Mara A. Schonberg

Prognostic Indices for Older Adults: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT To better target services to those who may benefit, many guidelines recommend incorporating life expectancy into clinical decisions. OBJECTIVE To assess the quality and limitations of prognostic indices for mortality in older adults through systematic review. DATA SOURCES We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Google Scholar from their inception through November 2011. STUDY SELECTION We included indices if they were validated and predicted absolute risk of mortality in patients whose average age was 60 years or older. We excluded indices that estimated intensive care unit, disease-specific, or in-hospital mortality. DATA EXTRACTION For each prognostic index, we extracted data on clinical setting, potential for bias, generalizability, and accuracy. RESULTS We reviewed 21,593 titles to identify 16 indices that predict risk of mortality from 6 months to 5 years for older adults in a variety of clinical settings: the community (6 indices), nursing home (2 indices), and hospital (8 indices). At least 1 measure of transportability (the index is accurate in more than 1 population) was tested for all but 3 indices. By our measures, no study was free from potential bias. Although 13 indices had C statistics of 0.70 or greater, none of the indices had C statistics of 0.90 or greater. Only 2 indices were independently validated by investigators who were not involved in the indexs development. CONCLUSION We identified several indices for predicting overall mortality in different patient groups; future studies need to independently test their accuracy in heterogeneous populations and their ability to improve clinical outcomes before their widespread use can be recommended.

Breast Cancer Among the Oldest Old: Tumor Characteristics, Treatment Choices, and Survival

PURPOSE Few data are available on breast cancer characteristics, treatment, and survival for women age 80 years or older. PATIENTS AND METHODS We used the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare data set from 1992 to 2003 to examine tumor characteristics, treatments (mastectomy, breast-conserving surgery [BCS] with radiation therapy or alone, or no surgery), and outcomes of women age 80 years or older (80 to 84, 85 to 89, > or = 90 years) with stage I/II breast cancer compared with younger women (age 67 to 79 years). We used Cox proportional hazard models to examine the impact of age on breast cancer-related and other causes of death. Analyses were performed within stage, adjusted for tumor and sociodemographic characteristics, treatments received, and comorbidities. Results In total, 49,616 women age 67 years or older with stage I/II disease were included. Tumor characteristics (grade, hormone receptivity) were similar across age groups. Treatment with BCS alone increased with age, especially after age 80. The risk of dying from breast cancer increased with age, significantly after age 80. For stage I disease, the adjusted hazard ratio of dying from breast cancer for women age > or = 90 years compared with women age 67 to 69 years was 2.6 (range, 2.0 to 3.4). Types of treatments received were significantly associated with age and comorbidity, with age as the stronger predictor (26% of women age > or = 80 years without comorbidity received BCS alone or no surgery compared with 6% of women age 67 to 79 years). CONCLUSION Women age > or = 80 years have breast cancer characteristics similar to those of younger women yet receive less aggressive treatment and experience higher mortality from early-stage breast cancer. Future studies should focus on identifying tumor and patient characteristics to help target treatments to the oldest women most likely to benefit.

Am I Doing the Right Thing? Provider Perspectives on Improving Palliative Care in the Emergency Department

STUDY OBJECTIVE Although the focus of emergency care is on the diagnosis and treatment of acute illnesses and injuries or the stabilization of patients for ongoing treatment, some patients may benefit from a palliative approach. Little is known about delivering palliative care in the emergency department (ED). We explore the attitudes, experiences, and beliefs of emergency providers about palliative care in the ED, using structured qualitative methods. METHODS We studied 3 focus groups with 26 providers, including 14 physicians (10 residents, 4 attending physicians), 6 nurses, 2 social workers, and 4 technicians, working in 2 academic EDs in Boston. We used a grounded theory approach to code responses, resolving discrepancies by consensus. RESULTS Six distinct themes emerged: (1) participants equated palliative care with end-of-life care; (2) participants disagreed about the feasibility and desirability of providing palliative care in the ED; (3) patients for whom a palliative approach has been established often visit the ED because family members are distressed by end-of-life symptoms; (4) lack of communication between outpatient and ED providers leads to undesirable outcomes (eg, resuscitation of patients with a do-not-resuscitate order); (5) conflict around withholding life-prolonging treatment is common (eg, between patients family and written advance directives); and (6) training in pain management is inadequate. CONCLUSION Providers ranked improved communication and documentation from outpatient providers as their highest priority for improvement. Attitudinal and structural barriers may need to be overcome to improve palliative care in the ED. Despite targeted recruitment, attending physician participation was low.

Index to Predict 5-Year Mortality of Community-Dwelling Adults Aged 65 and Older Using Data from the National Health Interview Survey

Prognostic information is becoming increasingly important for clinical decision-making. To develop and validate an index to predict 5-year mortality among community-dwelling older adults. A total of 24,115 individuals aged >65 who responded to the 1997-2000 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) with follow-up through 31 December 2002 from the National Death Index; 16,077 were randomly selected for the development cohort and 8,038 for the validation cohort. 39 risk factors (functional measures, illnesses, behaviors, demographics) were included in a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model to determine factors independently associated with mortality. Risk scores were calculated for participants using points derived from the final model’s beta coefficients. To evaluate external validity, we compared survival by quintile of risk between the development and validation cohorts. Seventeen percent of participants had died by the end of the study. The final model included 11 variables: age (1 point for 70-74 up to 7 points for >85); male: 3 points; BMI <25: 2 points; perceived health (good: 1 point, fair/poor: 2 points); emphysema: 2 points; cancer: 2 points; diabetes: 2 points; dependent in instrumental activities of daily living: 2 points; difficulty walking: 3 points; smoker-former: 1 point, smoker-current: 3 points; past year hospitalizations-one: 1 point, >2: 3 points. We observed close agreement between 5-year mortality in the two cohorts; which ranged from 5% in the lowest risk quintile to 50% in the highest risk quintile in the validation cohort. This validated mortality index can be used to account for participant life expectancy in analyses using NHIS data.BACKGROUNDPrognostic information is becoming increasingly important for clinical decision-making.OBJECTIVETo develop and validate an index to predict 5-year mortality among community-dwelling older adults.DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTSA total of 24,115 individuals aged >65 who responded to the 1997-2000 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) with follow-up through 31 December 2002 from the National Death Index; 16,077 were randomly selected for the development cohort and 8,038 for the validation cohort.MEASUREMENTS39 risk factors (functional measures, illnesses, behaviors, demographics) were included in a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model to determine factors independently associated with mortality. Risk scores were calculated for participants using points derived from the final model’s beta coefficients. To evaluate external validity, we compared survival by quintile of risk between the development and validation cohorts.RESULTSSeventeen percent of participants had died by the end of the study. The final model included 11 variables: age (1 point for 70-74 up to 7 points for >85); male: 3 points; BMI <25: 2 points; perceived health (good: 1 point, fair/poor: 2 points); emphysema: 2 points; cancer: 2 points; diabetes: 2 points; dependent in instrumental activities of daily living: 2 points; difficulty walking: 3 points; smoker-former: 1 point, smoker-current: 3 points; past year hospitalizations-one: 1 point, >2: 3 points. We observed close agreement between 5-year mortality in the two cohorts; which ranged from 5% in the lowest risk quintile to 50% in the highest risk quintile in the validation cohort.CONCLUSIONSThis validated mortality index can be used to account for participant life expectancy in analyses using NHIS data.

Population-Based Patterns and Predictors of Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening Among Older Men in the United States

PURPOSE For patients who elect to have prostate cancer screening, the optimal time to discontinue screening is unknown. Our objective was to describe rates and predictors of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening among older men in the United States. METHODS Data were extracted from the population-based 2000 and 2005 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). PSA screening was defined as a PSA test as part of a routine exam within the past year. Demographic, socioeconomic, and functional characteristics were collected, and a validated 5-year estimated life expectancy was calculated. Age-specific rates of PSA screening were determined, and sampling weight-adjusted multivariate regressions were fitted to determine predictors of screening among men age 70 years or older. RESULTS The PSA screening rate was 24.0% in men age 50 to 54 years, and it increased steadily with age until a peak of 45.5% among age 70 to 74 years. Screening rates then gradually declined by age, and 24.6% of men age 85 years or older reported being screened. Among men age 70 years or older, screening rates varied by estimated 5-year life expectancy: rates were 47.3% in men with high life expectancies (≤ 15% probability of 5-year mortality), 39.2% in men with intermediate life expectancies (16% to 48% probability), and 30.7% in men with low life expectancies (> 48% probability; P < .001). In multivariate analysis, estimated life expectancy and age remained independently associated with PSA screening (P < .001 for each). CONCLUSION Rates of PSA screening in the United States are associated with age and estimated life expectancy, but excessive PSA screening in elderly men with limited life expectancies remains a significant problem. The merits and limitations of PSA should be discussed with all patients considering prostate cancer screening.

Screening Mammography in Older Women: A Review

IMPORTANCE Guidelines recommend individualizing screening mammography decisions for women aged 75 years and older. However, little pragmatic guidance is available to help counsel patients. OBJECTIVE To provide an evidence-based approach for individualizing decision-making about screening mammography in older women. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION We searched PubMed for English-language studies in peer-reviewed journals published from January 1, 1990, to February 1, 2014, to identify risk factors for late-life breast cancer in women aged 65 years and older and to quantify the benefits and harms of screening mammography for women aged 75 years and older. FINDINGS Age is the major risk factor for developing and dying from breast cancer. Breast cancer risk factors that reflect hormonal exposures in the distant past, such as age at first birth or age at menarche, are less predictive of late-life breast cancer than factors indicating recent hormonal exposures such as high bone mass or obesity. Randomized trials of the benefits of screening mammography did not include women older than 74 years. Thus it is not known if screening mammography benefits older women. Observational studies favor extending screening mammography to older women who have a life expectancy of more than 10 years. Modeling studies estimate 2 fewer breast cancer deaths/1000 women who in their 70s continue biennial screening for 10 years instead of stopping screening at age 69. Potential harms of continued screening over 10 years include false-positive mammograms in approximately 200/1000 women screened and overdiagnosis (ie, finding breast cancer that would not have clinically surfaced otherwise) in approximately 13/1000 women screened. Providing information about life expectancy along with potential benefits and harms of screening may help older womens decision-making about screening mammography. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE For women with less than a 10-year life expectancy, recommendations to stop screening mammography should emphasize increased potential harms from screening and highlight health promotion measures likely to be beneficial over the short term. For women with a life expectancy of more than 10 years, deciding whether potential benefits of screening outweigh harms becomes a value judgment for patients, requiring a realistic understanding of screening outcomes.

External Validation of an Index to Predict Up to 9‐Year Mortality of Community‐Dwelling Adults Aged 65 and Older

OBJECTIVES: To further validate an index predicting mortality in community‐dwelling older adults.

Development and Evaluation of a Decision Aid on Mammography Screening for Women 75 Years and Older

IMPORTANCE Guidelines recommend that women 75 years and older should be informed of the benefits and risks of mammography before being screened. However, few are adequately informed. OBJECTIVES To develop and evaluate a mammography screening decision aid (DA) for women 75 years and older. DESIGN We designed the DA using international standards. Between July 14, 2010, and April 10, 2012, participants completed a pretest survey and read the DA before an appointment with their primary care physician. They completed a posttest survey after their appointment. Medical records were reviewed for follow-up information. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS Boston, Massachusetts, academic primary care practice. Eligible women were aged 75 to 89 years, English speaking, had not had a mammogram in 9 months but had been screened within the past 3 years, and did not have a history of dementia or invasive or noninvasive breast cancer. Of 84 women approached, 27 declined to participate, 12 were unable to complete the study for logistical reasons, and 45 participated. INTERVENTIONS The DA includes information on breast cancer risk, life expectancy, competing mortality risks, possible outcomes of screening, and a values clarification exercise. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Knowledge of the benefits and risks of screening, decisional conflict, and screening intentions; documentation in the medical record of a discussion of the risks and benefits of mammography with a primary care physician within 6 months; and the receipt of screening within 15 months. We used the Wilcoxon signed rank test and McNemar test to compare pretest-posttest information. RESULTS The median age of participants was 79 years, 69% (31 of 45) were of non-Hispanic white race/ethnicity, and 60% (27 of 45) had attended at least some college. Comparison of posttest results with pretest results demonstrated 2 findings. First, knowledge of the benefits and risks of screening improved (P < .001). Second, fewer participants intended to be screened (56% [25 of 45] afterward compared with 82% [37 of 45] before, P = .03). Decisional conflict declined but not significantly (P = .10). In the following 6 months, 53% (24 of 45) of participants had a primary care physician note that documented the discussion of the risks and benefits of screening compared with 11% (5 of 45) in the previous 5 years (P < .001). While 84% (36 of 43) had been screened within 2 years of participating, 60% (26 of 43) were screened within 15 months after participating (≥ 2 years since their last mammogram) (P = .01). Overall, 93% (42 of 45) found the DA helpful. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE A DA may improve older womens decision making about mammography screening.

Emergency department experiences of acutely symptomatic patients with terminal illness and their family caregivers.

CONTEXT Despite increased focus on improving palliative care in the emergency department (ED), there is little research on how to best address the specific needs of this patient population. OBJECTIVES To better understand the experiences of acutely symptomatic patients seen in the ED. METHODS Using in-person semi-structured interviews, we explored the attitudes, experiences, and beliefs of 14 patients and seven family caregivers on the inpatient palliative care consult service, who had been admitted through the ED at two academic medical centers. We used a grounded theory approach to code responses. Transcripts were coded by a palliative medicine physician, an emergency medicine physician, and a general internist. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Coded sections were iteratively reviewed for interpretation, and concepts were collapsed into themes. RESULTS Five distinct themes emerged: 1) unprepared for managing symptoms at home; 2) uncertainty and anxiety; 3) communication is essential; 4) mixed experiences with symptom management; and 5) conflicting perspectives about the purpose of palliative care clinicians in the ED. CONCLUSION Patients and caregivers identified systems, communication, and clinical issues in ED care that should be a focus for future research.

Breast cancer screening in women aged 80 and older: Results from a national survey

Objectives: To estimate the national rates of mammography screening in women aged 80 and older and examine the relationship between health status and screening within the previous 2 years.