Aligning goals with care: Advance directives in older adults with implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators
Background Patients ≥80 with implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators (ICDs) have high rates of hospitalization and mortality, yet few have documented advance directives. We sought to determine the prevalence of advance directives in adults ≥80 years with ICDs, focusing on those with frailty and cogn...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Pacing and clinical electrophysiology 2024-05, Vol.47 (5), p.697-701 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background
Patients ≥80 with implantable cardioverter‐defibrillators (ICDs) have high rates of hospitalization and mortality, yet few have documented advance directives. We sought to determine the prevalence of advance directives in adults ≥80 years with ICDs, focusing on those with frailty and cognitive impairment.
Methods
Prospective cohort study (July 2016–May 2019) in an electrophysiology clinic. Presence of advance directives (health care proxies [HCP] and living wills [LW], or medical orders for life‐sustaining treatment [MOLST]) was determined by medical record review. Frailty and cognitive impairment were screened using 4‐m gait speed and Mini‐Cog.
Results
77 Veterans were evaluated. Mean age 84 years, 100% male, 70% frail. Overall, 52 (68%) had an HCP and 37 (48%) had a LW/MOLST. Of 67 with cognitive testing, 36% were impaired. HCP documentation was similar among frail and non‐frail (69% vs. 65%). LW/MOLST was more prevalent among frail versus non‐frail (52% vs. 39%). There was no difference in HCP documentation by cognitive status (67%). A LW/MOLST was more frequent for cognitively impaired versus non‐impaired (50% vs. 42%). Among 19 Veterans who were frail and cognitively impaired, 14 (74%) had an HCP and 11 (58%) had a LW/MOLST.
Conclusions
Most Veterans had a documented advance directive, but a significant minority did not. Simple frailty and cognitive screening tools can rapidly identify patients for whom discussion of advance directives is especially important. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0147-8389 1540-8159 1540-8159 |
DOI: | 10.1111/pace.14983 |