Code status documentation in the electronic medical record for patients with stage IV pancreatic cancer.

Link to article at PubMed

Related Articles

Code status documentation in the electronic medical record for patients with stage IV pancreatic cancer.

J Clin Oncol. 2016 Mar;34(7_suppl):125

Authors: Armstrong JM, Ma JD, Revta C, Roeland E

125 Background: Improving incidence of code status documentation in the electronic medical record (EMR) has been suggested a better guidance for clinical care compared with a traditional advance directive. We have previously reported that in the absence of a template in the EMR, code status documentation was 36% and inconsistent in patients with advanced cancer. Utilizing a different cohort of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, we examined the prevalence of EMR code status documentation.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis in patients with analytic metastatic pancreatic cancer (2008-2014) was conducted at a single, academic medical center. The primary objective was to determine prevalence of code status documentation in the EMR. Secondary objectives were to determine documentation author, location in the EMR, and time from documentation until death. Patients were identified from a tumor registry and code status documentation was identified in the scanned media, demographics tab, problem list, or using key search terms in the EMR.
RESULTS: 169 patients with stage IV pancreatic cancer were identified. Seventy-five percent (n = 127) had a code status documented. Of those with documented code status, 44.9% (n = 57) were full code/full care, 22.0% (n = 28) were DNR/comfort care, 18.9% (n = 24) were DNR/full care, 13.4% (n = 17) were DNR/not specified, and 0.8% (n = 1) was limited DNR/full code. EMR locations for code status documentation included: 71.7% (n = 91) discharge summary, 10.2% (n = 13) inpatient encounter, 10.2% (n = 13) history & physical, 6.3% (n = 8) media tab, 0.8% (n = 1) telephone encounter, and 0.8% (n = 1) admission note. Code status documentation was completed by hospitalists (42.5%, n = 54), medicine residents (21.3%, n = 27), and primary oncologists (4.7%, n = 6). Mean difference for date of code status documentation and death was 67±145 d.
CONCLUSIONS: Code status documentation was higher for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer compared to patients with advanced cancer from a previous study at our institution. Research is needed to determine if full code/full care is a default selection or a true representation of a patient's wishes. Future efforts need to consider a standardized location for code status documentation in the EMR.

PMID: 28152940 [PubMed - in process]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *