Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Changes in the use of do-not-resuscitate orders after implementation of the patient self-determination act

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine changes in the use of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders and mortality rates following a DNR order after the Patient Self-determination Act (PSDA) was implemented in December 1991.

DESIGN: Time-series.

SETTING: Twenty-nine hospitals in Northeast Ohio.

PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Medicare patients (N=91,539) hospitalized with myocardial infarction, heart failure, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia, or stroke.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The use of “early” (first 2 hospital days) and “late” DNR orders was determined from chart abstractions. Deaths within 30 days after a DNR order were identified from Medicare Provider Analysis and Review files. Risk-adjusted rates of early DNR orders increased by 34% to 66% between 1991 and 1992 for 4 of the 6 conditions and then remained flat or declined slightly between 1992 and 1997. Use of late DNR orders declined by 29% to 53% for 4 of the 6 conditions between 1991 and 1997. Risk-adjusted mortality during the 30 days after a DNR order was written did not change between 1991 and 1997 for 5 conditions, but risk-adjusted mortality increased by 21% and 25% for stroke patients with early DNR and late DNR orders, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: Overall use of DNR orders changed relatively little after passage of the PSDA, because the increase in the use of early DNR orders between 1991 and 1992 was counteracted by decreasing use of late DNR orders. Risk-adjusted mortality rates after a DNR order generally remained stable, suggesting that there were no dramatic changes in quality of care or aggressiveness of care for patients with DNR orders. However, the increasing mortality for stroke patients warrants further examination.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wenger NS, Pearson ML, Desmond KA, Kahn KL. Changes over time in the use of do not resuscitate orders and the outcomes of patients receiving them. Med Care. 1997;35:311–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Jayes RL, Zimmerman JE, Wagner DP, Draper EA, Knaus WA. Do-not-resuscitate orders in intensive care units. Current practices and recent changes. JAMA. 1993;270:2213–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Jonsson PV, McNamee M, Campion EW. The ‘do not resuscitate’ order. A prolife of its changing use. Arch Intern Med. 1988;148:2373–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Stern SG, Orlowski JP. DNR or CPR-the choice is ours. Crit Care Med. 1992;20:1263–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990. Public law no. 101–508, 2002.

  6. Greco PJ, Schulman KA, Lavizzo-Mourey R, Hansen-Flaschen J. The Patient Self-Determination Act and the future of advance directives. Ann Intern Med. 1991;115:639–43.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Emanuel EJ, Weinberg DS, Gonin R, Hummel LR, Emanuel LL. How well is the Patient Self-Determination Act working? An early assessment. Am J Med. 1993;95:619–28.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Teno J, Lynn J, Wenger N, et al. Advance directives for seriously ill hospitalized patients: effectiveness with the patient self-determination act and the SUPPORT intervention. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997;45:500–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bradley EH, Wetle T, Horwitz SM. The patient self-determination act and advance directive completion in nursing homes. Arch Fam Med. 1998;7:417–23.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Castle NG, Mor V. Advance care planning in nursing homes, pre- and post-Patient Self-Determination Act. Health Serv Res. 1998;33:101–24.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Teno JM, Branco KJ, Mor V, et al. Changes in advance care planning in nursing homes before and after the patient Self-Determination Act: report of a 10-state survey. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997;45:939–44.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Golin CE, Wenger NS, Liu H, et al. A prospective study of patient-physician communication about resuscitation. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000;48(suppl):52–60.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rosenthal GE, Harper DL. Cleveland health quality choice: a model for collaborative community-based outcomes assessment. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 1994;20:425–42.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Baker DW, Einstadter D, Thomas C, Husak S, Gordon NH, Cebul RD. Mortality trends during a program that publicly reported hospital performance. Med Care. 2002;40:879–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ash AS, Shwartz M. Evaluating the performance of risk-adjustment methods: dichotomous outcomes. In: Iezzoni LI, ed. Risk Adjustment for Measuring Healthcare Outcomes. Chicago, Ill: Health Administration Press; 1997:444–9.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Zhang J, Yu KF. What’s the relative risk? A method of correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes. JAMA. 1998;280:1690–1.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Rubin DB. Estimating causal effects from large data sets using propensity scores. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:757–63.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Foody JM, Cole CR, Blackstone EH, Lauer MS. A propensity analysis of cigarette smoking and mortality with consideration of the effects of alcohol. Am J Cardiol. 2001;87:706–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Gum PA, Thamilarasan M, Watanabe J, Blackstone EH, Lauer MS. Aspirin use and all-cause mortality among patients being evaluated for known or suspected coronary artery disease: a propensity analysis. JAMA. 2001;286:1187–94.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Wolf SM, Boyle P, Callahan D, et al. Sources of concern about the Patient Self-Determination Act. N Engl J Med. 1991;325:1666–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Teno JM, Sabatino C, Parisier L, Rouse F, Lynn J. The impact of the Patient Self-Determination Act’s requirement that states describe law concerning patients’ rights. Law Med Health Care. 1993;21:102–8.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Wenger NS, Shekelle PG. Assessing care of vulnerable elders: ACOVE project overview. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135:642–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Lynn J, Forlini JH. Serious and complex illness in quality improvement and policy reform for end-of-life care. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:315–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Teno JM, Lynn J, Phillips RS, et al. Do formal advance directives affect resuscitation decisions and the use of resources for seriously ill patients? SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments. J Clin Ethics. 1994;5:23–30.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Teno JM, Hakim RB, Knaus WA, et al. Preferences for cardiopulmonary resuscitation, physician-patient agreement and hospital resource use. The SUPPORT Investigators. J Gen Intern Med. 1995;10:179–86.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Shepardson LB, Youngner SJ, Speroff T, Rosenthal GE. Increased risk of death in patients with do-not-resuscitate orders. Med Care. 1999;37:727–37.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Phillips RS, Wenger NS, Teno J, et al. Choices of seriously ill patients about cardiopulmonary resuscitation: correlates and outcomes. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments. Am J Med. 1996;100:128–37.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. The SUPPORT Principal Investigators. A controlled trial to improve care for seriously ill hospitalized patients. The Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT). JAMA. 1995;274:1591–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lynn J, De Vries KO, Arkes HR, et al. Ineffectiveness of the SUPPORT intervention: review of explanations. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000;48(suppl):206–13.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Lynn J, Arkes HR, Stevens M, et al. Rethinking fundamental assumptions: SUPPORT’s implications for future reform. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences and Risks of Treatment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000;48(suppl):214–21.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Myers SS, Lynn J. Patients with eventually fatal chronic illness: their importance within a national research agenda on improving patient safety and reducing medical errors. J Palliat Med. 2001;4:325–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David W. Baker MD, MPH.

Additional information

This study was supported by grant number R01 HS09969 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Baker, D.W., Einstadter, D., Husak, S. et al. Changes in the use of do-not-resuscitate orders after implementation of the patient self-determination act. J GEN INTERN MED 18, 343–349 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20522.x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20522.x

Key words

Navigation