Nav: Home

Do not resuscitate (DNR) orders impact hospital rankings

December 15, 2015

(Boston)-- Healthcare consumers, policy and insurance organizations rely heavily on hospital ranking reports, but how accurate are they? Do differences in patient preferences for life-sustaining treatments that exist between different hospitals affect how hospitals are ranked?

Researchers from Boston University School of Medicine (BUSM) examined how hospital differences in patient preferences for life-sustaining treatments (do not resuscitate, or DNR, orders) affected hospital rankings for pneumonia. They found that including patient decisions about life-sustaining treatments in the statistical models used to determine hospital mortality rankings resulted in substantial changes to hospital rankings that could affect hospital ratings, and reimbursements and financial penalties. This study appears in the JAMA Internal Medicine.

"Our findings suggest that current methods of comparing hospitals, which do not account for patient DNR status, penalize potentially high-quality hospitals admitting a larger proportion of patients who had chosen to forego resuscitation. Therefore, accounting for DNR status in programs that compare hospital mortality outcomes may substantially affect publicly reportable hospital rankings and hospital reimbursements," explained corresponding author Allan Walkey, MD, MSc, assistant professor of medicine at Boston University School of Medicine and a pulmonary, allergy, sleep & critical care physician at Boston Medical Center.

According to Walkey these findings have significant ramifications for methods used to assess patient outcomes and hospital quality. "Without accounting for patient preferences for life-sustaining treatments, hospitals admitting more patients who chose a 'DNR' status appeared to be poorer quality hospitals for patient mortality measures. However, our results suggested the opposite: hospitals with a larger number of patients who chose 'DNR' status tended to have greater patient satisfaction, high performance on measures of pneumonia care, and lower mortality after accounting for patient 'DNR' preferences. Our results also demonstrate the importance of collecting data regarding patient decisions for life-sustaining care and accounting for these decisions when comparing hospitals. Improving our ability to determine hospital 'quality' will facilitate efforts to improve care for all patients," he added.
-end-
Funding for this study was provided by the National Institutes of Health (NIH)/National Heart Lung and Blood Institute K01HL116768 (AJW), Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality K08HS020672 (CRC), and NIH K07 CA138772 (RSW). This study was also supported by resources from the Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial VA Hospital, Bedford, MA (RSW) and a Boston University School of Medicine Department of Medicine Career Investment Award (AJW).

Contact: Gina DiGravio, 617-638-8480, ginad@bu.edu

Boston University Medical Center

Related Decisions Articles:

How do brains remember decisions?
Mammal brains -- including those of humans -- store and recall impressive amounts of information based on our good and bad decisions and interactions in an ever-changing world.
How the brain helps us make good decisions -- and bad ones
A prevailing theory in neuroscience holds that people make decisions based on integrated global calculations that occur within the frontal cortex of the brain.
How we make complex decisions
MIT neuroscientists have identified a brain circuit that helps break complex decisions down into smaller pieces.
Opposites attract and, together, they can make surprisingly gratifying decisions
Little is known about how consumers make decisions together. A new study by researchers from Boston College, Georgia Tech and Washington State University finds pairs with opposing interpersonal orientations -- the selfish versus the altruistic -- can reach amicable decisions about what to watch on TV, or where to eat, for example.
Group decisions: When more information isn't necessarily better
Modular -- or cliquey -- group structure isolates the flow of communication between individuals, which might seem counterproductive to survival.
How do we make moral decisions?
When it comes to making moral decisions, we often think of the golden rule: do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
When more women make decisions, the environment wins
When more women are involved in group decisions about land management, the group conserves more - particularly when offered financial incentives to do so, according to a new University of Colorado Boulder study published this week in Nature Climate Change.
Social threat learning influences our decisions
Learning what is dangerous by watching a video or being told (known as social learning) has just as strong an effect on our decision-making as first-hand experience of danger, researchers at Karolinska Institutet in Sweden report.
Nudging does not necessarily improve decisions
Nudging, the concept of influencing people's behavior without imposing rules, bans or coercion, is an idea that government officials and marketing specialists alike are keen to harness, and itis often viewed as a one-size-fits-all solution.
Nationality likely a key factor in life-and-death decisions
People making decisions about life-and-death situations consider individuals' nationalities when deciding who should be sacrificed to save others, according to a study out of the University of Waterloo.
More Decisions News and Decisions Current Events

Best Science Podcasts 2019

We have hand picked the best science podcasts for 2019. Sit back and enjoy new science podcasts updated daily from your favorite science news services and scientists.
Now Playing: TED Radio Hour

Rethinking Anger
Anger is universal and complex: it can be quiet, festering, justified, vengeful, and destructive. This hour, TED speakers explore the many sides of anger, why we need it, and who's allowed to feel it. Guests include psychologists Ryan Martin and Russell Kolts, writer Soraya Chemaly, former talk radio host Lisa Fritsch, and business professor Dan Moshavi.
Now Playing: Science for the People

#538 Nobels and Astrophysics
This week we start with this year's physics Nobel Prize awarded to Jim Peebles, Michel Mayor, and Didier Queloz and finish with a discussion of the Nobel Prizes as a way to award and highlight important science. Are they still relevant? When science breakthroughs are built on the backs of hundreds -- and sometimes thousands -- of people's hard work, how do you pick just three to highlight? Join host Rachelle Saunders and astrophysicist, author, and science communicator Ethan Siegel for their chat about astrophysics and Nobel Prizes.