Cargando…

Recognizing difficult trade-offs: values and treatment preferences for end-of-life care in a multi-site survey of adult patients in family practices

BACKGROUND: Decisions about care options and the use of life-sustaining treatments should be informed by a person’s values and treatment preferences. The objective of this study was to examine the consistency of ratings of the importance of the values statements and the association between values st...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Howard, Michelle, Bansback, Nick, Tan, Amy, Klein, Doug, Bernard, Carrie, Barwich, Doris, Dodek, Peter, Nijjar, Aman, Heyland, Daren K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5719577/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29212487
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-017-0570-x
_version_ 1783284520611479552
author Howard, Michelle
Bansback, Nick
Tan, Amy
Klein, Doug
Bernard, Carrie
Barwich, Doris
Dodek, Peter
Nijjar, Aman
Heyland, Daren K.
author_facet Howard, Michelle
Bansback, Nick
Tan, Amy
Klein, Doug
Bernard, Carrie
Barwich, Doris
Dodek, Peter
Nijjar, Aman
Heyland, Daren K.
author_sort Howard, Michelle
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Decisions about care options and the use of life-sustaining treatments should be informed by a person’s values and treatment preferences. The objective of this study was to examine the consistency of ratings of the importance of the values statements and the association between values statement ratings and the patient’s expressed treatment preference. METHODS: We conducted a multi-site survey in 20 family practices. Patients aged 50 and older self-completed a questionnaire assessing the importance of eight values (rated 1 to 10), and indicated their preference for use of life-sustaining treatment (5 options). We compared correlations among values to a priori hypotheses based on whether the value related to prolonging or shortening life, and examined expected relationships between importance of values and the preference option for life-sustaining treatment. RESULTS: Eight hundred ten patients participated (92% response rate). Of 24 a priori predicted correlations among values statements, 14 were statistically significant but nearly all were negligible in their magnitude and some were in the opposite direction than expected. For example, the correlation between importance of being comfortable and suffering as little as possible and the importance of living as long as possible should have been inversely correlated but was positively correlated (r = 0.08, p = 0.03). Correlations between importance of values items and preference were negligible, ranging from 0.03 to 0.13. CONCLUSIONS: Patients may not recognize that trade-offs in what is most important may be needed when considering the use of treatments. In the context of preparation for decision-making during serious illness, decision aids that highlight these trade-offs and connect values to preferences more directly may be more helpful than those that do not. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi: 10.1186/s12911-017-0570-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5719577
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57195772017-12-08 Recognizing difficult trade-offs: values and treatment preferences for end-of-life care in a multi-site survey of adult patients in family practices Howard, Michelle Bansback, Nick Tan, Amy Klein, Doug Bernard, Carrie Barwich, Doris Dodek, Peter Nijjar, Aman Heyland, Daren K. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Research Article BACKGROUND: Decisions about care options and the use of life-sustaining treatments should be informed by a person’s values and treatment preferences. The objective of this study was to examine the consistency of ratings of the importance of the values statements and the association between values statement ratings and the patient’s expressed treatment preference. METHODS: We conducted a multi-site survey in 20 family practices. Patients aged 50 and older self-completed a questionnaire assessing the importance of eight values (rated 1 to 10), and indicated their preference for use of life-sustaining treatment (5 options). We compared correlations among values to a priori hypotheses based on whether the value related to prolonging or shortening life, and examined expected relationships between importance of values and the preference option for life-sustaining treatment. RESULTS: Eight hundred ten patients participated (92% response rate). Of 24 a priori predicted correlations among values statements, 14 were statistically significant but nearly all were negligible in their magnitude and some were in the opposite direction than expected. For example, the correlation between importance of being comfortable and suffering as little as possible and the importance of living as long as possible should have been inversely correlated but was positively correlated (r = 0.08, p = 0.03). Correlations between importance of values items and preference were negligible, ranging from 0.03 to 0.13. CONCLUSIONS: Patients may not recognize that trade-offs in what is most important may be needed when considering the use of treatments. In the context of preparation for decision-making during serious illness, decision aids that highlight these trade-offs and connect values to preferences more directly may be more helpful than those that do not. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi: 10.1186/s12911-017-0570-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-12-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5719577/ /pubmed/29212487 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-017-0570-x Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Howard, Michelle
Bansback, Nick
Tan, Amy
Klein, Doug
Bernard, Carrie
Barwich, Doris
Dodek, Peter
Nijjar, Aman
Heyland, Daren K.
Recognizing difficult trade-offs: values and treatment preferences for end-of-life care in a multi-site survey of adult patients in family practices
title Recognizing difficult trade-offs: values and treatment preferences for end-of-life care in a multi-site survey of adult patients in family practices
title_full Recognizing difficult trade-offs: values and treatment preferences for end-of-life care in a multi-site survey of adult patients in family practices
title_fullStr Recognizing difficult trade-offs: values and treatment preferences for end-of-life care in a multi-site survey of adult patients in family practices
title_full_unstemmed Recognizing difficult trade-offs: values and treatment preferences for end-of-life care in a multi-site survey of adult patients in family practices
title_short Recognizing difficult trade-offs: values and treatment preferences for end-of-life care in a multi-site survey of adult patients in family practices
title_sort recognizing difficult trade-offs: values and treatment preferences for end-of-life care in a multi-site survey of adult patients in family practices
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5719577/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29212487
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-017-0570-x
work_keys_str_mv AT howardmichelle recognizingdifficulttradeoffsvaluesandtreatmentpreferencesforendoflifecareinamultisitesurveyofadultpatientsinfamilypractices
AT bansbacknick recognizingdifficulttradeoffsvaluesandtreatmentpreferencesforendoflifecareinamultisitesurveyofadultpatientsinfamilypractices
AT tanamy recognizingdifficulttradeoffsvaluesandtreatmentpreferencesforendoflifecareinamultisitesurveyofadultpatientsinfamilypractices
AT kleindoug recognizingdifficulttradeoffsvaluesandtreatmentpreferencesforendoflifecareinamultisitesurveyofadultpatientsinfamilypractices
AT bernardcarrie recognizingdifficulttradeoffsvaluesandtreatmentpreferencesforendoflifecareinamultisitesurveyofadultpatientsinfamilypractices
AT barwichdoris recognizingdifficulttradeoffsvaluesandtreatmentpreferencesforendoflifecareinamultisitesurveyofadultpatientsinfamilypractices
AT dodekpeter recognizingdifficulttradeoffsvaluesandtreatmentpreferencesforendoflifecareinamultisitesurveyofadultpatientsinfamilypractices
AT nijjaraman recognizingdifficulttradeoffsvaluesandtreatmentpreferencesforendoflifecareinamultisitesurveyofadultpatientsinfamilypractices
AT heylanddarenk recognizingdifficulttradeoffsvaluesandtreatmentpreferencesforendoflifecareinamultisitesurveyofadultpatientsinfamilypractices