Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32427322›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2020

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

Amber R Comer, Susan E Hickman, James E Slaven, Patrick O Monahan, Greg A Sachs, Lucia D Wocial, Emily S Burke, Alexia M Torke

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. End-of-life discussions, preference concordance, and good death: insights from a nationwide mortality follow-back survey.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Amber R ComerDepartment of Health Sciences, Indiana University School of Health and Human Sciences, Indianapolis.
Susan E HickmanIndiana University Center for Aging Research, Regenstrief Institute, Inc, Indianapolis.
James E SlavenDepartment of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Patrick O MonahanDepartment of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Greg A SachsIndiana University Center for Aging Research, Regenstrief Institute, Inc, Indianapolis.
Lucia D WocialIndiana University Purdue University Indianapolis Research in Palliative and End-of-Life Communication and Training (RESPECT) Center, School of Nursing, Indiana University, Indianapolis.
Emily S BurkeIndiana University Center for Aging Research, Regenstrief Institute, Inc, Indianapolis.
Alexia M TorkeIndiana University Center for Aging Research, Regenstrief Institute, Inc, Indianapolis.
Indiana University School of MedicineIndiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · USRegenstrief Institute · US

Funding

Understanding the needs and experiences of surrogate decision makers caring for SGM individuals with Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias.K24AG053794 · NIA · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI TORKE, ALEXIA MARY · 2016 to 2025
$1.8M
Surrogate/Clinician Communication: The Family Inpatient Communication SurveyR01AG044408 · NIA · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI TORKE, ALEXIA MARY · 2013 to 2016
$1.4M
NIA NIH HHS K24 AG053794NIA NIH HHS R01 AG044408
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

Decision MakingPatient Care PlanningThird-Party ConsentAgedAged, 80 and overCardiopulmonary ResuscitationFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID32427322
PMCPMC7237962
OpenAlexW3026157991

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.