Clinical study
Documentation of discussions about prognosis with terminally ill patients

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9343(01)00798-7Get rights and content

Abstract

Purpose

Previous studies have suggested the importance of communicating with patients about prognosis at the end of life, yet the prevalence, content, and consequences of such communication have not been fully investigated. The purposes of this study were to estimate the proportion of terminally ill inpatients with documented discussions about prognosis, describe the nature and correlates of such discussions, and assess the association between documented discussions about prognosis and subsequent advance care planning.

Subjects and methods

Inpatients (n = 232) at least 65 years old who had brain, pancreas, liver, gall bladder, or inoperable lung cancer were randomly selected from six randomly chosen community hospitals in Connecticut. The presence and content of discussions about prognosis, advanced care planning efforts, and sociodemographic and clinical factors were ascertained by comprehensive review of medical records using a standardized abstraction form.

Results

Discussions about prognosis were documented in the medical records of 89 (38%) patients. Physicians and patients were both present during the discussion in 46 (52%) of these cases. Time until expected death was infrequently documented. Having a documented discussion about prognosis was associated with documented discussions of life-sustaining treatments (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 5.8; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.8 to 12.0) and having a do-not-resuscitate order (adjusted OR = 2.2; 95% CI: 1.1 to 4.2).

Conclusions

Among terminally ill patients with cancer, discussions about prognosis as documented in medical charts are infrequent and limited in scope. In some cases, such documented discussions may be important catalysts for subsequent discussions of patient and family preferences regarding treatment and future care.

Section snippets

Study design and sampling

We performed a cross-sectional study using data collected retrospectively from medical records of eligible patients admitted to community hospitals in Connecticut during 1997. Patient eligibility criteria included being at least 65 years old at the time of admission, being admitted for at least one night to one of the six study hospitals during the study period, and having a diagnosis of brain, pancreas, liver, gall bladder, or inoperable lung cancer at the time of admission. These types of

Results

The study sample (Table 1) was representative of patients who die of cancer in the state, as listed in the statewide tumor registry, in terms of sex, race, and marital status, but was slightly older, probably because all patients were at least 65 years old. The mean (± SD) length of stay was 9 ± 8 days; 30 patients (13%) stayed for 1 or 2 days, and 36 (16%) patients stayed for 2 weeks or more. The mean (±SD) number of diagnoses per patient was 6 ± 3.

Discussion

Our findings indicate that documentation of discussions about prognosis among inpatients with terminal cancer is infrequent and limited in several ways. First, in nearly one quarter of cases with documented prognosis discussions, no physician was involved. In these cases, either a social worker or a nurse was the clinician who discussed the prognosis with the patient or family. Second, patients were often not included in such discussions despite the importance of such information for patient

Acknowledgements

The authors have benefited from the comments of Harlan Krumholz, MD, Nicholas Christakis, MD, Liana Fraenkel, MD, Sara Erickson, MD, and Christiana Williams, MPH.

References (42)

  • S.C Johnston et al.

    The discussion about advance directives. Patient and physician opinions regarding when and how it should be conducted. End of Life Study Group

    Arch Intern Med

    (1995)
  • E.H Bradley et al.

    Discussions about end-of-life care in nursing homes

    J Am Geriatr Soc

    (1998)
  • S.E Bedell et al.

    Choices about cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the hospital. When do physicians talk with patients?

    N Engl J Med

    (1984)
  • J.A Tulsky et al.

    How do medical residents discuss resuscitation with patients?

    J Gen Intern Med

    (1995)
  • B Lo et al.

    Patient attitudes to discussing life-sustaining treatment

    Arch Intern Med

    (1986)
  • R.H Shmerling et al.

    Discussing cardiopulmonary resuscitationA study of elderly outpatients

    J Gen Intern Med

    (1988)
  • J.C Hofmann et al.

    Patient preferences for communication with physicians about end-of-life decisions

    Ann Intern Med

    (1997)
  • K.E Covinsky et al.

    Communication and decision-making in seriously ill patientsFindings of the support project. the study to understand prognoses and preferences for outcomes and risks of treatments

    J Am Geriatr Soc

    (2000)
  • J.R Levin et al.

    Life-sustaining treatment decisions for nursing home residentsWho discusses, who decides and what is decided?

    J Am Geriatr Soc

    (1999)
  • G.J Annas

    Informed consent, cancer, and truth in prognosis

    N Engl J Med

    (1994)
  • M.M Barnett

    Information needs of patients with advanced cancer—how much do they know and does this match what they want to know?

    Psycho-Oncology

    (1995)
  • Cited by (98)

    • Prognostication in Serious Illness

      2020, Medical Clinics of North America
      Citation Excerpt :

      Second, most data about patients’ actual survival are obtained from clinical trials, which typically select for otherwise healthy patients and are therefore limited in their generalizability.29 Third, the culture of modern medicine discourages frank discussions of death and dying and has, in turn, fostered professional norms that devalue prognostic estimates and favor optimism over accuracy.22,29,31 Unfortunately, even when a clinician has a clear sense of a patient’s disease trajectory, prognostic nondisclosure is exceedingly common.7,18,20,21,31

    • Feasibility of a team based prognosis and treatment goal discussion (T-PAT) with women diagnosed with advanced breast cancer

      2019, Patient Education and Counseling
      Citation Excerpt :

      Consequently, it is important to devise tools and approaches to prognosis discussion that enable clinicians to address prognosis in ways that are suitable to their role, and acceptable to patients. Recommendations for advanced disease prognosis discussion include planning and documenting the discussion, being adaptive to the patient’s willingness to discuss, using team or family-based discussions, repetition, and discussion of patients’ preferences for aggressive care and end of life concerns [2,4,23–30]. Though some approaches rely on patient initiated methods (e.g. question prompt lists) to start a prognosis discussion [18,19,30,31], clinician-patient communication reflects an inherent power imbalance that most patients and caregivers are reluctant to challenge [32].

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Supported by grants from the John D. Thompson Hospice Institute for Training, Education, and Research, and the Nathan Cummings Foundation.

    View full text