Skip to main content

A New Tool for Estimating Prognosis in the Elderly

"What if your doctor, making use of a Web site that collected a number of tested geriatric scales, could enter information about your history and your health, and then predict with reasonable accuracy your odds of living another year, or four, or nine?
What if you, with a slight fib, could log onto that same site and find that information yourself?"

This is the start of Paula Span's most recent New Old Age article in the NY Times titled 'Figuring the Odds'. The question she poses to her audience is whether the general public should have access to geriatric prognostic indexes. This is not some farfetched proposal, but rather a discussion that is coming on anticipated launch a new website created by some GeriPal contributors that will list 18-20 geriatric prognostic indexes.

Why bother with creating a website that can help with prognosticating? Well, although lots of geriatric prognostic indexes have been published, their use has been limited as there is no one place for health care providers to easily access them. The goals of this new service are to create a repository of published geriatric prognostic indexes where clinicians can go to obtain evidence-based information on patients’ prognosis.

But what about the general public? In its current form, the new website is only intended as a rough guide to inform clinicians about possible mortality outcomes. It is not meant to be used as the only basis for making care decisions, nor should it be viewed as a definitive means of predicting prognosis. As when using any prognostic tool, every patient should be considered as an individual, and other factors beyond those listed in the tool may influence a patient's prognosis.

Will the general public understand this? For that matter, will physicians understand this?

So far the comments on the post are very pro open access. Nearly all feel that the general public is savvy enough to understand the nuances of prognostication. Here is an exerpt of one comment:

"Yes, as a reasonably educated woman in my early 70's, I would definitely wish to have access to the site to help guide my own medical (and life) choices. My goal is to remain active and independent as long as possible, yet not burden our creaky medical system any more than necessary, I understand that the site deals in population statistics, rather than clairvoyance, and would be outraged if such potentially critical information were restricted to "medical professionals"…"
Do you agree?  Share your opinion. Go to Paula Span's New York Times article [click here] and comment. 

by: Eric Widera

Comments

DocKJ said…
"But doctor, you're LYING, the government is making you tell mom she's only got a 10% chance of living a year..."

(Snippet from an actual recent encounter with a patient's family.)

Rational discussion is hard when you are being accused as a liar and shill for the government and insurance.

An open access, evidence based site, run independent of any .gov or .com influence, could be a good tool to help families understand just how sick mom is.

@dockj
HenryF said…
name suggestions: "tell me when" or "timeline".

Popular posts from this blog

The Dangers of Fleet Enemas

The dangers of oral sodium phosphate preparations are fairly well known in the medical community. In 2006 the FDA issued it’s first warning that patients taking oral sodium phosphate preparations are at risk for potential for acute kidney injury. Two years later, over-the-counter preparations of these drugs were voluntarily withdrawn by the manufacturers.  Those agents still available by prescription were given black box warnings mainly due to acute phosphate nephropathy that can result in renal failure, especially in older adults. Despite all this talk of oral preparations, little was mentioned about a sodium phosphate preparation that is still available over-the-counter – the Fleet enema.

Why Oral Sodium Phosphate Preparations Are Dangerous 

Before we go into the risks of Fleet enemas, lets spend just a couple sentences on why oral sodium phosphate preparations carry significant risks. First, oral sodium phosphate preparations can cause significant fluid shifts within the colon …

Dying without Dialysis

There is a terrific article in this weeks Journal of Pain and Symptom Management by Fliss Murtagh of King's College in London about the epidemiology of symptoms for patients with advanced renal failure who die without dialysis.  This study is important because while we know that patients with advanced renal failure have a limited life expectancy and the average age of initiation of hemodialysis is increasing, we know little about the alternatives to hemodialysis.  Specifically, we know nothing about symptoms affecting quality of life among patients who elect not to start dialysis (so called "conservative management" - is this the best label?).  This article provides a terrific counterpoint to the article in last years NEJM showing that nursing home residents who initiated hemodialysis tended to die and decline in function (see GeriPal write up here). 

The study authors followed patients with the most advanced form of chronic kidney disease (the new name for renal failu…

Survival from severe sepsis: The infection is cured but all is not well

Severe sepsis is a syndrome marked by a severe infection that results in the failure of at least one major organ system: For example, pneumonia complicated by kidney failure. It is the most common non-cardiac cause of critical illness and is associated with a high mortality rate.

But what happens to those who survive their hospitalization for severe sepsis? An important study published in JAMA from Iwashyna and colleagues provides answers and tells us all is not well. When the patient leaves the hospital, the infection may be cured, but the patient and family will need to contend with a host of major new functional and cognitive deficits.

Iwashyna examined disability and cognitive outcomes among 516 survivors of severe sepsis. These subjects were Medicare enrollees who were participants in the Health and Retirement Study. The average age of patients was 77 years.

When interviewed after discharge, most survivors were left with major new deficits in their ability to live independently. …