1. Impact of a treatment escalation/limitation plan on non-beneficial interventions and harms in patients during their last admission before in-hospital death, using the Structured Judgment Review Method
- Author
-
Calvin J Lightbody, Jonathan N Campbell, Heather K Osborne, Alice Radley, G. Peter Herbison, and D Robin Taylor
- Subjects
Adult ,Male ,Advance care planning ,treatment escalation / limitation ,medicine.medical_specialty ,medicine.medical_treatment ,medical harms ,Psychological intervention ,underuse ,overuse ,Hospitals, General ,Rate ratio ,Patient-Centred Medicine ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Intensive care ,Humans ,Medicine ,In patient ,Hospital Mortality ,030212 general & internal medicine ,Cardiopulmonary resuscitation ,advance care planning ,end-of-life care ,Aged ,Resuscitation Orders ,Retrospective Studies ,Aged, 80 and over ,business.industry ,Research ,030503 health policy & services ,Gold standard ,General Medicine ,Middle Aged ,Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation ,Heart Arrest ,Emergency medicine ,Regression Analysis ,Female ,0305 other medical science ,business ,End-of-life care - Abstract
ObjectivesTo assess the effect of using a treatment escalation/limitation plan (TELP) on the frequency of harms in 300 patients who died following admission to hospital.DesignA retrospective case note review of 300 unselected, consecutive deaths comprising: (1) patients with a TELP in addition to a do-not-attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation order (DNACPR); (2) those with DNACPR only; and (3) those with neither. Patient deaths were classified retrospectively as ‘expected’ or ‘unexpected’ using the Gold Standard Framework Prognostic Indicator Guidance.SettingMedical, surgical and intensive care units of a district general hospital.OutcomesThe primary outcome was the between-group difference in rates of harms, non-beneficial interventions (NBIs) and clinical ‘problems’ identified using the Structured Judgement Review Method.Results289 case records were evaluable. 155 had a TELP and DNACPR (54%); 113 had DNACPR only (39%); 21 had neither (7%). 247 deaths (86%) were ‘expected’. Among patients with ‘expected’ deaths and using the TELP/DNACPR as controls (incidence rate ratio (IRR)=1.00), the IRRs were: for harms, 2.99 (DNACPR only) and 4.00 (neither TELP nor DNACPR) (pConclusionsThe use of a TELP was associated with a significant reduction in harms, NBIs and ‘problems’ in patients admitted acutely and who subsequently died, especially if they were likely to be in the last year of life.
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF