• A M Marbella, N A Desbiens, N Mueller-Rizner, and P M Layde.
• Department of Family and Community Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee 53226, USA.
• J Crit Care. 1998 Sep 1; 13 (3): 140-5.

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate an intervention to improve patient-surrogate agreement on end-of-life resuscitation preferences.Materials And MethodsSeven hundred seventeen patients with a 50% 6-month survival rate and their surrogate decision-makers were recruited for a randomized clinical trial from five teaching hospitals participating in the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT). Intervention patients (n=386) were assigned specially trained nurses who spent extra time with patients and families explaining prognoses and treatments. Control patients (n=331) received usual care. Patient preferences and surrogate's perception of those preferences at pre- and post-intervention interviews were compared.ResultsAgreement between patients and surrogates was 75.0% at the day 3 interview and 79.6% at the month 2 interview, increasing 4.6% (95% CI: 0.1%, 9.1%). Improvements in agreement from day 3 to month 2 were seen equally in both study groups. A multivariable analysis verified that the intervention did not have an effect on agreement and indicated a decrease in agreement among older patients and among surrogates not in the immediate family.ConclusionsThe SUPPORT intervention was not successful in increasing agreement between patients and surrogates. Because of the complex issues involved in end-of-life decision-making, a more aggressive intervention may be needed. Other findings suggest that improvements in communication are particularly needed when patients are older and when the surrogate is not a patient's immediate relative.

26 keywords...

hide…