Leung Alexander K, To Matthew J, Luong Linh, Vahabi Zahra Syavash, Gonçalves Victor L, Song John, Hwang Stephen W
Centre for Research on Inner City Health, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B1W8, Canada.
Center for Bioethics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
J Urban Health. 2017 Feb;94(1):43-53. doi: 10.1007/s11524-016-0105-2.
Advance care planning is relevant for homeless individuals because they experience high rates of morbidity and mortality. The impact of advance directive interventions on hospital care of homeless individuals has not been studied. The objective of this study was to determine if homeless individuals who complete an advance directive through a shelter-based intervention are more likely to have information from their advance directive documented and used during subsequent hospitalizations. The advance directive included preferences for life-sustaining treatments, resuscitation, and substitute decision maker(s). A total of 205 homeless men from a homeless shelter for men in Toronto, Canada, were enrolled in the study and offered an opportunity to complete an advance directive with the guidance of a trained counselor from April to June 2013. One hundred and three participants chose to complete an advance directive, and 102 participants chose to not complete an advance directive. Participants were provided copies of their advance directives. In addition, advance directives were electronically stored, and hospitals within a 1.0-mile radius of the shelter were provided access to the database. A prospective cohort study was performed using chart reviews to ascertain the documentation, availability, and use of advance directives, end-of-life care preferences, and medical treatments during hospitalizations over a 1-year follow-up period (April 2013 to June 2014) after the shelter-based advance directive intervention. Chart reviewers were blinded as to whether participants had completed an advance directive. The primary outcome was documentation or use of an advance directive during any hospitalization. The secondary outcome was documentation of end-of-life care preferences, without reference to an advance directive, during any hospitalization. After unblinding, charts were studied to determine whether advance directives were available, hospital care was consistent with patient preferences as documented in advance directives, and hospital resource utilization during admission. During the 1-year follow-up period, 38 participants who completed an advance directive and 37 participants who did not complete an advance directive had at least one hospitalization (36.9 vs. 36.2 %, p = 0.93). Participants who completed an advance directive were significantly more likely to have documentation or use of an advance directive in hospital, compared to participants who did not complete an advance directive (9.7 vs. 2.9 %, p = 0.047). Without reference to an advance directive, documentation of end-of-life care preferences occurred in 30.1 vs. 30.4 % of participants, respectively (p = 0.96), most often due to documentation of code status. There were no significant differences in resource utilization between admitted patients who completed and did not complete an advance directive. In conclusion, homeless men who complete an advance directive through a shelter-based intervention are more likely to have their detailed care preferences documented or used during subsequent hospitalizations.
预立医疗计划与无家可归者相关,因为他们的发病率和死亡率很高。预立医疗指示干预措施对无家可归者住院治疗的影响尚未得到研究。本研究的目的是确定通过基于收容所的干预措施完成预立医疗指示的无家可归者在随后住院期间,其预立医疗指示中的信息被记录并得到应用的可能性是否更高。预立医疗指示包括对维持生命治疗、心肺复苏和替代决策者的偏好。2013年4月至6月,来自加拿大多伦多一家男性收容所的205名无家可归男性被纳入研究,并在一名经过培训的咨询师的指导下获得了完成预立医疗指示的机会。103名参与者选择完成预立医疗指示,102名参与者选择不完成预立医疗指示。参与者获得了他们预立医疗指示的副本。此外,预立医疗指示被电子存储,收容所半径1.0英里范围内的医院可以访问该数据库。在基于收容所的预立医疗指示干预措施实施后的1年随访期(2013年4月至2014年6月)内,通过病历审查进行了一项前瞻性队列研究,以确定预立医疗指示的记录、可用性和应用情况、临终护理偏好以及住院期间的医疗治疗情况。病历审查人员对参与者是否完成了预立医疗指示不知情。主要结局是在任何住院期间预立医疗指示的记录或应用。次要结局是在任何住院期间不参考预立医疗指示的情况下,临终护理偏好的记录。在解除盲态后,研究病历以确定预立医疗指示是否可用、医院护理是否与预立医疗指示中记录的患者偏好一致以及住院期间的医院资源利用情况。在1年随访期内,38名完成预立医疗指示的参与者和37名未完成预立医疗指示的参与者至少有一次住院(36.9%对36.2%,p = 0.93)。与未完成预立医疗指示的参与者相比,完成预立医疗指示的参与者在医院更有可能记录或应用预立医疗指示(9.7%对2.9%,p = 0.047)。不参考预立医疗指示的情况下,分别有30.1%和30.4%的参与者记录了临终护理偏好(p = 0.96),最常见的原因是记录了心肺复苏状态。完成和未完成预立医疗指示的住院患者在资源利用方面没有显著差异。总之,通过基于收容所的干预措施完成预立医疗指示的无家可归男性在随后住院期间更有可能记录或应用其详细的护理偏好。