Effect of Default Options in Advance Directives on Hospital-Free Days and Care Choices Among Seriously Ill Patients A Randomized Clinical Trial

Question What effects do default options on advance directives have on the choices made by seriously ill patients and their future outcomes? Findings In this randomized clinical trial of 492 seriously ill patients, default options in advance directives strongly influenced patients' goals of care and preferences for receiving life support, even though patients were told of these defaults. Advance directives with defaults did not reduce the primary outcome of hospital-free days during a median follow-up of 18 months compared with advance directives without defaults, nor did they improve other patient-reported, clinical, or economic outcomes. Meaning The findings of this study suggest that seriously ill patients' end-of-life care choices are strongly influenced by the way choices are framed, but changing choices in conventional advance directives is unlikely to change patient outcomes. This randomized clinical trial examines whether default options in advance directives influence care choices and clinical outcomes among seriously ill patients. Importance There is limited evidence regarding how patients make choices in advance directives (ADs) or whether these choices influence subsequent care. Objective To examine whether default options in ADs influence care choices and clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants This randomized clinical trial included 515 patients who met criteria for having serious illness and agreed to participate. Patients were enrolled at 20 outpatient clinics affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania Health System and the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center from February 2014 to April 2016 and had a median follow-up of 18 months. Data analysis was conducted from November 2018 to April 2019. Interventions Patients were randomly assigned to complete 1 of the 3 following ADs: (1) a comfort-promoting plan of care and nonreceipt of potentially life-sustaining therapies were selected by default (comfort AD), (2) a life-extending plan of care and receipt of potentially life-sustaining therapies were selected by default (life-extending AD), or (3) no choices were preselected (standard AD). Main Outcomes and Measures This trial was powered to rule out a reduction in hospital-free days in the intervention groups. Secondary outcomes included choices in ADs for an overall comfort-oriented approach to care, choices to forgo 4 forms of life support, patients' quality of life, decision conflict, place of death, admissions to hospitals and intensive care units, and costs of inpatient care. Results Among 515 patients randomized, 10 withdrew consent and 13 were later found to be ineligible, leaving 492 (95.5%) in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) sample (median [interquartile range] age, 63 [56-70] years; 279 [56.7%] men; 122 [24.8%] black; 363 [73.8%] with cancer). Of these, 264 (53.7%) returned legally valid ADs and were debriefed about their assigned intervention. Among these, patients completing comfort ADs were more likely to choose comfort care (54 of 85 [63.5%]) than those returning standard ADs (45 of 91 [49.5%]) or life-extending ADs (33 of 88 [37.5%]) (P = .001). Among 492 patients in the mITT sample, 57 of 168 patients [33.9%] who completed the comfort AD, 47 of 165 patients [28.5%] who completed the standard AD, and 35 of 159 patients [22.0%] who completed the life-extending AD chose comfort care (P = .02), with patients not returning ADs coded as not selecting comfort care. In mITT analyses, median (interquartile range) hospital-free days among 168 patients assigned to comfort ADs and 159 patients assigned to life-extending default ADs were each noninferior to those among 165 patients assigned to standard ADs (standard AD: 486 [306-717] days; comfort AD: 554 [296-833] days; rate ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.90-1.23; P < .001; life-extending AD: 550 [325-783] days; rate ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.88-1.20; P < .001). There were no differences among groups in other secondary outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial, default options in ADs altered the choices seriously ill patients made regarding their future care without changing clinical outcomes.