Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
2007 JASN IMPACT FACTOR 7.111 HOME   AUTHOR INFO   EDITORIAL BOARD   SUBSCRIBE   FEEDBACK   ALERTS   HELP 
    advanced
CURRENT ISSUE ARCHIVES JASN Express ONLINE SUBMISSION


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Holley, J. L.
Right arrow Articles by Rault, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Holley, J. L.
Right arrow Articles by Rault, R.

Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, Vol 3, 1405-1408, Copyright © 1993 by American Society of Nephrology

REGULAR ARTICLES

Chronic in-center hemodialysis patients' attitudes, knowledge, and behavior towards advance directives

JL Holley, S Nespor and R Rault
Renal-Electrolyte Division, University of Pittsburgh, PA 15213.

Forty-three chronic in-center hemodialysis patients were asked about their knowledge, attitudes, and behavior towards advance directives. The survey collected patient demographic data and assessed attitudes, knowledge, and behavior towards advance directives by agreement or disagreement with statements. Sixty-six percent of patients did not know what a health care proxy was, and 42% did not know the legal status of a living will. However, 90% of older patients (> or = 60 yr of age) understood living wills. Although 77% of the patients had discussed their wishes about life-sustaining care with someone close to them, only 17% had had such discussions with their doctor. Twenty-one percent had completed an advance directive. Fifty percent of patients agreed with the statement that a potential problem with advance directives was that patients could change their minds about heroic treatments; 51% agreed that advance directives might interfere with a doctor's judgment. Only 26% agreed that a dialysis unit's promotion of the use of advance directives might lead to undertreatment. Patient age, race, marital status, and time on dialysis did not affect responses. A prior failed transplant and the educational level completed by the patient influenced some specific responses. Despite some concern, 79% of patients agreed that a dialysis unit policy asking patients whether they had completed an advance directive was a good idea.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JAMAHome page
D. W. Molloy, G. H. Guyatt, R. Russo, R. Goeree, B. J. O'Brien, M. Bedard, A. Willan, J. Watson, C. Patterson, C. Harrison, et al.
Systematic Implementation of an Advance Directive Program in Nursing Homes: A Randomized Controlled Trial
JAMA, March 15, 2000; 283(11): 1437 - 1444.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME CURRENT ISSUE ARCHIVES JASN Express ONLINE SUBMISSION AUTHOR INFO
EDITORIAL BOARD SUBSCRIBE FEEDBACK ALERTS HELP

Copyright © 2008 by the American Society of Nephrology. Online ISSN: 1533-3450 Print ISSN: 1046-6673