This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Attending Physicians' Attitudes, Their Inpatients' Wishes, and Reported Experience

Brendan M. Reilly, MD; C. Richard Magnussen, MD; James Ross; Jeffrey Ash, MD; Louis Papa, MD; Michael Wagner, MD

Arch Intern Med. 1994;154(20):2299-2308.

Abstract
Background
The attitudes of hospitalized patients and their attending physicians about advance directives have not been well studied. We compared these attitudes and explored relationships between them and the frequency of actual directives and directive discussions during hospitalization.

Methods
We conducted scripted interviews with 258 (94.5%) of 273 patients admitted consecutively to the acute medical service of a community teaching hospital in Rochester, NY, and contemporaneously surveyed their attending physicians (n=68) regarding attitudes about advance directives. Primary outcome measures were patients' willingness to discuss directives, actual physician-patient directive discussions, and patients' preferences for life-sustaining treatments. Also measured were physicians' indications for directive discussions, their reasons not to discuss directives, and their knowledge and attitudes about life-sustaining treatments.

Results
Eighty-one percent (172/212) of competent interviewed patients either did (100) or wanted to (72) discuss advance directives in hospital. Forty-one percent of patients chose to forgo cardiopulmonary resuscitation; 24% to 41% refused other life-sustaining interventions (intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, cardioversion, vasopressors). Overall, 90% (246/273) of all patients met at least one of three criteria reported by their physicians as indications for advance directive discussions: age at least 75 years, critical or potentially fatal illness, and patients' desire to discuss directives. Multiple logistic regression revealed that these same variables predicted patients' willingness to discuss cardiopulmonary resuscitation, their preferences to receive or forgo cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and the frequency of physician-patient discussions about these issues.

Conclusions
Most medical inpatients in a community hospital want to, are able to, and meet their own physicians' indications to discuss advance directives. Hospitalization presents an unrealized opportunity for physicians and patients to initiate these discussions.

(Arch Intern Med. 1994;154:2299-2308)

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Medicine, St Mary's Hospital, and the University of Rochester (NY) School of Medicine.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Code status discussions and goals of care among hospitalised adults
Kaldjian et al.
J. Med. Ethics 2009;35:338-342.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Role of advance directives in palliative care units: a prospective study
Pautex et al.
Palliat Med 2008;22:835-841.
ABSTRACT  

Development and Validation of a Prognostic Index for 4-Year Mortality in Older Adults
Lee et al.
JAMA 2006;295:801-808.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A 62-Year-Old Woman With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Celli
JAMA 2003;290:2721-2729.
FULL TEXT  

Life Support Withdrawal: Communication and Conflict
Norton et al.
Am J Crit Care 2003;12:548-555.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Determining resuscitation preferences of elderly inpatients: a review of the literature
Frank et al.
CMAJ 2003;169:795-799.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The value of taking an 'ethics history'
Sayers et al.
J. Med. Ethics 2001;27:114-117.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Patients' Knowledge of Options at the End of Life: Ignorance in the Face of Death
Silveira et al.
JAMA 2000;284:2483-2488.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The Slow Code -- Should Anyone Rush to Its Defense?
Gazelle
NEJM 1998;338:467-469.
FULL TEXT  

Publications in Subspecialty Journals on End-of-Life Ethics
Heffner et al.
Arch Intern Med 1997;157:685-690.
ABSTRACT  

New York's DNR Law Does Not Require Futile Resuscitation-Reply
Pollack
Arch Intern Med 1997;157:468-468.
ABSTRACT  

Involvement of Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Programs in Advance Directive Education
Heffner and Barbieri
Arch Intern Med 1996;156:1746-1751.
ABSTRACT  

Detours on the Road to Autonomy: A Critique of the New York State Do-Not-Resuscitate Law
Pollack
Arch Intern Med 1996;156:1369-1371.
ABSTRACT  

Marked Improvement in Recognition and Completion of Health Care Proxies: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Counseling by Hospital Patient Representatives
Meier et al.
Arch Intern Med 1996;156:1227-1232.
ABSTRACT  

Procedure-Specific Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders: Effect on Communication of Treatment Limitations
Heffner et al.
Arch Intern Med 1996;156:793-797.
ABSTRACT  

On Advancing Advance Directives: Why Should We Believe the Promise?
McIntyre
Arch Intern Med 1995;155:2271-2273.
ABSTRACT  

Promoting Inpatient Directives About Life-Sustaining Treatments in a Community Hospital: Results of a 3-Year Time-Series Intervention Trial
Reilly et al.
Arch Intern Med 1995;155:2317-2323.
ABSTRACT  

Promoting Completion of Health Care Proxies Following Hospitalization: A Randomized Controlled Trial in a Community Hospital
Reilly et al.
Arch Intern Med 1995;155:2202-2206.
ABSTRACT  

Factors Promoting Completion of Advance Directives in the Hospital
Cugliari et al.
Arch Intern Med 1995;155:1893-1898.
ABSTRACT  

Structured Advance Planning: Is It Finally Time for Physician Action and Reimbursement?
Emanuel
JAMA 1995;274:501-503.
ABSTRACT  

ADVANCE DIRECTIVES: ARE THEY BEING DISCUSSED?
JWatch General 1994;1994:1-1.
FULL TEXT  

Talking, Advance Directives, and Medical Practice
Loewy and Carlson
Arch Intern Med 1994;154:2265-2267.
ABSTRACT