Cited by 21Healthcare Decision-Making and RestraintsEthics and bioethics in healthcareEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare

A prospective observational study of decisional capacity determinations in an academic medical center

Kahn, Debra R., Bourgeois, James A., Klein, Sally C., Iosif, Ana-Maria·2009·The International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The main goals, of this observational study were to clarify and categorize decisional capacity assessments performed by a psychosomatic medicine (PSM) consult service at an academic medical center. Areas of investigation included types of decisional capacity requests, the relationship between Folstein Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE) and PSM decisional capacity determination, psychiatric diagnoses of patients, and the agreement between primary clinician capacity assessment and that of the PSM clinician. METHOD: This was a prospective study of 100 consecutive decisional capacity consultations. Twelve requests were for second consultations for patients previously seen, for a net of 88 patients. RESULTS: In 77 cases, patients lacked decisional capacity. Assessments for capacity to leave against medical advice (AMA), capacity to accept medical/surgical procedures, capacity to refuse medical/surgical procedures, and capacity to participate in discharge planning were nearly equally frequent. An MMSE cutoff score of < 21 was found to be 100% specific and 69% sensitive for identifying the patients without capacity, while a cutoff of < 24 was found to be 83% sensitive and 90% specific for identifying patients without capacity. The primary psychiatric diagnosis was a cognitive disorder in 52 cases. In 38 of the 39 cases where the primary team believed the patient lacked capacity, the PSM service agreed. In only two of the seven cases where primary teams believed patients had capacity did the PSM team agree. CONCLUSIONS: The MMSE was a useful predictor of capacity determination by PSM personnel, but using MMSE alone results in a number of erroneous determinations. Cognitive disorders were the most common primary psychiatric diagnoses in decisional capacity cases. Primary teams tended to be more accurate when they found patients to lack capacity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2190/pm.39.4.e

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The remaining studies show high heterogeneity in the decision to be evaluated and in the rate of incapacity, which ranges from 10% to 87% in the samples.

    “The remaining studies show high heterogeneity in the decision to be evaluated, without specifying the treatment (Kahn et al., 2009;Okai et al., 2007;G. S. Owen et al., 2008G. S. Owen et al., , 2011) ) as well as in the rate of incapacity, which ranges from 10% to 87% in the samples.”
  • Cognitive performance is relevant to capacity, although the MMSE and MOCA are screening tests so conclusions must be considered with caution.

    “Other studies also found that cognitive performance is relevant to capacity, although they used the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) (Kahn et al., 2009) or Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) (Tor et al., 2020) as measures, which are both screening tests, so their conclusions must be considered with caution.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kahn, D. R., Bourgeois, J. A., Klein, S. C., & Iosif, A.-M.
Affiliations
University of California Davis Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Kahn, Debra R.
Venue
The International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine
Published
2009-12
Volume
39
Issue
4
Pages
405-415
ISSN
  • 0033-278X (ISSN-L)
  • 0091-2174
  • 1541-3527
OpenAlex
W2044687764
Cited by
21
References
17
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
Keywords
decision-making capacity, Mini-Mental State Examination, cognitive impairment, cognitive disorders, against medical advice, informed consent, discharge planning, interprofessional agreement, capacity assessment
MeSH terms
Academic Medical Centers, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, California, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Informed Consent, Male, Mental Status Schedule, Middle Aged, Patient Discharge, Psychosomatic Medicine, Referral and Consultation, Treatment Refusal, Mental Competency, Young Adult

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