PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

N S Wenger

Publications and source records attributed to N S Wenger.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1997

Functional status among survivors of in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation. SUPPORT Investigators Study to Understand Progress and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment.

OBJECTIVES: To describe functional outcomes of seriously III patients who survived 2 months after in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and to identify patient and clinical characteristics associated with worse functional status after CPR. METHODS: Multicenter prospective observational analysis of 162 seriously ill hospitalized patients who survived 2 months after CPR. Analysis of clinical characteristics associated with worse functional outcome. RESULTS: Among 162 survivors of in-hospital CPR, 56% had the same or improved function and 44% had worse function at 2 months compared with functional status before CPR. Patients with worse function deteriorated by a mean of 3.9 activities of daily living and were less likely to survive to hospital discharge (P < .001) or to 6 months after study entry (P < .001). Worse functional outcome was associated with greater age and longer hospital stay before CPR. CONCLUSIONS: More than half of CPR survivors had preserved functional status 2 months after CPR. However, patients with worse function are profoundly disabled. In anticipation of possible severe disability after CPR, preferences for care in such health states should be discussed with patients before the need for CPR, particularly among older patients and those with long hospital stays.

Age Factors↗
PubMed1996

Factors associated with change in resuscitation preference of seriously ill patients. The SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments.

BACKGROUND: During serious illness, patient preferences regarding life-sustaining treatments play an important role in medical decisions. However, little is known about life-sustaining preference stability in this population or about factors associated with preference change. METHODS: We evaluated 2-month cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) preference stability in a cohort of 1590 seriously ill hospitalized patients at 5 acute care teaching hospitals. Using multiple logistic regression, we measured the association of patient demographic and health-related factors (quality of life, function, depression, prognosis, and diagnostic group) with change in CPR preference between interviews. RESULTS: Of 1590 patients analyzed, 73% of patients preferred CPR at baseline interview and 70% chose CPR at follow-up. Preference stability was 80% overall-85% in patients initially preferring CPR and 69% in those initially choosing do not resuscitate (DNR). For patients initially preferring CPR, older age, non-African American race, and greater depression at baseline were independently associated with a change to preferring DNR at follow-up. For patients initially preferring DNR, younger age, male gender, less depression at baseline, improvement in depression between interviews, and an initial admission diagnosis of acute respiratory failure or multiorgan system failure were associated with a change to preferring CPR at follow-up. For patients initially preferring DNR, patients with substantial improvements in depression score between interviews were more than 5 times as likely to change preference to CPR than were patients with substantial worsening in depression score. CONCLUSIONS: More than two thirds of seriously ill patients prefer CPR for cardiac arrest and 80% had stable preferences over 2 months. Factors associated with preference change suggest that depression may lead patients to refuse life-sustaining care. Providers should evaluate mood state when eliciting patients' preferences for life-sustaining treatments.

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation↗
PubMed1996

Choices of seriously ill patients about cardiopulmonary resuscitation: correlates and outcomes. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments.

PURPOSE: For patients hospitalized with serious illnesses, we identified factors associated with a stated preference to forgo cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), examined physician-patient communication about these issues, and determined the relationship of patients' preferences to intensity of care and survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was a cross-sectional evaluation of patient preferences. The setting was five geographically diverse academic acute-care medical centers participating in the SUPPORT (Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments) project. Study participants were hospitalized patients > or = 18 years of age with 1 of 9 serious illnesses who were interviewed between days 3 and 6 after qualifying for the study. Using standardized interviews, patients provided information on demographics, preferences for CPR and other treatments, quality of life, functional status, perceptions of prognosis, and whether the patient had discussed CPR preferences with his or her physician. Data abstracted from the medical record included physiologic measures, therapeutic intensity, whether CPR was provided, and whether there was a do-not-resuscitate order. RESULTS: Of 1,995 eligible patients, 84% were interviewed (mean age 62 years, 58% men, inhospital mortality 7%, 6-month mortality 33%). Of the respondents, 28% did not want CPR. Factors associated independently with not wanting CPR included: hospital site; diagnosis; being older; being more functionally impaired; and patient perception of a worse prognosis. Only 29% of patients had discussed their preferences with their physician; 48% of those who did not want CPR reported such discussions. After adjusting for illness severity and factors associated with CPR preferences, patients not wanting CPR had lower intensity of care; similar inhospital mortality; and higher mortality at 2 and 6 months following study entry. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis, patients' perception of the prognosis, and hospital site were significantly associated with patients' resuscitation preferences after adjusting for patient demographics, severity of illness, and functional status. The rate of discussing CPR was low even for patients who did not want CPR. Patient preferences not to receive CPR were associated with a small decrease in intensity of care but no difference in hospital survival.

Aged↗
PubMed1996

Pain and satisfaction with pain control in seriously ill hospitalized adults: findings from the SUPPORT research investigations. For the SUPPORT investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatmentm.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the pain experience of seriously ill hospitalized patients and their satisfaction with control of pain during hospitalization. To understand the relationship of level of pain and dissatisfaction with pain control to demographic, psychological, and illness-related variables. DESIGN: Prospective, cohort study. SETTING: Five teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: Patients for whom interviews were available about pain (n = 5,176) from a total of 9,105 patients in the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients were interviewed after study enrollment about their experiences with pain. When patients could not be interviewed due to illness, we used surrogate (usually a family member) responses calibrated to patient responses (from the subset of interviews with both patient and surrogate responses). Ordinal logistic regression was used to study the association of variables with level of pain and satisfaction with its control. Nearly 50% of patients reported pain. Nearly 15% reported extremely severe pain or moderately severe pain occurring at least half of the time, and nearly 15% of those patients with pain were dissatisfied with its control. After adjustment for confounding variables, older and sicker patients reported less pain, while patients with more dependencies in activities of daily living, more comorbid conditions, more depression, more anxiety, and poor quality of life reported more pain. Patients with colon cancer reported more pain than patients in other disease categories. Levels of reported pain varied among the five hospitals and also by physician specialty. After adjustment for confounding variables, dissatisfaction with pain control was more likely among patients with more severe pain, greater anxiety, depression, and alteration of mental status, and lower reported income; dissatisfaction with pain control also varied among study hospitals and by physician specialty. CONCLUSIONS: Pain is common among severely ill hospitalized patients. The most important variables associated with pain and satisfaction with pain control were patient demographics and those variables that reflected the acute illness. Pain and satisfaction with pain control varied significantly among study sites, even after adjustment for many potential confounders. Better pain management strategies are needed for patients with the serious and common illnesses studied in SUPPORT.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Understanding why heterosexual adults do not practice safer sex: a comparison of two samples.

We assessed why heterosexually active adults did not have "safer sex" with their last sexual partner. Subjects enrolled in HIV education and testing trials at a sexually transmitted disease (STD) clinic and a university student health service (SHS) completed questionnaires about their last sexual partner's risk factors for HIV and whether they had safer sex with this partner. Of the 652 sexually active subjects, 61% reported not having safer sex with their last sexual partner and explained why. Low perceived risk of HIV infection was the most common reason, indicated by 62%, though most knew too little about their partner to ensure the encounter was low risk. Other reasons included condom unavailability (20%), the subject "didn't want to" use a condom (19%), "couldn't stop ourselves" (15%), the partner's influence (14%), and alcohol or drug use (11%). Thirty-one percent of subjects indicated more than one reason for not having safer sex. SHS subjects more often reported that the encounter was low risk for HIV transmission (p = 0.0001), while STD subjects more often reported condom unavailability (p = 0.002) and drug and alcohol use (p = 0.003). We conclude that there are many different factors promoting sexual behavior at risk of infection, combinations of which are important, and that these factors differ between samples. Preventive interventions must focus on the factors most important to the targeted population and may need to consider multiple factors simultaneously.

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome↗
PubMed1995

Epidemiology of do-not-resuscitate orders. Disparity by age, diagnosis, gender, race, and functional impairment.

BACKGROUND: The relationship of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders to patient and hospital characteristics has not been well characterized. METHODS: This observational study of a nationally representative sample of 14,008 Medicare patients hospitalized with congestive heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, pneumonia, cerebrovascular accident, or hip fracture evaluated the relationship of DNR orders to patient sickness at admission, functional impairment, age, disease, race, gender, preadmission residence, insurance status, and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 14,008 patients, DNR orders were assigned to 11.6%. Patients with greater sickness at admission and functional impairment received more DNR orders (P < .001) but even among patients in the sickest quartile (with a 65% chance of death within 180 days), only 31% received DNR orders. The DNR orders were assigned more often to older patients after adjustment for sickness at admission and functional impairment (P < .001), and DNR order rates differed by diagnosis (P < .001). After adjustment for patient and hospital characteristics, DNR orders were assigned more often to women and patients with dementia or incontinence and were assigned less often to black patients, patients with Medicaid insurance, and patients in rural hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Do-not-resuscitate orders are assigned more often to sicker patients but may be underused even among the most sick. Sickness at admission and functional impairment do not explain the increase in DNR orders with age or the disparity across diagnosis. Further evaluation is needed into whether variation in DNR order rates with age, diagnosis, race, gender, insurance status, and rural location represents differences in patient preferences or care compromising patient autonomy.

Age Distribution↗
PubMed1995

Outcomes of patients with do-not-resuscitate orders. Toward an understanding of what do-not-resuscitate orders mean and how they affect patients.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcomes of hospitalized patients with do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders and to identify variables that may elucidate the high mortality of patients with DNR orders. METHODS: Among a nationally representative sample of Medicare patients hospitalized with congestive heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, pneumonia, cerebrovascular accident, or hip fracture, we retrospectively studied in-hospital and 180-day mortality and hospital lengths of stay for patients without DNR orders, with early (day 1 or 2) DNR orders, and with late (day 3 or later) DNR orders, before and after adjustment for sickness at hospital admission and patient and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality for patients with DNR orders exceeded that for patients without DNR orders before adjustment (59% vs 8%, P < .001), and after accounting for differences in sickness at admission and patient and hospital characteristics (40% vs 9%, P < .001). Sicker patients were assigned earlier DNR orders. Yet, patients with early DNR orders had a lower adjusted in-hospital mortality (31% vs 49%, P < .001) and shorter hospital stay (10 vs 18 days, P < .001) than did patients with late DNR orders. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized older patients with DNR orders have a much higher mortality than predicted by admission demographic and clinical characteristics. The differential association of early and late DNR orders with mortality indicates that DNR orders represent a heterogeneous group of interventions that may be a marker of unmeasured sickness and a determinant of quality of care. A better understanding of what the DNR order represents and its effect on patient care is needed to ensure optimal use.

Aged↗
PubMed1995

Preferences for cardiopulmonary resuscitation: physician-patient agreement and hospital resource use. The SUPPORT Investigators.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the association between hospital resource utilization and physicians' knowledge of patient preferences for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) among seriously ill hospitalized adult patients. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Five U.S. academic medical center, 1989-1991. PATIENTS: A sample of 2,636 patients with self- or surrogate interviews and matching physician interviews describing patient preferences for CPR, from a cohort of 4,301 patients with life-threatening illnesses enrolled in the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT). MEASURES: Patient, surrogate, and physician reports of preferences for resuscitation, and resource use derived from the Therapeutic Intensity Scoring System and hospital length of stay, converted into 1990 dollars. RESULTS: Nearly one-third of the patients preferred to forego resuscitation. Of the 2,636 paired physician-patient answers, nearly one-third did not agree about preferences for resuscitation. The physicians' views of the patients' preferences and those preferences themselves were both associated with resource use. Standardized adjusted hospital resource consumption, expressed as average cost in dollars during the enrollment hospitalization, was lowest when the physician agreed with the patient preference for a do-not-resuscitate order ($20,527), and highest when the patient did not have a preference and the physician believed the patient wanted resuscitation in the case of a cardiopulmonary arrest ($34,829). Hospital resource use was intermediate when patient-physician pairs evidenced either lack of agreement or communication, or awareness of options about resuscitation. CONCLUSIONS: Both physician and patient preferences for CPR influence total hospital resource consumption. Physician misunderstanding of patient preferences to forego CPR was associated with increased use of hospital resources, and could have led to a course of care at odds with patients' expressed preferences in the event of cardiac arrest. Increasing physicians' knowledge of patient preferences, and increasing communication to help patients understand that options for medical care that include foregoing resuscitation efforts, might reduce hospital expenditures for the seriously ill.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMed1995

Inconsistent contraceptive use among female college students: implications for intervention.

The authors evaluated the longitudinal consistency of use of contraceptive and barrier methods among female college students attending a student health clinic. The majority of students using unreliable methods of contraception during follow-up did not report unreliable contraceptive use at the baseline observation. Of 213 women who participated, 33% used unreliable contraception; 9% only at baseline, 14% only during 6-month follow-up, and 9% at both. Selection of a contraceptive method varied considerably over time. Of those using the oral contraceptive pill at baseline, 31% did not use this method during follow-up, and 43% of those using condoms at baseline had intercourse without a condom during follow-up. Single observations are inadequate to detect unreliable contraceptive use in this population; cross-sectional studies will fail to detect important transitions in contraceptive use. Interventions to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease among female college students should include a focus on the consistency of contraceptive use.

Adult↗
PubMed1994

Sexual behavior of individuals infected with the human immunodeficiency virus. The need for intervention.

BACKGROUND: Public health efforts to stop the spread of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) emphasize behavior change among all persons at risk of infection. Yet efficient physician-based intervention might be targeted toward persons infected with HIV. To evaluate the need for intervention among HIV-infected persons attending a continuity clinic, we determined the prevalence of behaviors risky for new transmission of HIV and the characteristics of HIV-infected individuals participating in such behavior. METHODS: Cross-sectional structured survey of 227 HIV-infected patients attending an urban HIV continuity-of-care clinic. RESULTS: Nine percent of the subjects had vaginal, anal, or oral sex without a condom with an HIV-negative last sex partner (24% of whom were unaware that the subject was HIV infected) and an additional 13% with an HIV-status-unknown last sex partner (41% were unaware that the subject was HIV infected). Subjects used a condom for intercourse more often with a partner they knew to be HIV negative than HIV-status-unknown or HIV-positive (84% vs 59% vs 51%). Subjects with more lifetime male sexual partners were more likely to have had sex without a condom with an HIV-negative or HIV-status-unknown partner. CONCLUSION: The HIV-infected individuals in this clinic setting participate in a substantial amount of sexual behavior placing others at risk of new HIV infection. Physicians must address such behaviors, and programs specifically aimed at reducing such behavior should be a public health priority.

Adult↗
PubMed1994

The contributions of authors to multiauthored biomedical research papers.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the contributions of each author to multiauthored biomedical research papers. DESIGN: Mailed, self-administered survey. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 184 first authors from a consecutive sample of 200 papers with four or more authors published in 10 leading biomedical journals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: First authors' ratings of which authors had made substantial contributions to the following: initial conception of the study, design of the study, provision of needed resources, collection of data, analysis and interpretation of data, and writing the first draft of the paper or revising drafts for important intellectual content. RESULTS: The contributions of nonfirst authors varied greatly within and among papers. Even second and last authors--though they generally contributed more than other nonfirst authors--were markedly inconsistent in the extent and pattern of their contributions. Time spent on the research differed among authors by orders of magnitude. An appreciable number of authors made few or no substantial contributions to the research. CONCLUSIONS: The nature and extent of contributions of nonfirst authors to biomedical research reported in multiauthored papers cannot reliably be discerned (or discounted) by authorship or order of authors. The two core purposes of scientific authorship--to confer credit and denote responsibility for research--are not adequately being met by these authorship practices.

Authorship↗
PubMed1994

Prior capacity of patients lacking decision making ability early in hospitalization: implications for advance directive administration. The SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the appropriateness of hospitalization as the time to elicit patients' medical care preferences, the authors evaluated the capability of seriously ill patients to participate in decision making early in hospitalization and their decision making capacity two weeks before hospital entry. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study with retrospective evaluation of preadmission decision making capacity. SETTING: Five acute care teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: Four thousand three hundred one acutely ill hospitalized adults meeting predetermined severity of illness criteria in nine specific disease categories. MEASUREMENTS: Surrogate decision makers' estimates of the prior mental capacities of patients unable to be interviewed early in hospitalization about care preferences due to intubation, coma, or cognitive impairment. Comparison of the demographics, degrees of sickness at admission, and outcomes of interviewable vs noninterviewable patients. MAIN RESULTS: Forty percent of the patients were not interviewable concerning preferences. Of these, 83% could have participated in treatment decisions two weeks prior to hospitalization. The patients who were not interviewable were more acutely ill, had less chronic disease, and were more likely to die during hospitalization than the interviewable patients. CONCLUSIONS: Many acutely ill patients likely to die in the hospital lost their ability to make medical care decisions around the time of hospital admission. Preferences for care and advance directives should be discussed in the outpatient setting or very early in hospital admission.

Advance Directives↗
PubMed1994

When patients first suspect and find out they are infected with the human immunodeficiency virus: implications for prevention.

To evaluate how individuals infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) became aware of their infection, when they first suspected they were infected with HIV and factors associated with suspecting HIV infection, we surveyed 227 patients at an urban outpatient HIV clinic. Though nearly all patients acknowledged risk factors for HIV, 60% reported that they did not suspect that they were infected until they received a positive HIV antibody test result. Non-white patients were less likely to suspect HIV infection prior to testing than white subjects (p < 0.03). Subjects not suspecting infection more often received HIV testing through a screening program or during a medical encounter (p = 0.02) and were less likely to be told by others that they might be infected (p = 0.001) than patients suspecting infection prior to testing. Forty-eight percent of subjects who suspected HIV infection prior to testing waited one year or more before obtaining their HIV antibody test. Interventions to reduce faulty personal HIV risk perception are needed to promote earlier HIV diagnosis.

AIDS Serodiagnosis↗