Prevalence and factors associated with informal advance care planning discussion and do-not-resuscitate directives in patients at geriatric clinics.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Yu-Tai Lo, Sheng-Yu Fan, Chung-Yi Li, Deng-Chi Yang, Chi-Chang Huang, Mei-Hua Chen
{"title":"Prevalence and factors associated with informal advance care planning discussion and do-not-resuscitate directives in patients at geriatric clinics.","authors":"Yu-Tai Lo, Sheng-Yu Fan, Chung-Yi Li, Deng-Chi Yang, Chi-Chang Huang, Mei-Hua Chen","doi":"10.1016/j.jfma.2025.03.024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Advance care planning (ACP) discussions and do-not-resuscitate (DNR) directives are essential for ensuring quality end-of-life care, especially for older adults with multiple comorbidities. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and associated factors of informal ACP discussions and DNR directives among geriatric outpatients in Taiwan.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional study was conducted among 276 Taiwanese geriatric outpatients aged 65 years and older. Data on demographics, comorbidities, functional status, informal ACP discussions, and DNR directives were collected. Multinomial logistic regression was used to analyze the association between independent variables and dependent variables (ACP discussion experience and DNR directives).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>While 92.1 % of participants reported having informal ACP discussions, only 8.3 % had completed DNR directives. Compared to those who only discussed ACP (reference group), individuals with a one-point higher Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics score were significantly more likely to have both discussed ACP and completed DNR directives (odds ratio [OR] = 1.14, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.29, p = .035). Conversely, individuals with junior high school education or higher (OR = 0.25, 95 % CI: 0.08-0.84, p = .025) and those dependent on others for activities of daily living (ADL dependence; OR = 0.24, 95 % CI: 0.07-0.86, p = .029) were significantly less likely to have neither informally discussed ACP nor completed DNR directives.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While Taiwanese older outpatients often informally discussed ACP, the completion of DNR directives was less common. The link between higher geriatric comorbidity and DNR directives highlights the need for proactive, tailored interventions in this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":17305,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Formosan Medical Association","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Formosan Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfma.2025.03.024","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Advance care planning (ACP) discussions and do-not-resuscitate (DNR) directives are essential for ensuring quality end-of-life care, especially for older adults with multiple comorbidities. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and associated factors of informal ACP discussions and DNR directives among geriatric outpatients in Taiwan.

Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 276 Taiwanese geriatric outpatients aged 65 years and older. Data on demographics, comorbidities, functional status, informal ACP discussions, and DNR directives were collected. Multinomial logistic regression was used to analyze the association between independent variables and dependent variables (ACP discussion experience and DNR directives).

Results: While 92.1 % of participants reported having informal ACP discussions, only 8.3 % had completed DNR directives. Compared to those who only discussed ACP (reference group), individuals with a one-point higher Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics score were significantly more likely to have both discussed ACP and completed DNR directives (odds ratio [OR] = 1.14, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.29, p = .035). Conversely, individuals with junior high school education or higher (OR = 0.25, 95 % CI: 0.08-0.84, p = .025) and those dependent on others for activities of daily living (ADL dependence; OR = 0.24, 95 % CI: 0.07-0.86, p = .029) were significantly less likely to have neither informally discussed ACP nor completed DNR directives.

Conclusion: While Taiwanese older outpatients often informally discussed ACP, the completion of DNR directives was less common. The link between higher geriatric comorbidity and DNR directives highlights the need for proactive, tailored interventions in this population.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
6.20%
发文量
381
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: Journal of the Formosan Medical Association (JFMA), published continuously since 1902, is an open access international general medical journal of the Formosan Medical Association based in Taipei, Taiwan. It is indexed in Current Contents/ Clinical Medicine, Medline, ciSearch, CAB Abstracts, Embase, SIIC Data Bases, Research Alert, BIOSIS, Biological Abstracts, Scopus and ScienceDirect. As a general medical journal, research related to clinical practice and research in all fields of medicine and related disciplines are considered for publication. Article types considered include perspectives, reviews, original papers, case reports, brief communications, correspondence and letters to the editor.
×
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