Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 551

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Association Between Advance Directives and Quality of End‐of‐Life Care: A National Study

Teno, Joan M., Gruneir, Andrea, Schwartz, Zachary, Nanda, Aman, Wetle, Terrie·2007·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
DOI 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01045.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To examine the role of advance directives (ADs) 10 years after the Patient Self‐Determination Act. DESIGN: Mortality follow‐back survey. SETTING: People who died in a nursing home, hospital, or at home. PARTICIPANTS: Bereaved family member or other knowledgeable informant. MEASUREMENTS: Telephone interviewers that asked about the use of written ADs, use of life‐sustaining treatment, and quality of care by asking whether staff provided desired symptom relief, treated the dying with respect, supported shared decision‐making, coordinated care, and provided family with the needed information and emotional support. RESULTS: Of the 1,587 people who died, 70.8% had an AD. Persons who died at home with hospice or in a nursing home were more likely to have an AD. In addition, those with an AD were less likely to have a feeding tube (17% vs 27%) or use a respirator in the last month of life (11.8% vs 22.0%). Bereaved family members who reported that the decedent did not have an AD were more likely to report concerns with physician communication (adjusted odds ratio (AOR)=1.4, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.1–1.6) and with being informed about what to expect (AOR=1.2, 95% CI=1.0–1.3). No statistically significant differences were observed in other outcomes. Even in those with an AD, important quality concerns remained; one in four reported an unmet need in pain, one in two reported inadequate emotional support for the patient, and one in three stated inadequate family emotional support. CONCLUSION: Bereaved family member report of completion of an AD was associated with greater use of hospice and fewer reported concerns with communication, yet important opportunities remain to improve the quality of end‐of‐life care.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01045.x

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Rouse F, 1991, Practicing the PSDA, Hastings Cent Rep, 21, S1
  2. 1990, Patient Self‐Determination Act in Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, Federal Law, 101
  3. 10.2307/3527683 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.7326/0003-4819-117-7-599 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Teno JM, 1994, 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, 5, 23, 10.1086/JCE199405106 · DOI
  6. Teno JM, 1998, Role of written advance directives in decision making, Insights from qualitative and quantitative data, 13, 439
  7. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1997.tb05180.x · DOI
  8. Teno JM, 1997, 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, 45, 500
  9. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1997.tb05179.x · DOI · Paper page
  10. Ditto PH, 2001, Advance directives as acts of communication, A randomized controlled trial, 161, 421
  11. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1992.tb03652.x · DOI
  12. Weeks WB, 1994, Advance directives and the cost of terminal hospitalization, Arch Intern Med, 154, 2077, 10.1001/archinte.1994.00420180085010 · DOI
  13. 10.1001/archinte.1994.00420050093009 · DOI
  14. Molloy DW, 2000, Systematic implementation of an advance directive program in nursing homes, A randomized controlled trial, 283, 1437
  15. Degenholtz HB, 2004, Brief communication, The relationship between having a living will and dying in place, 141, 113
  16. 10.1001/jama.291.1.88 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Teno JM, 2001, Patient‐focused, family‐centered end‐of‐life medical care, Views of the guidelines and bereaved family members, 22, 738
  18. Schneiderman LJ, 1992, Relationship of general advance directive instructions to specific life‐sustaining treatment preferences in patients with serious illness, Arch Intern Med, 152, 2114, 10.1001/archinte.1992.00400220122021 · DOI
  19. 10.7326/0003-4819-126-2-199701150-00001 · DOI · Paper page
  20. 10.7326/0003-4819-141-2-200407200-00009 · DOI
  21. McPherson C, 2003, Judging the quality of care at the end of life, Can proxies provide reliable information, 56, 95
  22. Baier RR, 2004, Ameliorating pain in nursing homes, A collaborative quality-improvement project, 52, 1988
  23. 10.1001/jama.280.19.1690 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Teno, J. M., Gruneir, A., Schwartz, Z., Nanda, A., & Wetle, T.
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-01-08
Volume
55
Issue
2
Pages
189-194
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
DOI
10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01045.x
OpenAlex
W1586305828
Cited by
551
References
0
FWCI
16.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.