Balancing urgency, age and quality of life in organ allocation decisions--what would you do? A survey.

PURPOSE: Explore public attitudes towards the trade-offs between justice and medical outcome inherent in organ allocation decisions. BACKGROUND: The US Task Force on Organ Transplantation recommended that considerations of justice, autonomy and medical outcome be part of all organ allocation decisions. Justice in this context may be modeled as a function of three types of need, related to age, clinical urgency, and quality of life. METHODS: A web-based survey was conducted in which respondents were asked to choose between two hypothetical patients who differed in clinical urgency (time to death <1 year), age, pretransplant and post-transplant quality of life, and life expectancy. RESULTS: A pool of 1600 people were notified via email about the survey; 623 (39%) responded. Respondents preferred giving organs to younger people up to an age difference of <15.4 years (SD 18) and more clinically urgent people up to a difference in urgency of <2.54 months (SD 3). Priority varied with the quality of life of the worst-off patient and the relative status of the patients. If both had worse than average quality of life, respondents preferred the better-off patient. When both had better than average quality of life, they preferred the worse-off patient. In analysis according to age versus clinical urgency, the older the patient, the more urgency needed to receive priority. In quality of life versus clinical urgency, the better the control's quality of life, the more urgency the competing patient required. The worse the patient's post-transplant outcome, the more urgency needed to receive priority. CONCLUSIONS: It appears that clinical urgency is only one of many factors influencing attitudes about allocation decisions and that respondents may invoke different principles of fairness depending the relative clinical status of patients.

Effect of macrolides as part of initial empiric therapy on length of stay in patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: The choice of antibiotics to treat community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is primarily empiric, and the effect of this choice on length of stay (LOS) and mortality is largely unknown. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of antibiotic choice on these outcomes in general medical patients hospitalized with CAP. METHODS: One hundred patients hospitalized with CAP were prospectively identified. Seventy-six met inclusion criteria and were entered into the study. After hospital discharge, each medical chart was examined by 2 independent physicians who verified the admitting diagnosis and entered the data for antimicrobial regimens, a CAP mortality prediction tool, a social and disposition index, and other health outcomes. Patients were stratified according to the antibiotic received. Simple regression techniques were used to examine the correlation between initial therapy, specifically, ceftriaxone sodium or a macrolide, and LOS and mortality. RESULTS: Patients who received macrolides within the first 24 hours of admission had a markedly shorter LOS (2.8 days) than those not so treated (5.3 days; P = .01). This effect diminished as the interval before administering macrolides increased. Including ceftriaxone as part of the initial therapy did not appear to affect LOS. Patients given a macrolide for initial treatment did not differ significantly from those not treated in terms of mean age, mortality prediction tool score, or Social and Disposition Index score. Eleven of the 12 patients who received macrolides also received a beta-lactam antibiotic. CONCLUSION: Use of macrolides as part of an initial therapeutic regimen appears to be associated with shorter LOS.