Do-not-resuscitate Status Research Articles

Resuscitation of people with a do-not-resuscitate order: when does it happen and what are the outcomes?

Abstract Background Do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders allow competent individuals to state their wishes to not receive resuscitation. Despite the existence of a DNR order, resuscitative efforts may still occur. Purpose To identify rates and outcomes of resuscitation attempts for people with DNR orders. Methods The statewide out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) registry in Victoria, Australia (population 6.5 million) identified rates of DNR orders and resuscitative efforts in ≥60-year-olds from 2006-2021. Results Of 47,322 patients ≥60 years old with OHCA, 2,688 (5.7%) had a DNR order. DNR order was communicated to emergency call-takers in only 332 (12.4%) cases. Bystander resuscitation was commenced in 1,074 (40.0%) patients, with EMS terminating efforts in 346 (32.2%) patients on arrival but commencing resuscitation in 189 others. Strongest predictors of bystander resuscitation were shockable rhythm (OR 7.75, 95% CI 5.04-11.9) and OHCA in public location (OR 4.8, 95% CI 2.0-11.3). Predictors of EMS terminating resuscitation efforts were OHCA in residential aged care facility (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.47-2.5) and older age (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.00-1.04). Transfer to hospital was undertaken in 107 patients, with strongest predictors being return of spontaneous circulation (OR 91.1, 95% CI 51.7-160.7) and witnessed OHCA (OR 7.5, 95% CI 3.9-14.5). Only 7 (0.3%) transported patients survived to discharge, with 5 deceased at 12-month follow-up. Conclusion Approximately 5% of EMS-attended OHCAs in ≥60-year-olds involve a patient with a DNR order, with low rates of awareness of DNR orders. Resuscitation is commenced in 47% of patients, and 4% are transported to hospital with very poor outcomes. Strategies to communicate DNR status and respect patients’ autonomy are extremely important.

Racial disparities in end-of-life suffering within surgical intensive care units

BackgroundEnd-of-life (EOL) care is associated with high resource utilization. Recognizing and effectively communicating that EOL is near promotes more patient-centered care, while decreasing futile interventions. We hypothesize that provider assessment...

Prior Advanced Care Planning and Outcomes of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in the Emergency Department of a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) outcomes vary for patients with cancer. Here, we characterized cancer patients who underwent CPR in the emergency department (ED), their outcomes, and the effects of advanced care planning (ACP). The hospital databases and electronic medical records of cancer patients at a comprehensive cancer center who underwent CPR in the ED from 6 March 2016 to 31 December 2022 were reviewed for patient characteristics, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), conversion to do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status afterward, hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, mortality, cost of hospitalization, and prior GOC discussions. CPR occurred in 0.05% of all ED visits. Of the 100 included patients, 67 patients achieved ROSC, with 15% surviving to hospital discharge. The median survival was 26 h, and the 30-day mortality rate was 89%. Patients with and without prior ACP had no significant differences in demographics, metastatic involvement, achievement of ROSC, or in-hospital mortality, but patients with ACP were more likely to change their code status to DNR and had shorter stays in the ICU or hospital. In conclusion, few cancer patients undergo CPR in the ED. Whether this results from an increase in terminally ill patients choosing DNR status requires further study. ACP was associated with increased conversion to DNR after resuscitation and decreased hospital or ICU stays without an increase in overall mortality.

Factors Associated with Do Not Resuscitate Status and Palliative Care in Hospitalized Patients: A National Inpatient Sample Analysis.

Patients from diverse sociocultural backgrounds and with differing medical conditions may have varying levels of acceptance of advanced care planning and palliative care. We performed a retrospective analysis of the National Inpatient Sample for patients discharged from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2019, with conditions associated with frequently terminal conditions. We recorded demographic variables, do not resuscitate (DNR) status, and palliative care (PC) status and analyzed the associations between outcomes, mortality, and length of stay (LOS). A total of 23,402,637 patient records were included in the study, of which 2% were DNR and PC, 5% were DNR only, and 1% was PC only. From 2016 to 2019, the percentage of patients with PC increased from 2.55% to 3.27% and DNR from 6.31% to 7.7%. Black patients were less likely to have DNR status (odds ratio [OR] 0.72 [0.71-0.72]) but had similar PC rates. Male patients were less likely to have a DNR order in place (OR 0.89 [0.89-0.89]) but more likely to be in PC (OR 1.05 [1.04-1.05]). The diagnoses with the highest association with DNR status were lung cancer (OR 4.1 [4.0-4.5]), pancreatic cancer (OR 4.6 [4.5-4.7]), and sepsis (OR 2.9 [2.9-2.9]) The diagnoses most associated with PC were lung cancer (OR 6.3 [6.2-6.4]), pancreatic cancer (OR 8.1 [7.1-8.3]), colon cancer (OR 4.9 [4.8-5.1]), and senile brain degeneration of the brain OR 6.5 [5.3-7.9]). Mortality and LOS decreased between 2016 and 2019, but hospital charges increased (p < 0.001). Black race and male gender were associated with higher inpatient mortality (OR 1.12 [1.12-1.14]), LOS, and hospital charges. In the United States, the proportion of hospitalized patients with DNR, PC, and DNR with PC increased from 2016 to 2019. Overall, inpatient mortality and LOS fell, but hospital charges per patient increased. Significant gender and ethnic differences emerged. Black patients and males were less likely to have DNR status and had higher inpatient mortality, LOS, and hospital charges.

Unintended Consequences of Code Status in the Intensive Care Unit: What Happens After a Do-Not-Resuscitate Order Is Placed? A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background: Some clinicians suspect that patients with do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders receive less aggressive care. Extrapolation from code status to goals of care could cause significant harm. This study asked the question: Do DNR orders in the intensive care unit (ICU) lead to a decrease in invasive interventions? Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of ICU patients from three teaching hospitals. All ICU patients were assessed for inclusion. Exclusion criteria were medical futility and death, comfort care, or ICU discharge <48 hours after DNR initiation. Five hundred thirty-six patients met inclusion criteria. One hundred forty-five were included in the final analysis. Primary outcomes were occurrence of invasive interventions after DNR initiation-surgical operation, central line, ventilation, dialysis, or other procedure. Secondary outcomes were antibiotic administration, blood transfusion, mortality, and discharge location. Results: Patients with DNR orders underwent fewer surgical operations (14.5% vs. 31.1%, p = 0.002), but more central lines (42.1% vs. 23.0%, p = 0.009), ventilator use (49.0% vs. 18.9%, p < 0.001), and dialysis (20.0% vs. 4.1%, p = 0.002), compared with patients without DNR orders. Transfusions and antibiotic use decreased similarly over admission for both groups (transfusions: β = 1.25; p = 0.59; and antibiotics: β = 1.44; p = 0.27). Mortality and hospice discharges were higher for DNR patients (p < 0.001.). Conclusions: DNR status did not decrease the number of nonoperative interventions patients received as compared with full code counterparts. Although differences in populations existed, patients with DNR orders were likely to receive a similar number of invasive interventions. This finding suggests that providers do not wholesale limit these options for patients with code status limitations.

Advancing screening tool for hospice needs and end-of-life decision-making process in the emergency department

BackgroundPredicting mortality in the emergency department (ED) is imperative to guide palliative care and end-of-life decisions. However, the clinical usefulness of utilizing the existing screening tools still leaves something to be desired.MethodsWe advanced the screening tool with the A-qCPR (Age, qSOFA (quick sepsis-related organ failure assessment), cancer, Performance Status Scale, and DNR (Do-Not-Resuscitate) risk score model for predicting one-year mortality in the emergency department of Taipei City Hospital of Taiwan with the potential of hospice need and evaluated its performance compared with the existing screening model. We adopted a large retrospective cohort in conjunction with in-time (the trained and the holdout validation cohort) for the development of the A-qCPR model and out-of-time validation sample for external validation and model robustness to variation with the calendar year.ResultsA total of 10,474 patients were enrolled in the training cohort and 33,182 patients for external validation. Significant risk scores included age (0.05 per year), qSOFA ≥ 2 (4), Cancer (5), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status score ≥ 2 (2), and DNR status (2). One-year mortality rates were 13.6% for low (score ≦ 3 points), 29.9% for medium (3 < Score ≦ 9 points), and 47.1% for high categories (Score > 9 points). The AUROC curve for the in-time validation sample was 0.76 (0.74–0.78). However, the corresponding figure was slightly shrunk to 0.69 (0.69–0.70) based on out-of-time validation. The accuracy with our newly developed A-qCPR model was better than those existing tools including 0.57 (0.56–0.57) by using SQ (surprise question), 0.54 (0.54–0.54) by using qSOFA, and 0.59 (0.59–0.59) by using ECOG performance status score. Applying the A-qCPR model to emergency departments since 2017 has led to a year-on-year increase in the proportion of patients or their families signing DNR documents, which had not been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.ConclusionsThe A-qCPR model is not only effective in predicting one-year mortality but also in identifying hospice needs. Advancing the screening tool that has been widely used for hospice in various scenarios is particularly helpful for facilitating the end-of-life decision-making process in the ED.

Knowledge and Attitudes Regarding Do-Not-Resuscitate Decisions Among Clinical-Year Medical Students and Interns in the Western Region of Saudi Arabia.

Background The directive to withhold emergent interventions in the case of cardiac and/or respiratory arrest with the continuation of standard care and therapy is known as do-not-resuscitate (DNR). The diversity of DNR guidelines depends on moral and religious factors. In Saudi Arabia, a DNR policy was published in 2017 which corresponds to the religious and ethical aspects of Islamic law. To augment future awareness regarding DNR decisions, as they are an essential element in critical care medicine, the foundational principles of DNR must be provided during the clinical years of medical school. Objectives The current study aims to assess and evaluate the knowledge and attitudes regarding DNR decisions among clinical-year medical students and interns in the Western Region of Saudi Arabia. Methods A cross-sectional study was carried out from October to December 2023, utilizing a self-administered online survey distributed via social media platforms. After receiving ethical approval from the institutional review board, data were collected from clinical-yearmedical students and interns in the Western Region of Saudi Arabia, and an appropriate statistical analysis was performed. Results A total of 397 participants were enrolled in this study. More than half (n = 251, 63.2%) were from Umm Al-Qura University, while the remaining (n=79, 19.9%) were from Taibah University. Of the total, 258 (65%) were male participants, and 139 (35%) were female. A total of 152 (38.3%) were fifth-year medical students, and 102 (25.7%) were interns. The vast majority (n = 364, 91.7%) had heard the term DNR, with the most reported source of information being from healthcare providers (n = 306, 83.2%), while a minority (n = 33, 8.3%) had not. Of the respondents, 226 (56.9%) identified the presence of a clear DNR policy in Saudi Arabia, and 77 (19.4%) had previously had experience with DNR. Most of the studied population (n = 333, 83.9%) expressed a willingness to take a lecture/session regarding DNR. Most of our participants, 347 (87.4%), believe it is essential to consider legal concerns when making a DNR decision. Interestingly, 152 (38.5%) of the participants think it is acceptable to be conservative in investigations and treatments with patients who are labeled as DNR, and 223 (56.2%) agree that patients should be aware of their DNR status. Approximately three-quarters of the study population (n = 290, 73%) agreed that it is stressful to discuss the possibility of a DNR order. In the association of who heard about DNR more, 101 (99%) of the interns had heard about the term DNR, while only 53 (75.7%) of the fourth-year medical students had. At the same time, 74 (72.5%) of the interns showed a positive attitude regarding the DNR definition, compared to 33 (47.1%) of the fourth-year medical students. Conclusion This study highlights the necessity of integrating educational interventions into DNR decisions in addition to clinical placement in the intensive care unit as part of the medical school curriculum.

Discussion of the do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders with the family caregivers of cancer patients: An example from a major cancer center in Saudi Arabia.

To explore the views of the family caregivers (FCGs) about the "do-not-resuscitate" (DNR) discussions and decision-making processes that occurred during hospitalization in a Saudi cancer center. In this cross-sectional survey, the FCGs of inpatients with advanced cancer completed a self-administered questionnaire soon after giving the patients a DNR status designation by their oncologists. Eighty-two FCGs participated in the study, with a median age of 36.5 years and male preponderance (70.7%). The FCGs were mostly sons (41.5%), daughters (14%), or brothers (11%) of patients. Only 13.4% of mentally competent patients had the chance to listen to the DNR discussion. The discussion mainly occurred in the ward corridor (48.8%) or another room away from the patients' rooms (35.4%). In 36.6% of cases, the discussion took ≤5 minutes. Half of the FCGs stated that the oncologists' justifications for the DNR decision were unconvincing. The majority (84.2%) of the FCGs felt that the healthcare providers should share the DNR decision-making with patients (1.2%), families (69.5%), or both (13.4%). FCGs ≤ 30 years of age were more supportive of giving patients' families a chance to participate in the DNR decision-making process (p = 0.012). There is considerable room for improving the current practice of DNR discussions and decision-making processes in the studied setting. A readily feasible rectifying measure is to ensure the adequacy of time and privacy when planning for DNR discussions. We expect our findings to draw the attention of stakeholders to a compelling need for reviewing the current policies and processes, aiming to improve the experience of cancer patients and their FCGs.

Abstract 13526: Palliative Care Service Utilization in End-Stage Heart Failure: A Propensity Matched Nationwide Analysis

Background: Palliative care services (PCS) is crucial in the care of end-stage heart failure (ESHF) patients. However, there is limited data on the utilization rates and the predictors PCS in ESHF patients. Research question: What is the frequency of PCS utilization, and what are the predictors of PCS use in ESHF patients? Methods: ESHF admissions were identified from the National Inpatient Sample database from 2018 – 2020. The identified admissions were stratified based on the use of PCS. The primary outcomes were the rate of utilization, and the predictors of PCS use in ESHF patients. Multivariate logistic regression and propensity matching were used to adjust for confounders. Results: In total, 147,140 ESHF admissions were identified, of which only 6.2% (9170) had PCS use. Patients with PCS were older(71.66 years vs 63.78 years; p&lt;0.001), and were less likely to be of African American race (13.7% vs 17%; p&lt;0.001). They were more likely to have a do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status (66.1% vs 10.2%; p&lt;0.001), be frail (42.4% vs 18.3%), and have had a cardiac arrest event(2.5% vs 0.8%;p&lt;0.001). The major predictors of PCS use were DNR status (adjusted odds ratio[aOR]:13.38, 95%CI: 11.73 – 15.27; p&lt;0.001), cardiogenic shock (aOR: 3.54, 95%CI: 3.02 – 4.15; p&lt;0.001), cardiac arrest during the current admission (aOR: 1.57, 95%CI: 1.01 – 2.44; p&lt;0.001), &amp; urban teaching hospital status (aOR: 1.69, 95%CI: 1.36 – 2.09; p&lt;0.001) Fig 1 . A matched pair of 8255 patients were identified in both groups. The ESHF patients with PCS had a higher in-hospital mortality (aOR: 3.30; 95%CI: 2.73 – 3.99; p&lt;0.001), and were less likely to receive a heart transplant (aOR: 0.25; 95%CI: 0.12 – 0.50; p&lt;0.001) Tab 1. Conclusion: Palliative care services are significant underutilized in the United States. DNR status, cardiogenic shock, respiratory failure, cardiac arrest, and admission to an urban teaching hospital were the major predictors of PCS use in ESHF.

Clinical factors associated with in-hospital mortality in elderly versus non-elderly pneumonia patients in the emergency department

BackgroundPneumonia is a respiratory infection with an increasing incidence with age. However, limited evidence has identified factors associated with its outcome among different age groups, especially in the elderly and in the emergency department (ED) setting. We aimed to identify clinical factors associated with in-hospital mortality in elderly versus non-elderly pneumonia patients in the ED.MethodsA retrospective observational study was conducted at the ED of Siriraj Hospital, Thailand. Patients aged at least 18 years old diagnosed with non-COVID pneumonia between June 1, 2021, and May 31, 2022, were included. They were categorized into the elderly (age ≥ 65 years) and non-elderly (age < 65 years) groups. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. We employed multivariate logistic regression models to identify independent factors associated with the outcome in each age group.ResultsWe enrolled 735 patients, 515 elderly and 222 non-elderly. There was no difference in in-hospital mortality rate between the two groups (39.0% in the elderly and 32.9% in the non-elderly; p = 0.116). In the elderly cohort, independent factors associated with in-hospital mortality were do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 12.89; 95% confidence interval (CI) 7.19–23.1; p < 0.001), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score (aOR 0.91; 95%CI 0.85–0.96; p = 0.002), hemoglobin level (aOR 0.9; 95%CI 0.82–0.98; p = 0.012) and the type of initial oxygen support (p = 0.05). Among non-elderly patients, independent factors were DNR status (aOR 6.81; 95%CI 3.18–14.59; p < 0.001), GCS score (aOR 0.89; 95%CI 0.8–0.99; p = 0.025), platelet level (aOR 1; 95%CI 1–1; p = 0.038), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (aOR 1.12; 95%CI 0.99–1.28; p = 0.078), and the type of initial oxygen support p = 0.079).ConclusionIn pneumonia patients presenting to the ED, DNR status, lower GCS score, and more invasive initial oxygen supplementation were independently associated with in-hospital mortality in both elderly and non-elderly groups. However, lower hemoglobin level was only associated with in-hospital mortality in the elderly, while higher CCI and lower platelet count were independent factors only in the non-elderly. These findings emphasize the importance of age-specific considerations for the disease, and these factors are potential prognostic markers that may be used in clinical practice to improve patient outcomes.

Association Between Opening a Palliative Care Unit and Hospital Care for Patients With Serious Illness.

Background: Palliative care units (PCUs) are devoted to intensive management of symptoms and other palliative care needs. We examined the association between opening a PCU and acute care processes at a single U.S. academic medical center. Methods: We retrospectively compared acute care processes for seriously ill patients admitted before and after the opening of a PCU at a single academic medical center. Outcomes included rates of change in code status to do-not-resuscitate (DNR) and comfort measures only (CMO) status, and time to DNR and CMO. We calculated unadjusted and adjusted rates and used logistic regression to assess interaction between care period and palliative care consultation. Results: There were 16,611 patients in the pre-PCU period and 18,305 patients in the post-PCU period. The post-PCU cohort was slightly older, with a higher Charlson index (p < 0.001 for both). Post-PCU, unadjusted rates of DNR and CMO increased from 16.4% to 18.3% (p < 0.001) and 9.3% to 11.5% (p < 0.001), respectively. Post-PCU, median time to DNR was unchanged (0 days), and time to CMO decreased from 6 to 5 days. The adjusted odds ratio was 1.08 (p = 0.01) for DNR and 1.19 (p < 0.001) for CMO. Significant interaction between care period and palliative care consultation for DNR (p = 0.04) and CMO (p = 0.01) suggests an important role for palliative care engagement. Conclusions: The opening of a PCU at a single center was associated with increased rates of DNR and CMO status for seriously ill patients.

Clinical factors associated with adverse clinical outcomes in elderly versus non-elderly COVID-19 emergency patients: a multi-center observational study

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has caused over 6 million deaths worldwide. The elderly accounted for a large proportion of patients with their mortality rate largely higher than the non-elderly. However, limited studies have explored clinical factors associated with poor clinical outcomes in this important population. Therefore, this study aimed to determine factors independently associated with adverse clinical outcomes among COVID-19 elderly patients.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter observational study at five emergency departments (EDs) in Thailand. Patients over 18 years old diagnosed with COVID-19 between January and December 2021 were included. We classified patients into elderly (age ≥ 65 years) and non-elderly (age < 65 years). The primary clinical outcome was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes were endotracheal intubation and intensive care unit admission. We identified independent factors associating with these outcomes both in the whole population and separately by age group using multivariate logistic regression models.ResultsA total of 978 patients were included, 519 (53.1%) were elderly and 459 (46.9%) were non-elderly, and 254 (26%) died at hospital discharge. The mortality rate was significantly higher in the elderly group (39.1% versus 14.3%, p<0.001)). In the elderly, age (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.13; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1—1.2; p<0.001), male sex (aOR 3.64; 95%CI 1.5–8.8; p=0.004), do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status (aOR 12.46; 95%CI 3.8–40.7; p<0.001), diastolic blood pressure (aOR 0.96; 95%CI 0.9–1.0; p=0.002), body temperature (aOR 1.74; 95%CI 1.0–2.9; p=0.036), and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score (aOR 0.71; 95%CI 0.5–1.0; p=0.026) were independent baseline and physiologic factors associated with in-hospital mortality. Only DNR status and GCS score were associated with in-hospital mortality in both the elderly and non-elderly, as well as the overall population. Lower total bilirubin was independently associated with in-hospital mortality in the elderly (aOR 0.34; 95%CI 0.1–0.9; p=0.035), while a higher level was associated with the outcome in the non-elderly. C-reactive protein (CRP) was the only laboratory factor independently associated with all three study outcomes in the elderly (aOR for in-hospital mortality 1.01; 95%CI 1.0–1.0; p=0.006).ConclusionImportant clinical factors associated with in-hospital mortality in elderly COVID-19 patients were age, sex, DNR status, diastolic blood pressure, body temperature, GCS score, total bilirubin, and CRP. These parameters may aid in triage and ED disposition decision-making in this very important patient population during times of limited resources during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Treatment and outcome variation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest among four urban hospitals in Detroit

AimsTo determine whether out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) post-resuscitation management and outcomes differ between four Detroit hospitals. IntroductionSignificant variation exists in treatment/outcomes from OHCA. Disparities between hospitals serving a similar population is not well known. MethodsRetrospective OHCA data was collected from the Detroit-Cardiac Arrest Registry (DCAR) between January 2014 to December 2019. Four hospitals were compared on two treatments (angiography, do not resuscitate (DNR)) and two outcomes (cerebral performance category (CPC) ≤ 2, in-hospital death). Models for death and CPC were tested with and without coronary angiography and DNR status. Results999 patients at hospitals A - D differed (p < 0.05) before multivariable adjustment by age, race, witnessed arrest, dispatch-emergency department (ED) time, TTM, coronary angiography, DNR order, and in-hospital death. Rates of death and CPC ≤ 2 were worse in Hospital A (82.8%, 10%, respectively) compared to others (69.1%, 14.1%). After multivariable adjustment, Hospital A performed angiography less compared to B (OR = 0.17) and was more likely to initiate new DNR status than B (OR = 2.9), C (OR = 16.1), or D (OR = 3.6). CPC ≤ 2 were worse in Hospital A compared to B (OR = 0.27) and D (OR = 0.35). After sensitivity analysis, CPC ≤ 2 odds did not differ for A versus B (OR = 0.58, adjusted for angiography) or D (OR = 0.65, adjusted for DNR). Odds of death, despite angiography and DNR differences, were worse in Hospital A compared to B (OR = 1.87) and D (OR = 1.81). ConclusionDiffering rates of DNR and coronary angiography was associated with observed disparities in favorable neurologic outcome, but not death, between four Detroit hospitals.

The affordable care act and do-not-resuscitate orders: Differences by race and ethnicity

BackgroundThe Affordable Care Act (ACA) created new payment rules that provided reimbursement for physicians to engage in advance care planning (ACP) conversations with patients. This reimbursement policy has the potential to increase ACP participation, including among racial and ethnic minority groups that have had lower ACP participation. ObjectivesTo examine whether the ACP payment rules were associated with an increase in use of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders, particularly among racial and ethnic minority groups, among patients diagnosed with heart failure (HF) in California. MethodsThe California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) Patient Discharge Data Set was used to identify a cohort of elderly patients with a principal diagnosis of HF. This study included 432,520 hospital admissions of patients over the age of 65 with a primary diagnosis of HF between 2012 and 2018. DNR status was identified using International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modification Ninth and Tenth Revision, codes. ResultsThere was a small increase in the utilization of DNR orders overall after the ACA reimbursement policy, but the change was not significantly different for all racial and ethnic groups when compared to white non-Hispanic patients. ConclusionsACP payment rules provided in the ACA were associated with increased utilization of DNR, but the effect was not significantly different for racial and ethnic minorities hospitalized with HF in CA. Additional efforts are needed to increase ACP participation among racial and ethnic minorities.

Do-not-resuscitate (DNR) Orders' Awareness and Perception Among Physicians: a National Survey.

The concept of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders began when medical and surgical interventions increased the possibility of resuscitation in dying patients. Healthcare providers should start to care more about the quality of life rather than quantity. The acceptance of signing DNR orders varies among physicians owing to different reasons and conceptions. The aim of this national survey was to evaluate the extent of physicians' knowledge and attitude towards do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders in different hospitals and specialties in Saudi Arabia. A cross-sectional study was conducted in Saudi Arabia and other Arab Gulf countries between March 2019 and May 2021. A total of 409 physicians completed the questionnaire (53.3% male, 47% of the participants were less than 30 years of age). Most participants had their residency medical training in Saudi Arabia (73.6%, n=281); 33.5% were emergency medicine (EM) physicians. Among 409 patients, 92.7% (n=379 ) were familiar with the DNR (do-not-resuscitate) ter. Half of the participants had never discussed a DNR status with the patient or family (n=215, 52.6%), however, only 38.4% had read the policy. A total of 275 (67.2%) participants were aware that their institute had a DNR policy, and a lack of patient/family understanding was the most common barrier for the majority to initiate DNR orders (53.9%, n=222). Most of the participants (65.8%, n=269) acknowledged a lack of training and understanding of the concepts of DNR orders. Most physicians who participated in this study were aware of the DNR order concept; however, half of them had never discussed or signed a DNR order. Patients and their families' misunderstandings were considered the main barriers. In addition, the lack of training in the concepts of DNR orders was considered a major obstacle.

1771. End-of-Life Use of Antibiotics in Pediatric Patients

Abstract Background Antibiotic use at the end of life is common in adult patients but little is known about children. While important to treat and prevent infection in these vulnerable populations, unnecessary antibiotic exposure may result in adverse events and selection of antimicrobial resistant organisms. The purpose of this study was to describe clinical features of pediatric patients who receive antibiotic use at the end of life, quantify antibiotic utilization, and determine indications for antibiotic use. Methods We performed a retrospective review of antibiotic use in the last 30 days of life who had palliative care consultation at a tertiary care pediatric hospital from June 2012 to February 2020. Demographic characteristics, primary diagnosis, do not resuscitate (DNR) status, and hospice status were assessed. Days of antibiotic therapy were recorded. Results Of the 151 patients identified, 67 (44%) were female, and the median age at death was 3.5 years (IQR: 0.50-13.8 years). Of the causes of death, 133 (88%) had chronic progressive illness, 13 (8.7%) had a chronic static illness, 5 (3.3%) and had an acute illness. The most common primary diagnoses were oncologic (n=56, 37%), cardiac (n=32, 21%), genetic metabolic (n=19, 13%), and neurological (n=16, 11%). DNR status was recorded for 109 (72%) patients, and 11 (7.2%) had documented hospice status. Antimicrobial use was most common for a known organism (n=75, 50%), followed by no documented indication (n=33, 22.8%), empiric therapy (n=31, 20.5%), and prophylaxis only (n=2.7%). Of the 2126 total days of therapy of antibiotic use, the most common agents were vancomycin (n=379), meropenem (n=254), ceftazidime (n=171), and cefepime (n=143). The median number of unique antibiotics received in the last 30 days of life was 2 (IQR 0-5). Conclusion Antibiotic exposure was common in pediatric patients at the end of life, particularly for vancomycin and meropenem, even without documented infection. Opportunities for future interventions include better discussion of goals of care between providers and parents and risk of adverse events, particularly if suspicion of infection is low. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

Differences in palliative opportunities across diagnosis groups in children with cancer.

Childhood cancer causes significant physical and emotional stress. Patients and families benefit from palliative care (PC) to reduce symptom burden, improve quality of life, and enhance family-centered care. We evaluated palliative opportunities across leukemia/lymphoma (LL), solid tumors (ST), and central nervous system (CNS) tumor groups. A priori, nine palliative opportunities were defined: disease progression/relapse, hematopoietic stem cell transplant, phase 1 trial enrollment, admission for severe symptoms, social concerns or end-of-life (EOL) care, intensive care admission, do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status, and hospice enrollment. A single-center retrospective review was completed on 0-18-year olds with cancer who died from January 1, 2012 to November 30, 2017. Demographic, disease, and treatment data were collected. Descriptive statistics were performed. Opportunities were evaluated from diagnosis to death and across disease groups. Included patients (n=296) had LL (n=87), ST (n=114), or CNS tumors (n=95). Palliative opportunities were more frequent in patients with ST (median 8) and CNS tumors (median 7) versus LL (median 5, p=.0005). While patients with ST had more progression/relapse opportunities (p<.0001), patients with CNS tumors had more EOL opportunities (p<.0001), earlier PC consultation, DNR status, and hospice enrollment. Palliative opportunities increased toward the EOL in all diseases (p<.0001). PC was consulted in 108 (36%) patients: LL (48%), ST (30%), and CNS (34%, p=.02). All children with cancer incur many events warranting PC support. Patients with ST and CNS tumors had more palliative opportunities than LL, yet received less subspecialty PC. Understanding palliative opportunities within each disease group can guide PC utilization to ease patient and family stress.

Palliative Care Use in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction and Do-Not-Resuscitate Status From a Nationwide Inpatient Cohort

ObjectiveTo examine the predictors, treatments, and outcomes of the use of palliative care in patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) who had a do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order. Patients and MethodsUsing the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sampling database for 2015-2018, we examined the predictors, in-hospital procedures, and outcomes of palliative care recipients among patients with AMI who had a DNR order. ResultsWe identified 339,270 admissions with AMI that had a DNR order, including patients who received palliative care (n=113,215 [33.4%]). Compared with patients who did not receive palliative care, these patients were more frequently younger (median age, 81 vs 83 years; P<.001), were less likely to be female (50.9% [57,626 of 113,215] vs 54.7% [123,652 of 226,055]; P<.001), and were more likely to present with cardiac arrest (11.6% [13,133 of 113,215] vs 6.9% [15,598 of 226,055]; P<.001). Patients were more likely to receive palliative care at a large (odds ratio [OR], 1.47; 95% CI, 1.44 to 1.50) or teaching (OR, 2.10; 95% CI, 2.04 to 2.16) hospitals compared with small or rural ones. Patients receiving palliative care were less likely to be treated invasively, with reduced rates of invasive coronary angiography (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.47) and percutaneous coronary intervention (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.48), and were more likely to die in the hospital (52.4% [59,325 of 113,215] vs 22.9% [51,766 of 226,055]). ConclusionIn patients who had a DNR status and were hospitalized and received a diagnosis of AMI, only one-third received palliative care.

Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders and Outcomes for Patients with Pancreatic Cancer.

The impact of the do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order on patients with pancreatic cancer remains uncertain. In this study, we evaluated whether DNR status was associated with in-hospital mortality and costs for inpatient stay among patients hospitalized with pancreatic cancer. Data were obtained from the National Inpatient Sample, Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, which represents ∼20% of all discharges from US community hospitals; 40,246 pancreatic cancer admissions between 2011 and 2016 were included. Mortality was modeled using a logistic regression model; costs for inpatient stay were modeled using a multivariable generalized linear regression model. The sample included 6041 (15%) patients with a documented DNR order. After controlling for covariates, patients with a DNR order had approximately six times greater odds of mortality compared with patients without a DNR order (odds ratio 5.90, p < 0.0001). Compared with patients who survived without a DNR order during the hospital stay, patients who had a DNR order and died during the hospital stay had significantly lower costs (-US$983; p = 0.0270), and patients who died without a DNR order during the hospital stay had significantly higher costs (US$5638; p < 0.0001). Patients who survived with a DNR order had costs that were not significantly different from patients who survived without a DNR order. The presence of a DNR order among patients with pancreatic cancer was significantly associated with higher mortality risk as well as lower costs for patients who died during the hospital stay. However, DNR status was not significantly associated with costs for pancreatic cancer patients who were discharged alive.

IN HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS WITH IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATORS: DOCUMENTED CODE STATUS DISCUSSIONS INFREQUENTLY REFERENCE THE IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER-DEFIBRILLATOR (ICD) DEVICE

IN HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS WITH IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATORS: DOCUMENTED CODE STATUS DISCUSSIONS INFREQUENTLY REFERENCE THE IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER-DEFIBRILLATOR (ICD) DEVICE