Choice Of Diction's Effect: Effects in No Code Phrasing on Code Status Discussions
试验速览
- 阶段
- 不适用
- 入组人数
- 100
- 试验地点
- 1
- 主要终点
- Code Status Selection
研究概览
简要总结
The purpose of the research is to determine how the language used when discussing preferences about cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) affects decisions regarding this (code status)
详细描述
Most Americans express a preference for dying at home naturally and surrounded by loved ones. However, many also believe that cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is more effective than it is, and want to have CPR even when the chances for a good outcome is poor. Among other reasons, the alternative term (Do Not Resuscitate, or DNR) has been shown in the literature to be associated by patients with passive, sub-optimal, and low quality care.
This study will attempt to determine patient preference for the "no CPR" term on patients admitted to the hospital using alternate phrasing. During admission to the Medical Teaching Service, patients over the age of 65 who are able to consent and who are not critically ill/unstable will be approached. After checking brief background questions (such as if they ever had discussions like these before), they will be randomized into two groups and asked code status using one of the two phrases. This question will determine the patient's "code status;" asking for this is a routine part of hospitalized care that is required by law (the exact terminology is left to the care team). After determining the patient's code status, they will be asked how satisfied they were with the decision; the investigator will be asked if they agree with the decision separately. Demographic and clinical information will be collected. Six months later, the patient will be contacted again; at this time, they will be asked about recent life and health changes. Finally, they will be asked their code status one more time. This will conclude the participant's involvement in the study
研究设计
- 研究类型
- Interventional
- 分配方式
- Randomized
- 干预模型
- Parallel
- 主要目的
- Health Services Research
- 盲法
- None
入排标准
- 年龄范围
- 65 Years 至 —(Older Adult)
- 性别
- All
- 接受健康志愿者
- 是
入选标准
- •65 or older
- •English-fluency in reading and speaking
- •Capacity to consent
排除标准
- •Unstable psychiatric illness
- •Unstable/critically ill patients requiring ICU-level care
- •Active substance abuse
研究组 & 干预措施
Alternative Phrase
This arm will have the code status question randomized to offer CPR vs the alternative phrase
干预措施: Alternative phrasing for no code (Other)
Standard of care phrase
This arm will have the code status question randomized to offer CPR vs the standard of care phrase
干预措施: Standard of care for no code (Other)
结局指标
主要结局
Code Status Selection
时间窗: Immediately collected after consent and randomization into a study arm
Selection of "code" versus "no code" decision depending on phrasing used, stratified by GO-FAR calculation
次要结局
- Participant Satisfaction with Decision(Immediately collected after consent and randomization into a study arm)
- Length of Conversation(Immediately collected after consent and randomization into a study arm)
研究者
Karthik Joshua Kota, MD MPH
Instructor
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
