PubMed · 15069743
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Lucy Gooding. The final choice.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15069743/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Most patients eventually must face the process of planning for their future medical care. However, few Americans have a living will or a durable power of attorney for health care. Although advance directives provide a legal basis for physicians to carry out treatment using a health care proxy or a living will, they also should reflect the patient's values and preferences. Family physicians are in a position to integrate medical knowledge, individual values, and cultural influences into end-of-life care. Family physicians can best respect the autonomy of patients by allowing the patient and family to prospectively identify relevant health care preferences, by sustaining an ongoing discussion about end-of-life preferences, and by abiding by the decisions their patients have made.
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) may be used by default on patients suffering a cardiac arrest in hospital in the UK unless there is an order that specifies otherwise in the patient's notes. Guidelines recommend that the decision involves competent and willing patients or, in the case of incapacitation, their families. In practice, patient autonomy is often compromised. Ideally, discussion of preferences for end-of-life care should take place prior to hospitalisation. The majority of research on this topic has been conducted on hospitalised patients, so little is known about the views of older, but healthy, people about resuscitation decision-making. The present study was designed to address this gap. A series of eight focus groups involving a total of 48 participants over the age of 65 was conducted to explore people's views about the factors guiding resuscitation decision-making. A qualitative analysis, which emphasised the dilemmatic nature of resuscitation decision-making, identified two broad thematic dilemmas that subsumed six specific themes which contribute to resolving the dilemmas: quality of life (medical condition, mental versus physical incapacity, age and ageing, and burden), and the involvement of others (doctors and families) versus loss of autonomy. The dilemma underlying quality of life is that an acceptable quality of life after CPR cannot be assured. The dilemma underlying the involvement of others is that individual autonomy may be lost. The themes and subthemes provide the basis for guiding these difficult discussions in advance of serious illness.
Troubling deficits exist in palliative care (PC) of older adults under the prevailing "terminal care"-oriented model. We previously described a PC model--TLC--that provides a blueprint for remedying these shortfalls. In this model, PC is envisioned as Timely and Team-oriented, Longitudinal, and Collaborative and Comprehensive. We present results of the Palliative Care in Assisted Living pilot, comparing two TLC model-based, facility delivered interventions for improving the PC of elderly assisted living residents in Sacramento, California, a growing and under-researched population. The less intensive intervention involved one assessment followed by a PC improvement recommendation letter to the resident, family member, primary provider, and facility staff, while the more intensive intervention involved assessments and letters every three months. Primary outcomes were SF-36 Physical (PCS) and Mental (MCS) Component scores and recommendation adherence. Eighty-one subjects enrolled (mean age 85), 58 in the more and 23 in the less intensive group. A loved one attended 56% of baseline assessments. Most subjects expressed a preference for maintaining current quality of life over prolonging life at reduced quality. None were eligible for hospice care. A total of 418 recommendations (mean 5.1 per subject) were generated concerning symptoms, mood, functional impairments, and advance directives. We found no significant differences in recommendation adherence between more (42%) and less (44%) intensive groups, and no significant changes in PCS and MCS scores within or between groups. However, a loved one's attendance of the baseline assessment was associated with improved PCS scores (p=0.04). Our pilot study had methodological limitations that could account for the lack of significant outcome effects. In this context, and given the myriad unmet PC needs we detected, interventions based on the TLC model might allow delivery of timely PC to assisted living residents not eligible for hospice care. Further studies exploring the TLC model appear warranted.