Estimating the Impact of Words Used by Physicians in Advance Care Planning Discussions: The "Do You Want Everything Done?" Effect
- PMID: 32166233
- PMCID: PMC7063893
- DOI: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000000052
Estimating the Impact of Words Used by Physicians in Advance Care Planning Discussions: The "Do You Want Everything Done?" Effect
Abstract
To estimate the probability of a substitute decision maker choosing to withdraw life-sustaining therapy after hearing an affirmative patient response to the phrase "Do you want everything done?"
Design: Discrete choice experiment.
Setting: Single community hospital in Ontario.
Subjects: Nonrandom sampling of healthcare providers and the public.
Intervention: Online survey.
Measurements and main results: Of the 1,621 subjects who entered the survey, 692 consented and 432 completed the survey. Females comprised 73% of subjects. Over 95% of subjects were under 65 years old, and 50% had some intensive care-related exposure. Healthcare providers comprised 29% of the subjects. The relative importance of attributes for determining the probability of withdraw life-sustaining therapy by substitute decision makers was as follows: stated patient preferences equals to 23.4%; patient age equals to 20.6%; physical function prognosis equals to 15.2%; length of ICU stay equals to 14.4%; survival prognosis equals to 13.8%; and prognosis for communication equals to 12.6%. Using attribute level utilities, the probability of an substitute decision maker choosing to withdraw life-sustaining therapy after hearing a patient answer in the affirmative "Do you want everything done?" compared with "I would not want to live if I could not take care of myself" was 18.8% (95% CI, 17.2-20.4%) versus 59.8% (95% CI, 57.6-62.0%) after controlling for all the other five attribute levels in the scenario: age greater than 80 years; survival prognosis less than 1%; length of ICU stay greater than 6 months; communication equals to unresponsive; and physical equals to bed bound.
Conclusions: Using a discrete choice experiment survey, we estimated the impact of a commonly employed and poorly understood phrase physicians may use when discussing advance care plans with patients and their substitute decision makers on the subsequent withdraw life-sustaining therapies. This phrase is predicted to dramatically reduce the likelihood of withdraw life-sustaining therapy even in medically nonbeneficial scenarios and potentially contribute to low-value end-of-life care and outcomes. The immediate cessation of this term should be reinforced in medical training for all healthcare providers who participate in advance care planning.
Keywords: advance care planning; decision modeling; healthcare survey; life support systems; medical power of attorney; withdrawing care.
Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.
Similar articles
-
"Everything has been tried and his heart can't recover…": A Descriptive Review of "Do Everything!" in the Archive of Ontario Consent and Capacity Board.BMC Med Ethics. 2022 Jun 27;23(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s12910-022-00796-7. BMC Med Ethics. 2022. PMID: 35761229 Free PMC article.
-
Nonbeneficial treatment Canada: definitions, causes, and potential solutions from the perspective of healthcare practitioners*.Crit Care Med. 2015 Feb;43(2):270-81. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000704. Crit Care Med. 2015. PMID: 25377017
-
Decision-Making on Withholding or Withdrawing Life Support in the ICU: A Worldwide Perspective.Chest. 2017 Aug;152(2):321-329. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2017.04.176. Epub 2017 May 5. Chest. 2017. PMID: 28483610
-
Decision-making for long-term tube-feeding in cognitively impaired elderly people.CMAJ. 1999 Jun 15;160(12):1705-9. CMAJ. 1999. PMID: 10410631 Free PMC article.
-
The effect of statutory limitations on the authority of substitute decision makers on the care of patients in the intensive care unit: case examples and review of state laws affecting withdrawing or withholding life-sustaining treatment.J Intensive Care Med. 2014 Mar-Apr;29(2):71-80. doi: 10.1177/0885066611433551. Epub 2012 Jan 17. J Intensive Care Med. 2014. PMID: 22257784 Review.
Cited by
-
"Everything has been tried and his heart can't recover…": A Descriptive Review of "Do Everything!" in the Archive of Ontario Consent and Capacity Board.BMC Med Ethics. 2022 Jun 27;23(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s12910-022-00796-7. BMC Med Ethics. 2022. PMID: 35761229 Free PMC article.
-
The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.Pharmacoeconomics. 2025 Aug;43(8):879-936. doi: 10.1007/s40273-025-01495-y. Epub 2025 May 21. Pharmacoeconomics. 2025. PMID: 40397369 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of a program using a physician assistant and an electronic patient-provider communication tool to facilitate discussions about goals of care in older adults in hospital: a pilot study.CMAJ Open. 2020 Sep 14;8(3):E577-E584. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20200022. Print 2020 Jul-Sep. CMAJ Open. 2020. PMID: 32928879 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Mark NM, Rayner SG, Lee NJ, et al. Global variability in withholding and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in the intensive care unit: A systematic review. Intensive Care Med 2015411572–1585 - PubMed
-
- Sudore RL. Preparing surrogates for complex decision making. JAMA Intern Med 2019179E1–E2 - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources