Systematic Approach to Selecting and Preparing a Medical Power of Attorney in the Gynecologic Oncology Center.

Q1 Nursing
D. Zhukovsky, P. Soliman, Boby Mathew, Sarah Mills, D. Bodurka, M. Frumovitz, L. Meyer, S. Westin, Marisa Nowitz, L. Archie, Shauna L. Fenton, Kai E. Lang, Janet L. Williams, Valentine Boving, E. Bruera
{"title":"Systematic Approach to Selecting and Preparing a Medical Power of Attorney in the Gynecologic Oncology Center.","authors":"D. Zhukovsky, P. Soliman, Boby Mathew, Sarah Mills, D. Bodurka, M. Frumovitz, L. Meyer, S. Westin, Marisa Nowitz, L. Archie, Shauna L. Fenton, Kai E. Lang, Janet L. Williams, Valentine Boving, E. Bruera","doi":"10.1200/jop.19.00109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE\nAdvance care planning (ACP) supports national priorities of patient engagement, person-centered care, and safety. A systematic approach is uncommon in most care settings. Our institution offers all patients with cancer new to the institution an opportunity to select and prepare a medical decision maker (MDM) after social work counseling. The goals of this study were to determine the success of a systematic institutional process for selecting a prepared MDM. The primary objectives were that (1) 70% or more of new patients would have one or more documented social work ACP discussions by the third office visit within 4 months, and (2) there would be a two-fold increase in scanned medical power of attorney (MPOA) documents available in the electronic health record (EHR). The secondary objectives were (1) improved surrogate preparedness for medical decision making, and (2) to determine whether patients with metastatic disease demonstrated greater readiness for selection of an MDM than those with localized disease.\n\n\nMATERIALS AND METHODS\nWe conducted a retrospective chart review of consecutive gynecology oncology outpatients.\n\n\nRESULTS\nOf 133 patients, 93 (70%) had metastatic disease. The median number of visits was two (one to three). Forty-seven patients (39.3%) met with social work by visit 3. Review of ACP notes suggested that most patients were in the early stages of selecting a prepared MDM. At visit 1, 39 (29.3%) reported having an advance directive document; 14 (10.5%) had an MPOA in the EHR. There was no increase by visit 3. Fewer patients with metastatic disease than those with localized cancer (32.3% v 67.5%; P = .001) had three visits; no other parameter, including presence of MPOA documents in the EHR, achieved statistical significance between groups.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nCurrent processes fail to engage patients in selecting and preparing an MDM.","PeriodicalId":54273,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oncology Practice","volume":"1 1","pages":"JOP1900109"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1200/jop.19.00109","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oncology Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/jop.19.00109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

PURPOSE Advance care planning (ACP) supports national priorities of patient engagement, person-centered care, and safety. A systematic approach is uncommon in most care settings. Our institution offers all patients with cancer new to the institution an opportunity to select and prepare a medical decision maker (MDM) after social work counseling. The goals of this study were to determine the success of a systematic institutional process for selecting a prepared MDM. The primary objectives were that (1) 70% or more of new patients would have one or more documented social work ACP discussions by the third office visit within 4 months, and (2) there would be a two-fold increase in scanned medical power of attorney (MPOA) documents available in the electronic health record (EHR). The secondary objectives were (1) improved surrogate preparedness for medical decision making, and (2) to determine whether patients with metastatic disease demonstrated greater readiness for selection of an MDM than those with localized disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS We conducted a retrospective chart review of consecutive gynecology oncology outpatients. RESULTS Of 133 patients, 93 (70%) had metastatic disease. The median number of visits was two (one to three). Forty-seven patients (39.3%) met with social work by visit 3. Review of ACP notes suggested that most patients were in the early stages of selecting a prepared MDM. At visit 1, 39 (29.3%) reported having an advance directive document; 14 (10.5%) had an MPOA in the EHR. There was no increase by visit 3. Fewer patients with metastatic disease than those with localized cancer (32.3% v 67.5%; P = .001) had three visits; no other parameter, including presence of MPOA documents in the EHR, achieved statistical significance between groups. CONCLUSION Current processes fail to engage patients in selecting and preparing an MDM.
选择和准备妇科肿瘤中心医疗委托书的系统方法。
目的:预先护理计划(ACP)支持国家优先考虑患者参与、以人为本的护理和安全。在大多数护理机构中,系统的方法并不常见。我们的机构为所有新到机构的癌症患者提供一个机会,在社会工作咨询后选择和准备医疗决策者(MDM)。本研究的目标是确定选择准备好的MDM的系统制度流程是否成功。主要目标是:(1)70%或更多的新患者将在4个月内第三次就诊时进行一次或多次记录在案的社会工作ACP讨论;(2)电子健康记录(EHR)中可用的扫描医疗授权书(MPOA)文件将增加两倍。次要目标是(1)改善替代医疗决策的准备,(2)确定转移性疾病患者是否比局限性疾病患者更愿意选择MDM。材料与方法我们对连续的妇科肿瘤门诊患者进行回顾性图表分析。结果133例患者中,93例(70%)有转移性疾病。访问次数的中位数为两次(一到三次)。47名患者(39.3%)在第3次访视时接受了社会工作。对ACP记录的回顾表明,大多数患者处于选择准备好的MDM的早期阶段。在第1次就诊时,39人(29.3%)报告有预先指示文件;14例(10.5%)在电子病历中有MPOA。第三次访问没有增加。转移性癌症患者少于局限性癌症患者(32.3% vs 67.5%;P = .001)三次就诊;其他参数,包括EHR中MPOA文件的存在,在组间没有统计学意义。结论目前的流程不能让患者参与MDM的选择和准备。
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
Journal of Oncology Practice
Journal of Oncology Practice Nursing-Oncology (nursing)
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Journal of Oncology Practice (JOP) provides necessary information and insights to keep oncology practice current on changes and challenges inherent in delivering quality oncology care. All content dealing with understanding the provision of care—the mechanics of practice—is the purview of JOP. JOP also addresses an expressed need of practicing physicians to have compressed, expert opinion addressing common clinical problems.
×
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