Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Code Status Documentation in the Outpatient Electronic Medical Records of Patients with Metastatic Cancer

  • Brief Report
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Advanced care planning (ACP) is considered an essential component of medical care in the United States, especially in patients with incurable diseases. However, little is known about clinical practices in outpatient oncology settings related to discussing end-of-life care and documenting code status preferences in ambulatory medical records.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the rate of documentation of code status in the electronic longitudinal medical records (LMR) of patients with metastatic cancer.

DESIGN

Retrospective review of 2,498 patients with metastatic solid tumors at an academic cancer center. An electronic patient database and the LMR were queried to identify demographic information, cancer type, number of clinic visits, and documentation of code status.

PARTICIPANTS

The sample consisted of adult patients with metastatic prostate, breast, ovarian, bladder kidney, colorectal, non-colorectal gastrointestinal (GI), and lung cancers.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcome was the percentage of documented code status in the LMR.

MAIN RESULTS

Among the 2,498 patients, 20.3% had a documented code status. Code status was designated most frequently in patients with non-colorectal GI (193/609, 31.7%) and lung (179/583, 30.7%) cancers and least frequently in patients with genitourinary malignancies [bladder/kidney (4/89, 4.5%), ovarian (4/93, 4.3%), and prostate (7/365, 1.9%) cancers]. Independent predictors of having documented code status included religious affiliation, cancer type, and a greater number of visits to the cancer center. Younger patients and black patients were less likely to be designated as DNR/DNI.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the incurable nature of metastatic cancer, only a minority of patients had a code status documented in the electronic medical record.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Emanuel LL, Barry MJ, Stoeckle JD, Ettelson LM, Emanuel EJ. Advance directives for medical care—a case for greater use. N Engl J Med. 1991;324(13):889–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. A controlled trial to improve care for seriously ill hospitalized patients. The study to understand prognoses and preferences for outcomes and risks of treatments (SUPPORT). The SUPPORT Principal Investigators. Jama. 1995;274(20):1591–8.

  3. Teno JM, Licks S, Lynn J, et al. Do advance directives provide instructions that direct care? SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment.[see comment]. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997;45(4):508–12.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lo B, Steinbrook R. Resuscitating advance directives. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(14):1501–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Perkins HS. Controlling death: the false promise of advance directives. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147(1):51–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fagerlin A, Schneider CE. Enough. The failure of the living will. Hastings Cent Rep. 2004;34(2):30–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sehgal NL, Wachter RM. Identification of inpatient DNR status: a safety hazard begging for standardization. J Hosp Med. 2007;2(6):366–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kernerman P, Cook DJ, Griffith LE. Documenting life-support preferences in hospitalized patients. J Crit Care. 1997;12(4):155–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Aronsky D, Kasworm E, Jacobson JA, Haug PJ, Dean NC. Electronic screening of dictated reports to identify patients with do-not-resuscitate status. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2004;11(5):403–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Heffner JE, Barbieri C, Fracica P, Brown LK. Communicating do-not-resuscitate orders with a computer-based system. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158(10):1090–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Reisfield GM, Wallace SK, Munsell MF, Webb FJ, Alvarez ER, Wilson GR. Survival in cancer patients undergoing in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a meta-analysis. Resuscitation. 2006;71(2):152–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Varon J, Marik PE. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation in patients with cancer. Am J Hospice Palliat Care. 2007;24(3):224–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hamel MB, Teno JM, Goldman L, et al. Patient age and decisions to withhold life-sustaining treatments from seriously ill, hospitalized adults. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment. Ann Intern Med. 1999;130(2):116–25.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Borum ML, Lynn J, Zhong Z. The effects of patient race on outcomes in seriously ill patients in SUPPORT: an overview of economic impact, medical intervention, and end-of-life decisions. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000;48(5 Suppl):S194–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. McKinley ED, Garrett JM, Evans AT, Danis M. Differences in end-of-life decision making among black and white ambulatory cancer patients. J Gen Intern Med. 1996;11(11):651–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Shepardson LB, Gordon HS, Ibrahim SA, Harper DL, Rosenthal GE. Racial variation in the use of do-not-resuscitate orders. J Gen Intern Med. 1999;14(1):15–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Smith AK, McCarthy EP, Paulk E, et al. Racial and ethnic differences in advance care planning among patients with cancer: impact of terminal illness acknowledgment, religiousness, and treatment preferences. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(25):4131–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Yun YH, Lee CG, Kim SY, et al. The attitudes of cancer patients and their families toward the disclosure of terminal illness. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(2):307–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Weeks JC, Cook EF, O'Day SJ, et al. Relationship between cancer patients’ predictions of prognosis and their treatment preferences. JAMA. 1998;279(21):1709–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bradley EH, Hallemeier AG, Fried TR, et al. Documentation of discussions about prognosis with terminally ill patients. Am J Med. 2001;111(3):218–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This study was supported by a gift from the Joanne Hill Monahan Cancer Fund and Golf Fights Cancer.

Conflict of Interest

None disclosed.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer S. Temel MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Temel, J.S., Greer, J.A., Admane, S. et al. Code Status Documentation in the Outpatient Electronic Medical Records of Patients with Metastatic Cancer. J GEN INTERN MED 25, 150–153 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-009-1161-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-009-1161-z

KEY WORDS

Navigation