"What do you Mean I Cannot Consent For My Grandmother's Medical Procedure?": Key Issues With State Default Surrogate Decision Making Laws

When a patient is unable to make medical decisions, a health care surrogate must be designated to make decisions on the patient's behalf. Studies show that fewer than 20% of patients have completed health care representative forms to legally designate a surrogate. Without a prior designation, surrogates are determined via state statute. Currently, there is no up-to-date comprehensive evaluation of state surrogate legislation. A survey of state legislative codes was conducted to determine: 1) whether the state has a default surrogate statute; 2) who is included as an acceptable legal surrogate; and 3) whether there is a hierarchy to determine a final decision-maker. Currently, 36 states have enacted some form of surrogate statute. There is little consistency between states regarding who may serve as a surrogate decision- maker. The key challenges with state laws include: 1) a narrow list of persons who qualify as allowable legal surrogates; and 2) a lack of a hierarchy to determine a final decision-maker. The results of this survey show that state surrogate decision making laws have many flaws which could affect patient care. The narrow construction of state laws can leave patients in situations where they either have no qualified surrogate under the law, or where they have multiple surrogates with competing interests who may be unable to reach consensus on the patient's medical care. State laws need to be changed so that they accurately reflect the realities of clinical practice and expanded to allow a broader spectrum of potential surrogates

The legal and ethical implications of the Indiana surrogate decision making impact on physicians and patient care in Indiana hospitals

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI)Background: When a patient is incapacitated and unable to make health care decisions, a surrogate decision maker must be designated to make decisions about the patient’s care in his or her place. Studies show that fewer than 20% of patients in hospitals present with a designated health care representative form. Therefore, the overwhelming majority of surrogates in hospitals are identified via default state statutes. Little is known about the implications of state default surrogate decision making statutes on physicians and patient care in clinical practice. Methods: An evaluation of state surrogate decision making statutes was conducted in order to determine variability among state laws. Additionally, a statewide, quantitative, descriptive, cross-sectional survey of a random sample of 405 physicians working in Indiana hospitals was conducted to determine: 1) physicians’ knowledge of Indiana’s surrogate decision making law; 2) physicians’ approaches to hypothetical cases they might encounter in hospital practice; and 3) any delay in patient care physicians experience as a result of state surrogate decision making laws. Results: There is very little consistency among states regarding who may serve as a surrogate decision maker. In Indiana, less than half of the surveyed physicians (47.90%) were able to correctly identify legally allowable surrogates. When presented with clinica vignettes, nearly all physicians (84.90%) report that they would allow a grandchild to act as a surrogate decision maker, even though grandchildren are not legal surrogates under the law. Additionally, more than half of physicians (53.8%) experienced a delay in patient care due to the inability to identify a legal surrogate. Conclusions: The narrow construction of state laws can leave patients in situations where they either have no qualified surrogate under the law or where they have multiple surrogates. If there are multiple surrogates with competing interests a consensus may not be reached on the patient’s medical care. These situations result in a delay of patient care. The results of this study show that the Indiana Surrogate Decision Making law is flawed as it does not reflect the composition of Indiana families and leads to delays in patient care

The effect of a state health care consent law on patient care in hospitals: A survey of physicians

Objective: When a patient cannot make medical decisions for him or herself, and has not appointed a healthcare representative, default state healthcare consent laws determine who is able to make healthcare decisions for the patient. The narrow construction of some state laws leaves many patients in situations where the closest person to the patient does not qualify as a representative under the law, or where the patient has too many representatives and a consensus cannot be reached on the patient’s medical care. Methods: In order to determine how state healthcare consent laws affect patient care in hospitals, a survey of 412 Indiana physicians was conducted. Results: The data shows 53.8% of physicians experienced a delay in patient care because they were unable to identify a legally appropriate health care representative. Almost half (46.01%) of physicians experienced delay of patient care due to the inability to identify a final decision maker when disputes arose between multiple legal representatives. Conclusions: The results of this study have important implications for hospital administrators as a delay in patient care can be costly and unnecessarily utilizes hospital resources. Additionally, the results of this study have important implications for the status of state surrogate decision making laws. Amending state laws to include more potential surrogates, has the potential to minimize delays in patient care and ensure that appropriate surrogates are making medical care decisions for patients without the undue burden of court intervention

Non-Traditional Surrogate Decision Makers for Hospitalized Older Adults

Background Without advanced preparation of legal documents, state law determines who may serve as a surrogate decision maker for patients in hospitals. Objectives To examine the relationship characteristics associated with traditional versus non-traditional healthcare surrogates who are making medical decisions for patients in hospitals. Research Design Secondary analysis of a baseline cross-sectional survey of a larger prospective observational study. Subjects 364 patient/ surrogate dyads consisting of patients age 65 years and older admitted to the medical or medical ICU services who lacked decision making capacity based on a physician assessment and also had a surrogate available. Results This study of surrogate decision makers for hospitalized older adults found that the relationships of non-traditional surrogates such as, nieces, nephews, and friends serving in the surrogate role is nearly identical to those of traditional, first degree relatives serving as a surrogate. Over two-thirds (71.2%) of non-traditional surrogates saw the patient in person at least weekly compared to 80.8% of legal surrogates (p-value .9023). Almost all traditional and non-traditional surrogates discussed the patient’s medical preferences with the patient (96.9% of legal surrogates and 89.2% of non-traditional surrogates; p=0.0510). Conclusion This study shows that both traditional and non-traditional surrogates, who are a patient’s primary care giver have similar relationships with patients. The findings of this study suggest that requiring family members such as grandchildren to take the extra step of formal appointment through a legal channel may not be necessary to protect patients. Therefore, broader state laws expanding the list of surrogates authorized by state statute to include more non-traditional surrogates may be necessary

Health Care Practitioners’ Determinants of Telerehabilitation Acceptance

Background: Pulmonary rehabilitation is a multidisciplinary patient-tailored intervention that aims to improve the physical and psychological condition of people with chronic respiratory diseases. Providing pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) services to the growing population of patients is challenging due to shortages in health care practitioners and pulmonary rehabilitation programs. Telerehabilitation has the potential to address this shortage in practitioners and PR programs as well as improve patients’ participation and adherence. This study’s purpose was to identify and evaluate the influences of intention of health care practitioners to use telerehabilitation. Methods: Data were collected through a self-administered Internet-based survey. Results: Surveys were completed by 222 health care practitioners working in pulmonary rehabilitation with 79% having a positive intention to use telerehabilitation. Specifically, perceived usefulness was a significant individual predictor of positive intentions to use telerehabilitation. Conclusion: Perceived usefulness may be an important factor associated with health care providers’ intent to use telerehabilitation for pulmonary rehabilitation

Development and Validation of the Tele-Pulmonary Rehabilitation Acceptance Scale

BACKGROUND: Using telehealth in pulmonary rehabilitation (telerehabilitation) is a new field of health-care practice. To successfully implement a telerehabilitation program, measures of acceptance of this new type of program need to be assessed among potential users. The purpose of this study was to develop a scale to measure acceptance of using telerehabilitation by health-care practitioners and patients. METHODS: Three objectives were met (a) constructing a modified scale of the technology acceptance model, (b) judging the items for content validity, and (c) judging the scale for face validity. Nine experts agreed to participate and evaluate item relevance to theoretical definitions of domains. To establish face validity, 7 health-care practitioners and 5 patients were interviewed to provide feedback about the scale's clarity and ease of reading. RESULTS: The final items were divided into 2 scales that reflected the health-care practitioner and patient responses. Each scale included 3 subscales: perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and behavioral intention. CONCLUSIONS: The 2 scales, each with 3 subscales, exhibited evidence of content validity and face validity. The 17-item telerehabilitation acceptance scale for health-care practitioners and the 13-item telerehabilitation acceptance scale among patients warrant further psychometric testing as valuable measures for pulmonary rehabilitation programs

Medical decision making about long-term artificial nutrition after severe stroke: a case report

Choosing to use a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG tube) for long term artificial nutrition in the setting of inadequate oral intake after stroke is complex because the decision must be made in a relatively short amount of time and prognosis is often uncertain. This case study utilized interviews with attending and resident neurologists, and surrogate medical decision makers in order to examine how neurologists and surrogate medical decision makers approached the decision to either receive a PEG tube or pursue comfort measures after severe stroke in two patients. Although these two patients presented with similar clinical characteristics and faced similar medical decisions, different decisions regarding PEG tube placement were made. Major challenges included physicians who did not agree on prognosis and surrogates who did not agree on whether to place a PEG tube. These cases demonstrate the importance of the role of the surrogate medical decision maker and the necessity of physicians and surrogate medical decision makers approaching the complex decision of PEG tube placement after stroke together. Additionally, these cases highlight the differing views on what defines a good quality of life and show the vital importance of high-quality goals of care conversations about prognosis and quality of life when deciding whether to place a PEG tube after severe stroke

Assessment of Discordance Between Surrogate Care Goals and Medical Treatment Provided to Older Adults With Serious Illness

Importance: An important aspect of high-quality care is ensuring that treatments are in alignment with patient or surrogate decision-maker goals. Treatment discordant with patient goals has been shown to increase medical costs and prolong end-of-life difficulties. Objectives: To evaluate discordance between surrogate decision-maker goals of care and medical orders and treatments provided to hospitalized, incapacitated older patients. Design, setting, and participants: This prospective cohort study included 363 patient-surrogate dyads. Patients were 65 years or older and faced at least 1 major medical decision in the medical and medical intensive care unit services in 3 tertiary care hospitals in an urban Midwestern area. Data were collected from April 27, 2012, through July 10, 2015, and analyzed from October 5, 2018, to December 5, 2019. Main outcomes and measures: Each surrogate's preferred goal of care was determined via interview during initial hospitalization and 6 to 8 weeks after discharge. Surrogates were asked to select the goal of care for the patient from 3 options: comfort-focused care, life-sustaining treatment, or an intermediate option. To assess discordance, the preferred goal of care as determined by the surrogate was compared with data from medical record review outlining the medical treatment received during the target hospitalization. Results: A total of 363 dyads consisting of patients (223 women [61.4%]; mean [SD] age, 81.8 [8.3] years) and their surrogates (257 women [70.8%]; mean [SD] age, 58.3 [11.2] years) were included in the analysis. One hundred sixty-nine patients (46.6%) received at least 1 medical treatment discordant from their surrogate's identified goals of care. The most common type of discordance involved full-code orders for patients with a goal of comfort (n = 41) or an intermediate option (n = 93). More frequent in-person contact between surrogate and patient (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.43; 95% CI, 0.23-0.82), patient residence in an institution (AOR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.23-0.82), and surrogate-rated quality of communication (AOR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.96-0.99) were associated with lower discordance. Surrogate marital status (AOR for single vs married, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.01-3.66), number of family members involved in decisions (AOR for ≥2 vs 0-1, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.05-3.21), and religious affiliation (AOR for none vs any, 4.87; 95% CI, 1.12-21.09) were associated with higher discordance. Conclusions and relevance: This study found that discordance between surrogate goals of care and medical treatments for hospitalized, incapacitated patients was common. Communication quality is a modifiable factor associated with discordance that may be an avenue for future interventions

National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scoring inconsistencies between neurologists and emergency room nurses

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the consistency of initial NIHSS scores between neurologists and RNs in clinical practice. METHODS: A cohort study of patients with a code stroke was conducted at an urban academic Primary Stroke Center in the Midwest between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019 to determine consistency in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale Scores (NIHSS) between neurologists and registered nurses (RNs). RESULTS: Among the 438 patients included in this study 65.3% (n = 286) of neurologist-RN NIHSS scoring pairs had congruent scores. One-in-three, (34.7%, n = 152) of neurologist-RN NIHSS scoring pairs had a clinically meaningful scoring difference of two points or greater. Higher NIHSS (p ≤ 0.01) and aphasia (p ≤ 0.01) were each associated with incongruent scoring between neurologist and emergency room RN pairs. CONCLUSIONS: One-in-three initial NIHSS assessed by both a neurologist and RN had a clinically meaningful score difference between providers. More severe stroke, as indicated by a higher NIHSS was associated with scoring inconsistency between neurologist-RN pairs. Subjective scoring measures, especially those involving a patient having aphasia, was associated with greater score incongruency. Score differences may be attributed to differences in NIHSS training requirements between neurologists and RNs

Indiana Medical Resident’s Knowledge of Surrogate Decision Making Laws

Introduction During the care of incapacitated patients, physicians, and medical residents discuss treatment options and gain consent to treat through healthcare surrogates. The purpose of this study is to ascertain medical residents’ knowledge of healthcare consent laws, application during clinical practice, and appraise the education residents received regarding surrogate decision making laws. Methods Beginning in February of 2018, 35 of 113 medical residents working with patients within Indiana completed a survey. The survey explored medical residents’ knowledge of health care surrogate consent laws utilized in Indiana hospitals and Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals via clinical vignettes. Results Only 22.9% of medical residents knew the default state law in Indiana did not have a hierarchy for settling disputes among surrogates. Medical residents correctly identified which family members could participate in medical decisions 86% of the time. Under the Veterans Affairs surrogate law, medical residents correctly identified appropriate family members or friends 50% of the time and incorrectly acknowledged the chief decision makers during a dispute 30% of the time. All medical residents report only having little or some knowledge of surrogate decision making laws with only 43% having remembered receiving surrogate decision making training during their residency. Conclusions These findings demonstrate that medical residents lack understanding of surrogate decision making laws. In order to ensure medical decisions are made by the appropriate surrogates and patient autonomy is upheld, an educational intervention is required to train medical residents about surrogate decision making laws and how they are used in clinical practice