Abstract
BackgroundHospitalized patients with cancer face pivotal decisions that will affect their cancer care trajectory and quality of life, but frequently lack Decision Making Capacity (DMC). Standardization is conspicuously missing for inpatient oncology teams and for Consultation-Liaison psychiatrists performing DMC assessments for patients with cancer. This study sought to characterize a single institutional experience of psychiatric consultations to assess DMC. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective chart review of ninety-seven consecutive psychiatric consultations for DMC from 2017-2019. Demographic, hospital-based, and psychiatry consult differences were assessed based on the reasons for DMC evaluation (uncertainty, patient refusal, emergency) and whether patients had decisional capacity. ResultsOut of 97 consultations, 56 (59%) hospitalized patients with cancer were unable to demonstrate capacity. Consultations came from medical services almost exclusively. Only 5% of primary teams documented their own DMC evaluation. Only 22% of DMC evaluation by C-L psychiatrists documented four determinates of DMC. Few commented on reversibility or tenuousness of DMC, and the identification of agents/surrogates; however, psychiatry consultants were more likely to follow up on patients without DMC. One-third of patients died in the hospital and two-thirds of patients were deceased three months after the consult. ConclusionsGiven the substantial heterogeneity in the documentation of DMC evaluations in this retrospective chart review, we call for more rigor and standardization in documentation of DMC evaluations.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Journal of the Academy of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.