Checklist-Guided Code Status Discussions in Patients for Whom Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Is Considered Futile: An Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.
Armon Arpagaus, Leta Arpagaus, Christoph Becker, Sebastian Gross, Flavio Gössi, Benjamin Bissmann, Samuel Kaspar Zumbrunn, Philipp Schuetz, Jörg D Leuppi, Drahomir Aujesky, Balthasar Hug, Thomas Peters, Stefano Bassetti, Sabina Hunziker
{"title":"Checklist-Guided Code Status Discussions in Patients for Whom Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Is Considered Futile: An Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.","authors":"Armon Arpagaus, Leta Arpagaus, Christoph Becker, Sebastian Gross, Flavio Gössi, Benjamin Bissmann, Samuel Kaspar Zumbrunn, Philipp Schuetz, Jörg D Leuppi, Drahomir Aujesky, Balthasar Hug, Thomas Peters, Stefano Bassetti, Sabina Hunziker","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.33638","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Code status discussions represent a fundamental aspect of advanced care planning and impose major challenges for clinicians in patients for whom cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is considered futile.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate the effect of a structured communication approach in code status discussions on decisions regarding code status and various quality-of-care measures for patients in whom resuscitation is considered futile.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>The GUIDE trial is a multicenter randomized clinical trial, which included patients deemed futile regarding CPR measures. The study was conducted between June 1, 2019, and April 30, 2023, in medical inpatients wards across 6 Swiss teaching hospitals. Medical inpatients for whom CPR measures were considered futile based on a prearrest Good Outcome Following Attempted Resuscitation score of 14 or higher or a Clinical Frailty Scale score of 7 or higher were eligible. Patients with cognitive or physical condition hindering meaningful conversation were excluded.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Main outcomes included patients' code status decisions as well as preference for mechanical ventilatory assistance and intensive care unit admission. Additional outcomes assessed patients' psychological burden after the discussion measured by the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale and physicians' perception regarding the discussions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 177 patients (mean [SD] age, 76.3 [12.0] years; 90 [51%] female) were studied. Overall, the rate of do-not-resuscitate orders was 85%. No significant difference was observed between groups (checklist vs usual care group, 79 of 89 [89%] vs 72 of 88 [82%]; odds ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 0.75-4.12; P = .20). However, patients in the checklist group were less likely to prefer intensive care unit admission compared with usual care (31 of 89 [36%] vs 44 of 88 [52%]; odds ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.29-0.99; P = .046). Physicians perceived code status discussions using the checklist less challenging (mean [SD], 3.5 [2.8] vs 4.7 [2.8]; difference, -1.23; 95% CI, -2.1 to -0.35; P = .006). There was no significant difference in patients' psychological reaction to code status discussions measured by State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>This analysis of a randomized clinical trial found that checklist-guided code status discussions in patients for whom CPR was considered futile reduced their preference for intensive care unit admission while alleviating physicians' challenges during code status discussions without adversely affecting patients' psychosocial burden.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03872154.</p>","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 9","pages":"e2533638"},"PeriodicalIF":9.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12464790/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Network Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.33638","RegionNum":1,"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
Importance: Code status discussions represent a fundamental aspect of advanced care planning and impose major challenges for clinicians in patients for whom cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is considered futile.
Objective: To investigate the effect of a structured communication approach in code status discussions on decisions regarding code status and various quality-of-care measures for patients in whom resuscitation is considered futile.
Design, setting, and participants: The GUIDE trial is a multicenter randomized clinical trial, which included patients deemed futile regarding CPR measures. The study was conducted between June 1, 2019, and April 30, 2023, in medical inpatients wards across 6 Swiss teaching hospitals. Medical inpatients for whom CPR measures were considered futile based on a prearrest Good Outcome Following Attempted Resuscitation score of 14 or higher or a Clinical Frailty Scale score of 7 or higher were eligible. Patients with cognitive or physical condition hindering meaningful conversation were excluded.
Main outcomes and measures: Main outcomes included patients' code status decisions as well as preference for mechanical ventilatory assistance and intensive care unit admission. Additional outcomes assessed patients' psychological burden after the discussion measured by the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale and physicians' perception regarding the discussions.
Results: A total of 177 patients (mean [SD] age, 76.3 [12.0] years; 90 [51%] female) were studied. Overall, the rate of do-not-resuscitate orders was 85%. No significant difference was observed between groups (checklist vs usual care group, 79 of 89 [89%] vs 72 of 88 [82%]; odds ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 0.75-4.12; P = .20). However, patients in the checklist group were less likely to prefer intensive care unit admission compared with usual care (31 of 89 [36%] vs 44 of 88 [52%]; odds ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.29-0.99; P = .046). Physicians perceived code status discussions using the checklist less challenging (mean [SD], 3.5 [2.8] vs 4.7 [2.8]; difference, -1.23; 95% CI, -2.1 to -0.35; P = .006). There was no significant difference in patients' psychological reaction to code status discussions measured by State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale.
Conclusions and relevance: This analysis of a randomized clinical trial found that checklist-guided code status discussions in patients for whom CPR was considered futile reduced their preference for intensive care unit admission while alleviating physicians' challenges during code status discussions without adversely affecting patients' psychosocial burden.
期刊介绍:
JAMA Network Open, a member of the esteemed JAMA Network, stands as an international, peer-reviewed, open-access general medical journal.The publication is dedicated to disseminating research across various health disciplines and countries, encompassing clinical care, innovation in health care, health policy, and global health.
JAMA Network Open caters to clinicians, investigators, and policymakers, providing a platform for valuable insights and advancements in the medical field. As part of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed general medical and specialty publications, JAMA Network Open contributes to the collective knowledge and understanding within the medical community.