A Pilot Study to Evaluate Compliance with Guidelines for Preprocedural Reconsideration of Code Status Limitations

Prevalence, Management, and Outcomes Related to Preoperative Medical Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) in an Adult Surgical Population: Preoperative MOLST and Code Status Discussions

OBJECTIVE

To determine prevalence of documented preoperative code status discussions and postoperative outcomes (specifically mortality, readmission, and discharge disposition) of patients with completed MOLST forms before surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

A MOLST form documents patient care preference regarding treatment limitations. When considering surgery in these patients, preoperative discussion is necessary to ensure concordance of care. Little is known about prevalence of these discussions and postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted consisting of all patients having surgery during a 1-year period at a tertiary care academic center in Boston, Massachusetts.

RESULTS

Among 21,787 surgical patients meeting inclusion criteria, 402 (1.8%) patients had preoperative MOLST. Within the MOLST, 224 (55.7%) patients had chosen to limit cardiopulmonary resuscitation and 214 (53.2%) had chosen to limit intubation and mechanical ventilation. Code status discussion was documented presurgery in 169 (42.0%) patients with MOLST. Surgery was elective or nonurgent for 362 (90%), and median length of stay (Q1, Q3) was 5.1 days (1.9, 9.9). The minority of patients with preoperative MOLST were discharged home [169 (42%), and 103 (25.6%) patients were readmitted within 30 days. Patients with preoperative MOLST had a 30-day mortality of 9.2% (37 patients) and cumulative 90-day mortality of 14.9% (60 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

Fewer than half of surgical patients with preoperative MOLST have documented code status discussions before surgery. Given their high risk of postoperative mortality and the diversity of preferences found in MOLST, thoughtful discussion before surgery is critical to ensure concordant perioperative care.

Management of Do Not Resuscitate Orders Before Invasive Procedures

Background

In 2017, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) implemented the Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Initiative (LSTDI), which created a portable and durable code status for use across its health care system. Patients who now have a durable do not resuscitate (DNR) status may undergo invasive procedures. Few studies have examined whether proceduralists discuss DNR status and document changes before procedures.

Objective

To assess baseline percentage of suspension of DNR before nonsurgical invasive procedures and determine whether an academic detailing intervention consisting of training proceduralists in the use of a template that allows rapid suspension of DNR status increases percentage of DNR acknowledgments.

Methods

Single-center, quasi-experimental pre- and postassessments were done in high-volume, procedural areas, including gastroenterology, cardiology, and interventional radiology, in a VA medical center. The primary outcome was the proceduralists' documentation of DNR status acknowledgment before a nonsurgical invasive procedure at baseline and after the intervention. Logistic regression was used to compare percentage of DNR acknowledgment with time (before, after) and procedural area and assessing their interaction in the model.

Results

The interaction between department and time revealed wide variation in documentation of DNR acknowledgment. Examining the model predicted percentages from the interaction, preintervention percentages for gastroenterology, cardiology and interventional radiology were 46%, 75.6%, and 7.5%, respectively, and postintervention model predicted percentages were 53.5%, 91.7%, and 26.3%, respectively. Only the before vs after contrast for interventional radiology was significantly different. When all procedural areas were combined, the percentage of DNR acknowledgment significantly improved from 38.6% to 61.1% (P = .01).

Conclusions

Before nonsurgical invasive procedures, the percentage of DNR acknowledgment was low but after, the intervention significantly improved. Further research is needed to assess its impact on patient-centered outcomes.

Creating a Pathway for Multidisciplinary Shared Decision-Making to Improve Communication During Preoperative Assessment

Shared decision-making (SDM) is essential for high-quality surgical care. Barriers to SDM exist in clinical practice but there is evidence these obstacles can be overcome. SDM requires clinician and patient engagement. Though patients may indicate understanding, deficits in decision making may persist based on language, age, or educational barriers. Multidisciplinary decision-making before surgery is an opportunity for anesthesiologists and other perioperative professionals to improve surgical care. The authors present an example of a successfully implemented pathway for high-risk surgical patients at a tertiary care center, leveraging the preoperative anesthesia evaluation.