Factors predicting the risk of loss of decisional capacity for medical assistance in dying: a retrospective database review.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Decision Making
Female
Humans
Logistic Models
Male
Mental Competency
Middle Aged
Multivariate Analysis
Neoplasms
/ epidemiology
Ontario
Palliative Care
/ standards
Physical Functional Performance
Predictive Value of Tests
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Suicide, Assisted
/ legislation & jurisprudence
Survival Rate
Terminal Care
/ standards
Tertiary Care Centers
Journal
CMAJ open
ISSN: 2291-0026
Titre abrégé: CMAJ Open
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101620603
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
entrez:
9
12
2020
pubmed:
10
12
2020
medline:
21
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Bill C-14, the legislation that legalized medical assistance in dying (MAiD) in Canada in 2016, outlines eligibility criteria and includes both a mandated 10-day reflection period and a requirement that the patient have capacity to consent at the time MAiD is provided. We examined clinical factors associated with shortened reflection periods or loss of capacity before provision of MAiD. This retrospective database review involved patients who requested MAiD at a tertiary care hospital in Toronto, Canada, between June 2016 and April 2019. We used logistic regression analyses to examine the association between the combined outcome of unanticipated loss of decisional capacity, shortening of the reflection period or death and the clinical risk factors of interest (age, sex, location of MAiD request [inpatient v. outpatient], score on palliative performance scale [PPS] and diagnosis [cancer v. noncancer]). We generated receiver operating characteristic curves to identify the PPS score (encompassing 5 functional domains: ambulation, activity level, self-care, intake and level of consciousness) that best predicted loss of capacity, shortening of the reflection period or death. In total, 155 patients requested assessment for MAiD, and 136 of these were included in the statistical analyses. For 68 patients, the reflection period was not shortened; the other 68 patients lost capacity, died or required shortening of the reflection period. In contrast to the results for age, sex, location of request and diagnosis, the PPS score was associated with loss of capacity or shortening of the reflection period (odds ratio 4.63, 95% confidence interval 2.87-8.23, per 10-point decrease in PPS score). PPS scores less than or equal to 40% balanced sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive value while emphasizing sensitivity to prevent false negative errors. The PPS score at the time of MAiD request was strongly associated with loss of capacity or shortening of the reflection period, with lower scores incrementally increasing the risk of these outcomes. For patients with a PPS score of 40% or below, close monitoring is warranted, potentially with plans made to allow rapid provision of MAiD should their clinical condition deteriorate.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Bill C-14, the legislation that legalized medical assistance in dying (MAiD) in Canada in 2016, outlines eligibility criteria and includes both a mandated 10-day reflection period and a requirement that the patient have capacity to consent at the time MAiD is provided. We examined clinical factors associated with shortened reflection periods or loss of capacity before provision of MAiD.
METHODS
This retrospective database review involved patients who requested MAiD at a tertiary care hospital in Toronto, Canada, between June 2016 and April 2019. We used logistic regression analyses to examine the association between the combined outcome of unanticipated loss of decisional capacity, shortening of the reflection period or death and the clinical risk factors of interest (age, sex, location of MAiD request [inpatient v. outpatient], score on palliative performance scale [PPS] and diagnosis [cancer v. noncancer]). We generated receiver operating characteristic curves to identify the PPS score (encompassing 5 functional domains: ambulation, activity level, self-care, intake and level of consciousness) that best predicted loss of capacity, shortening of the reflection period or death.
RESULTS
In total, 155 patients requested assessment for MAiD, and 136 of these were included in the statistical analyses. For 68 patients, the reflection period was not shortened; the other 68 patients lost capacity, died or required shortening of the reflection period. In contrast to the results for age, sex, location of request and diagnosis, the PPS score was associated with loss of capacity or shortening of the reflection period (odds ratio 4.63, 95% confidence interval 2.87-8.23, per 10-point decrease in PPS score). PPS scores less than or equal to 40% balanced sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive value while emphasizing sensitivity to prevent false negative errors.
INTERPRETATION
The PPS score at the time of MAiD request was strongly associated with loss of capacity or shortening of the reflection period, with lower scores incrementally increasing the risk of these outcomes. For patients with a PPS score of 40% or below, close monitoring is warranted, potentially with plans made to allow rapid provision of MAiD should their clinical condition deteriorate.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33293332
pii: 8/4/E825
doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20200052
pmc: PMC7743904
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Pagination
E825-E831Informations de copyright
Copyright 2020, Joule Inc. or its licensors.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: For activities outside the work reported here, Elie Isenberg-Grzeda has received consultancy fees from Celgene USA. No other competing interests were declared.
Références
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2011 Oct;42(4):578-88
pubmed: 21565461
J Palliat Care. 2007 Winter;23(4):245-52; discussion 252-4
pubmed: 18251442
N Engl J Med. 1999 Feb 18;340(7):577-83
pubmed: 10021482
J Palliat Care. 1996 Spring;12(1):5-11
pubmed: 8857241
Palliat Support Care. 2019 Oct;17(5):590-595
pubmed: 30887936
J Palliat Med. 2007 Feb;10(1):111-7
pubmed: 17298259
BMJ. 2009 Mar 24;338:b1248
pubmed: 19318441
Can Fam Physician. 2018 Sep;64(9):e380-e386
pubmed: 30209111
Lancet. 2003 Oct 11;362(9391):1239-40
pubmed: 14568754
Palliat Support Care. 2011 Jun;9(2):123-8
pubmed: 24468479
Support Care Cancer. 2015 Apr;23(4):913-8
pubmed: 25228018
J Palliat Med. 2006 Oct;9(5):1066-75
pubmed: 17040144
Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2020 Jan;37(1):58-64
pubmed: 31256607
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2015 Mar;49(3):555-61
pubmed: 25116913
BMC Med Ethics. 2009 Oct 27;10:18
pubmed: 19860873