Aligning goals with care: Advance directives in older adults with implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators

Warren D. Backman, Michael V. DiCaro, Xintong Zuo, Adelqui Peralta, Ariela R. Orkaby
{"title":"Aligning goals with care: Advance directives in older adults with implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators","authors":"Warren D. Backman, Michael V. DiCaro, Xintong Zuo, Adelqui Peralta, Ariela R. Orkaby","doi":"10.1111/pace.14983","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundPatients ≥80 with implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators (ICDs) have high rates of hospitalization and mortality, yet few have documented advance directives. We sought to determine the prevalence of advance directives in adults ≥80 years with ICDs, focusing on those with frailty and cognitive impairment.MethodsProspective cohort study (July 2016–May 2019) in an electrophysiology clinic. Presence of advance directives (health care proxies [HCP] and living wills [LW], or medical orders for life‐sustaining treatment [MOLST]) was determined by medical record review. Frailty and cognitive impairment were screened using 4‐m gait speed and Mini‐Cog.Results77 Veterans were evaluated. Mean age 84 years, 100% male, 70% frail. Overall, 52 (68%) had an HCP and 37 (48%) had a LW/MOLST. Of 67 with cognitive testing, 36% were impaired. HCP documentation was similar among frail and non‐frail (69% vs. 65%). LW/MOLST was more prevalent among frail versus non‐frail (52% vs. 39%). There was no difference in HCP documentation by cognitive status (67%). A LW/MOLST was more frequent for cognitively impaired versus non‐impaired (50% vs. 42%). Among 19 Veterans who were frail and cognitively impaired, 14 (74%) had an HCP and 11 (58%) had a LW/MOLST.ConclusionsMost Veterans had a documented advance directive, but a significant minority did not. Simple frailty and cognitive screening tools can rapidly identify patients for whom discussion of advance directives is especially important.","PeriodicalId":19650,"journal":{"name":"Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pace.14983","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundPatients ≥80 with implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators (ICDs) have high rates of hospitalization and mortality, yet few have documented advance directives. We sought to determine the prevalence of advance directives in adults ≥80 years with ICDs, focusing on those with frailty and cognitive impairment.MethodsProspective cohort study (July 2016–May 2019) in an electrophysiology clinic. Presence of advance directives (health care proxies [HCP] and living wills [LW], or medical orders for life‐sustaining treatment [MOLST]) was determined by medical record review. Frailty and cognitive impairment were screened using 4‐m gait speed and Mini‐Cog.Results77 Veterans were evaluated. Mean age 84 years, 100% male, 70% frail. Overall, 52 (68%) had an HCP and 37 (48%) had a LW/MOLST. Of 67 with cognitive testing, 36% were impaired. HCP documentation was similar among frail and non‐frail (69% vs. 65%). LW/MOLST was more prevalent among frail versus non‐frail (52% vs. 39%). There was no difference in HCP documentation by cognitive status (67%). A LW/MOLST was more frequent for cognitively impaired versus non‐impaired (50% vs. 42%). Among 19 Veterans who were frail and cognitively impaired, 14 (74%) had an HCP and 11 (58%) had a LW/MOLST.ConclusionsMost Veterans had a documented advance directive, but a significant minority did not. Simple frailty and cognitive screening tools can rapidly identify patients for whom discussion of advance directives is especially important.
将目标与护理相结合:植入式心律转复除颤器老年人的预先指令
背景≥80 岁的植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)患者的住院率和死亡率都很高,但有记录的预嘱却很少。我们试图确定植入 ICD 的≥80 岁成人中预先指示的流行率,重点关注那些体弱和认知障碍的患者。方法在电生理学诊所进行前瞻性队列研究(2016 年 7 月至 2019 年 5 月)。通过病历审查确定是否存在预先指示(健康护理委托书 [HCP] 和生前预嘱 [LW] 或维持生命治疗医嘱 [MOLST])。通过 4 米步速和 Mini-Cog 筛查虚弱和认知障碍。平均年龄 84 岁,100% 男性,70% 体弱。总体而言,52 人(68%)接受了 HCP,37 人(48%)接受了 LW/MOLST。在接受认知测试的 67 人中,36% 的人存在认知障碍。体弱者和非体弱者的 HCP 记录相似(69% 对 65%)。体弱者和非体弱者的 LW/MOLST 比例更高(52% 对 39%)。认知状况(67%)对 HCP 记录的影响没有差异。认知能力受损的退伍军人与非认知能力受损的退伍军人相比,LW/MOLST 的发生率更高(50% 对 42%)。在 19 名体弱且认知能力受损的退伍军人中,14 人(74%)有 HCP,11 人(58%)有 LW/MOLST 。简单的体弱和认知能力筛查工具可以快速识别出哪些病人需要特别讨论预先指示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信