , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Observer Variation , Physicians/psychology , Reproducibility of Results , Terminal Care/psychology , Translations
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...