Availability of Advance Care Planning Documentation for Older Emergency Department Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study.

INTRODUCTION: Increasing advance care planning (ACP) among older adults is a national priority. Documentation of ACP in the electronic health record (EHR) is particularly important during emergency care. OBJECTIVE: We sought to characterize completion and availability of ACP among a subset of older patients at an academic emergency department (ED) with an integrated EHR. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, patients were eligible if aged ≥80 years or aged 65-79 with ≥1 indicator of high risk for short-term mortality. Patient-reported completion of ACP and availability of ACP documentation in the EHR were assessed. RESULTS: Among study patients (n = 104), 59% reported completing some form of ACP: living will 52%, heathcare power of attorney 54%, do not resuscitate 38%, and medical orders for scope of treatment or physician orders for life-sustaining treatment 6%. Whites were more likely to report having some form of ACP than minorities (66% vs. 37%, p < 0.01), as were patients aged ≥80 years than those aged 65-79 (79% vs. 44%, p < 0.01). Only 13% of all patients had either a current code status or any other current ACP documentation in the EHR. Among patients whose primary care provider uses the same EHR system as the study ED, only 19% had a current code status or any other ACP documentation in the EHR. CONCLUSION: In a sample of older ED patients likely to benefit from ACP, few patients had documented end-of-life care preferences in the EHR.

Shared Decision Making to Support the Provision of Palliative and End-of-Life Care in the Emergency Department: A Consensus Statement and Research Agenda.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the optimal use of shared decision making (SDM) to guide palliative and end-of-life decisions in the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVE: The objective was to convene a working group to develop a set of research questions that, when answered, will substantially advance the ability of clinicians to use SDM to guide palliative and end-of-life care decisions in the ED. METHODS: Participants were identified based on expertise in emergency, palliative, or geriatrics care; policy or patient-advocacy; and spanned physician, nursing, social work, legal, and patient perspectives. Input from the group was elicited using a time-staggered Delphi process including three teleconferences, an open platform for asynchronous input, and an in-person meeting to obtain a final round of input from all members and to identify and resolve or describe areas of disagreement. CONCLUSION: Key research questions identified by the group related to which ED patients are likely to benefit from palliative care (PC), what interventions can most effectively promote PC in the ED, what outcomes are most appropriate to assess the impact of these interventions, what is the potential for initiating advance care planning in the ED to help patients define long-term goals of care, and what policies influence palliative and end-of-life care decision making in the ED. Answers to these questions have the potential to substantially improve the quality of care for ED patients with advanced illness.