Context Changes Choices: A Prospective Study of the Effects of Hospitalization on Life-Sustaining Treatment Preferences

Abstract

Objective.Policy and law encouraging individuals to document their wishes for life-sustaining medical treatment in advance of serious illness assumes that these wishes are unaffected by changes in health condition. To test this assumption, the authors examine the life-sustaining treatment preferences of a sample of elderly adults prior to, soon after, and several months after a hospitalization experience. Subjects and Methods. As part of the Advance Directives, Values Assessment, and Communication Enhancement (ADVANCE) project, 401 individuals older than age 65 participated in 3 annual interviews. A subsample of 88 individuals who were hospitalized for greater than 48 hours during the course of the study participated in an additional “recovery” interview conducted soon after their release from the hospital (M = 14 days postdischarge). At each interview, subjects indicated their desire to receive 4 life-sustaining medical treatments in 4 serious illness scenarios.Results. Treatment preferences showed a significant “hospitalization dip,” with subjects reporting less desire to receive life-sustaining treatment at the recovery interview than they did at the annual interview conducted prior to hospitalization, but with desire returning to near prehospitalization levels at the annual interview conducted several months after hospitalization. This dip was more pronounced in preferences for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and artificial nutrition and hydration than in preferences for less invasive treatments. Conclusions. Preferences for life-sustaining treatment are dependent on the context in which they are made, and thus individuals may express different treatment preferences when they are healthy than when they are ill. These results challenge a key psychological assumption underlying the use of instructional advance directives in end-of-life decision making.

Keywords

end-of-life decision making advance directives life-sustaining treatment preferences

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Dresser R . Precommitment: A misguided strategy for securing death with dignity. Texas Law Rev. 2003;81:1823-1847.

Bradley E , Walker L , Blecher BB , Wettle T . Assessing capacity to participate in discussions of advance directives in nursing homes: findings from a study of the Patient Self Determination Act. J Am Ger Soc. 1997;45:79-83.

American Association of Retired Persons . Tomorrow's Choices: Preparing Now for Future Legal, Financial, and Health Care Decisions. Washington, DC: American Association of Retired Persons; 1988.

American Geriatrics Society Public Policy Committee . AGS Position Statement: Medical Treatment Decisions Concerning Elderly Persons. New York: American Geriatrics Society; 1991.

Orentlicher D . Advance medical directives. JAMA. 1990;263: 2365-2367.

101st Congress—Second Session . Patient Self-Determination Act. 1990; Public Laws 101-508 to 101-548.

Ditto PH . Self-determination, substituted judgment, and the psychology of end-of-life medical decision making. In: Werth J , Blevins D , eds. Psychosocial Issues Near the End of Life: A Resource for Professional Care Providers. Washington, DC: APA Press; 2006.

Fagerlin A , Schneider, CE . Enough: the failure of the living will. Hastings Center Report. 2004;34:30-42.

Loewenstein G , Schkade D . Wouldn't it be nice? Predicting future feelings. In: Diener E , Schwarz N , Kahneman D , eds. Hedonic Psychology: Scientific Approaches to Enjoyment, Suffering and Well-Being. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 1999.

10.

Wilson TD , Gilbert DT . Affective forecasting. In: Zanna M , ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 35). New York: Elsevier; 2003.

11.

Boyd NF , Sutherland, HJ , Heasman KZ , Tritchler DL , Cummings BJ . Whose utilities for decision analysis? Med Decis Making. 1990;10:58-67.

12.

Christensen-Szalanski JJ . Discount functions and the measurement of patients' values: women's decisions during childbirth. Med Decis Making. 1984;4:47-58.

13.

Jansen SJT , Stiggelbout, AM , Wakker PP , et al. Unstable preferences: a shift in valuation or an effect of the elicitation procedure? Med Decis Making. 2000;20:62-71.

14.

Riis J , Loewenstein G , Baron J , et al. Ignorance of hedonic adaptation to hemodialysis: a study using ecological momentary assessment. J Exp Psych Gen. 2005;134:3-9.

15.

Sackett DL , Torrance GW . The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public. J Chronic Dis. 1978;31: 697-704.

16.

Schkade DA , Kahneman D . Does living in California make people happy? A focusing illusion in judgments of life satisfaction. Psychol Sci. 1998;9:340-346.

17.

Smith DM , Sherriff RL , Damschroder L , et al. Misremembering colostomies? Former patients give lower utility ratings than do current patients. Health Psychol. In press.

18.

Danis M , Garrett J , Harris R , Patrick DL . Stability of choices about life-sustaining treatments. Ann Intern Med. 1994;120:567-573.

19.

Rosenfeld KE , Wenger NS , Phillips RS , et al. Factors associated with change in resuscitation preference of seriously ill patients. The SUPPORT investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments. Arch Intern Med. 1996;156:1558-1564.

20.

Ditto PH , Danks JH , Smucker WD , et al. Advance directives as acts of communication: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:421-430.

21.

Ditto PH , Smucker WD , Danks JH , et al. Stability of older adults' preferences for life-sustaining medical treatment. Health Psychol. 2003;22:605-615.

22.

Andresen EM , Carter WB , Malmgren JA , Patrick DL . Screening for depression in well older adults: evaluation of a short form of the CES-D. Am J Prev Med. 1994;10:77-84.

23.

Ware JE , Sherbourne CD . The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). Med Care. 1992;30:473-483.

24.

Seckler AB , Meier DE , Mulvihill M , et al. Substituted judgment: how accurate are proxy predictions? Ann Intern Med. 1991;115:92-98.

25.

Uhlmann RF , Pearlman RA , Cain KC . Physicians' and spouses' predictions of elderly patients' resuscitation preferences. J Gerontol. 1988;43:M115-M121.

26.

Emanuel LL , Emanuel EJ , Stoeckle JD , Hummel LR , Barry MJ . Advance directives: stability of patients' treatment choices. Arch Intern Med. 1994;154:209-217.

27.

Houts R , Smucker WD , Jacobson JA , et al. Predicting elderly outpatients' life-sustaining treatment preference over time: the majority rules. Med Decis Making. 2002;22:39-52.

28.

Smucker WD , Houts R , Danks JH , et al. Modal preferences predict elderly patients' life-sustaining treatment preferences as well as chosen surrogates. Med Decis Making. 2000;20:271-280.

29.

Gilbert DT , Pinel EC , Wilson TD , Blumberg SJ , Wheatley TP . Immune neglect: a source of durability bias in affective forecasting. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998;75:617-638.

30.

Wilson TD , Wheatley TP , Meyers JM , Gilbert DT , Axsom D . Focalism: a source of durability bias in affective forecasting. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000;78:821-836.

31.

Trope Y , Liberman, N . Temporal construal. Psychol Rev. 2003;110:401-421.

32.

VanBoven L , Loewenstein G . Social projection of transient visceral feelings. Person Soc Psychol Bull. 2003;29:1159-1168.

33.

Carmel S , Mutran E . Stability of elderly persons' expressed preferences regarding the use of life-sustaining treatments. Soc Sci Med. 1999;49:303-311.

34.

Elster J . Ulysses and the Sirens. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1979.

35.

Emanuel L . Appropriate and inappropriate use of advance directives. Journal Clin Ethics. 1994;5:357-359.

36.

Ditto PH , Hawkins NA , Pizarro DA . Imagining the end of life. Motivation & Emotion. In press.