IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v19y1999i1p16-26.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Stability of Preferences for Life-sustaining Care among Persons with AIDS in the Boston Health Study

Author

Listed:
  • Joel S. Weissman
  • Jennifer S. Haas
  • Floyd J. Fowler JR.
  • Constantine Gatsonis
  • Michael P. Massagli
  • George R. Seage
  • Paul Cleary

Abstract

Background. Clinicians recognize the importance of eliciting patient preferences for life-sustaining care, yet little is known about the stability of those preferences for pa tients with serious disease. Objectives. To examine the stability of preferences for life- sustaining care among persons with AIDS and to assess factors associated with changes in preferences. Design. Two patient surveys and medical record reviews, administered four months apart in 1990-1991. Setting. Three health care settings in Boston. Patients. 252 of 505 eligible persons with AIDS who participated in both base line and follow-up surveys. Main outcome measures. A single question assessing de sire for cardiac resuscitation and a scale of preferences for life-extending treatment conditional on hypothetical health states. Results. Approximately one-fourth of the re spondents changed their minds about life-sustaining care during a four-month period. Of patients who initially desired cardiac resuscitation, 23% decided to forego it four months later, and of those who initially said they would decline care, 34% later said they would accept it. Of those who initially desired any of the life-extending treatments, 25% decided to forego them four months later, and of those who initially said they would decline life-extending care, 24% later said they would accept some treatment. Patients reporting changes in physical function, pain, or suicide ideation were more likely to modify their desires to be resuscitated (all p ≤ 0.05). Patients lacking an advance directive, not completing high school, or becoming more severely ill were more likely to change their preferences on the Life Extension scale (p ≤ 0.05). Patients who discussed their preferences with at least one physician were just as likely as others to change desires for cardiac resuscitation. Age, gender, race, emotional health, clinical severity, social support, and site of care were not significant correlates of change for either measure. Conclusions. Health care providers should periodically reassess preferences for life-sustaining care, particularly for patients with progressive disease, given the instability in patient preferences. However, predictors of instability may vary with how preferences are measured. In particular, changes in health status may be related to instability of preferences for certain types of treatments. Key words: life-sustaining care; patient preferences; AIDS. (Med Decis Making 1999;19:16-26)

Suggested Citation

  • Joel S. Weissman & Jennifer S. Haas & Floyd J. Fowler JR. & Constantine Gatsonis & Michael P. Massagli & George R. Seage & Paul Cleary, 1999. "The Stability of Preferences for Life-sustaining Care among Persons with AIDS in the Boston Health Study," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 19(1), pages 16-26, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:19:y:1999:i:1:p:16-26
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9901900103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X9901900103
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X9901900103?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Floyd J. Fowler JR. & Paul D. Cleary & Michael P. Massagli & Joel Weissman & Arnold Epstein, 1995. "The Role of Reluctance to Give Up life in the Measurement of the Values of Health states," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 15(3), pages 195-200, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vandrevala, Tushna & Hampson, Sarah E. & Daly, Tom & Arber, Sara & Thomas, Hilary, 2006. "Dilemmas in decision-making about resuscitation--a focus group study of older people," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(7), pages 1579-1593, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eve Wittenberg & Lisa Prosser, 2011. "Ordering errors, objections and invariance in utility survey responses," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 225-241, July.
    2. Valerio Benedetto & Luís Filipe & Catherine Harris & Joseph Spencer & Carmel Hickson & Andrew Clegg, 2023. "Analytical Frameworks and Outcome Measures in Economic Evaluations of Digital Health Interventions: A Methodological Systematic Review," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(1), pages 125-138, January.
    3. Mandy Ryan & Mabelle Amaya‐Amaya, 2005. "‘Threats’ to and hopes for estimating benefits," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(6), pages 609-619, June.
    4. Trude Arnesen & Mari Trommald, 2005. "Are QALYs based on time trade‐off comparable? – A systematic review of TTO methodologies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(1), pages 39-53, January.
    5. G. Ardine De Wit & Jan J.V. Busschbach & Frank Th. De Charro, 2000. "Sensitivity and perspective in the valuation of health status: whose values count?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(2), pages 109-126, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:19:y:1999:i:1:p:16-26. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.