This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Objective: To determine whether ALS patients’ preferences for ameliorative or life-extending technologies elicited early in the disease were related to later treatment choices.
Methods: In this prospective cohort study, 121 patients were seen at a tertiary ALS care center and followed for a median of 12 months. At baseline, patient preferences for use of tracheostomy and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement were elicited. All patients received the same educational information before being interviewed about treatment preferences. Patients were then followed to determine if patients who viewed the interventions favorably at baseline were significantly more likely to use the interventions over follow-up.
Results: Six to twelve percent of patients were certain they wanted tracheostomy and 28.2% wanted PEG. Preferences were related to later treatment choices: 20% of patients who found tracheostomy acceptable had one in the follow-up period, compared with 3.4% of those not in favor (p < 0.001). For PEG, similar findings were obtained: 48.5% who initially found it acceptable had PEG, versus 8.1% of those not in favor of this treatment (p < 0.001). Patients who found the interventions acceptable were more likely to be recently diagnosed, expressed greater attachment to life, and showed greater declines in pulmonary function over follow-up.
Conclusions: Patients with ALS were able to express their preferences for life-extending or ameliorative technologies and made choices consistent with these preferences. However, patient preferences may change over time, and clinical education efforts are required throughout the course of disease.
- Received August 5, 1998.
- Accepted March 22, 1999.
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
