Background: Goals of care discussions ensure patients receive the care that they want. Recent studies have recognized the opportunity for allied health professionals, such as nurses, in facilitating goals of care discussions. However, the outcomes of such interventions are not well studied.
Aim: To compare the outcomes of goals of care discussions led by physicians and nurses.
Design: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to an Internal Medicine unit from January 2018 to August 2019. A comprehensive chart review was performed on a random sample of patients. Patient's decision to accept or refuse cardiopulmonary resuscitation was recorded and analyzed. Analysis was stratified by patients' comorbidity burden and illness severity.
Setting/participants: The study took place at a tertiary care center and included 200 patients. Patients aged ⩾ 18 were included. Patients who have had pre-existing goals of care documentation were excluded.
Results: About 52% of the goals of care discussions were completed by nurses and 48% by physicians. Patients were more likely to accept cardiopulmonary resuscitation in nurse-led discussions compared to physician-led ones (80.8% vs 61.4%, = 0.003). Multiple regression showed that patients with higher comorbidity burden (OR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.62-0.82), more severe illness (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.88-0.99), and physician-led goals of care discussions (OR 0.30, 95% CI: 0.15-0.62) were less likely to accept cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
Conclusions: There was a significant difference between the outcomes of goals of care discussions led by nurses and physicians. Patients were more likely to accept aggressive resuscitative measures in nurse-led goals of care discussions. Further research efforts are needed to identify the factors contributing to this discrepancy, and to devise ways of improving goals of care discussion delivery.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8894680 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02692163211058607 | DOI Listing |
J Gen Intern Med
January 2025
Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, NY, USA.
Background: Oropharyngeal dysphagia (dysphagia) is a common (up to 86%) and devastating syndrome in hospitalized older adults with dementia.
Objective: To describe the perspectives of dysphagia management in hospitalized patients with dementia among hospital medicine providers (i.e.
BMJ Open
January 2025
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
Introduction: Emergency care begins in the community, who are often the first on the scene. Where emergency care systems are nascent or absent, bystanders represent the only prehospital emergency care that victims might receive. It is important to equip bystanders through life-saving skills training (LST).
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAm J Hosp Palliat Care
January 2025
Division of Cancer Education, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Background: Palliative Care, Geriatrics and Emergency physicians are exposed to death, terminally ill patients and distress of patients and their families. As physicians bear witness to patients' suffering, they are vulnerable to the costs of caring-the emotional distress associated with providing compassionate and empathetic care to patients. If left unattended, this may culminate in burnout and compromise professional identity.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAnnu Rev Biomed Data Sci
January 2025
1Department of Computational Biomedicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA;
Cancer remains a leading cause of death globally. The complexity and diversity of cancer-related datasets across different specialties pose challenges in refining precision medicine for oncology. Foundation models offer a promising solution.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFCodas
January 2025
Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo - USP - São Paulo (SP), Brasil.
Purpose: To identify the most significant risk factors for child development through the application of two risk protocols, namely, the Protocol for the Identification of Risk Factors for Language and Speech Disorders (PIFRAL) and the Language Development Protocol (PDL).
Methods: A retrospective study was carried out with 194 children aged 0 to 5 years and 11 months who were participants of primary health care (PHC) in the municipality of São Paulo, Brazil, from 2016 to 2020. The database was thoroughly analyzed using R software, and the most relevant risk factors were correlated through statistical analysis, generating altered and unaltered PDL results.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!