A Randomized Controlled Trial of a CPR and Intubation Video Decision Support Tool for Hospitalized Patients

Areej El-Jawahri, Susan L. Mitchell, Michael K. Paasche-Orlow, Jennifer S. Temel, Vicki A. Jackson, Renee R. Rutledge, Mihir Parikh, Aretha D. Davis, Muriel R. Gillick, Michael J. Barry, Lenny Lopez, Elizabeth S. Walker-Corkery, Yuchiao Chang, Kathleen Finn, Christopher Coley, Angelo E. Volandes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

65 Scopus citations


BACKGROUND: Decisions about cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and intubation are a core part of advance care planning, particularly for seriously ill hospitalized patients. However, these discussions are often avoided. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to examine the impact of a video decision tool for CPR and intubation on patients’ choices, knowledge, medical orders, and discussions with providers. DESIGN: This was a prospective randomized trial conducted between 9 March 2011 and 1 June 2013 on the internal medicine services at two hospitals in Boston. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and fifty seriously ill hospitalized patients over the age of 60 with an advanced illness and a prognosis of 1 year or less were included. Mean age was 76 and 51 % were women. INTERVENTION: Three-minute video describing CPR and intubation plus verbal communication of participants’ preferences to their physicians (intervention) (N = 75) or control arm (usual care) (N = 75). MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was participants’ preferences for CPR and intubation (immediately after viewing the video in the intervention arm). Secondary outcomes included: orders to withhold CPR/intubation, documented discussions with providers during hospitalization, and participants’ knowledge of CPR/ intubation (five-item test, range 0–5, higher scores indicate greater knowledge). RESULTS: Intervention participants (vs. controls) were more likely not to want CPR (64 % vs. 32 %, p <0.0001) and intubation (72 % vs. 43 %, p < 0.0001). Intervention participants (vs. controls) were also more likely to have orders to withhold CPR (57 % vs. 19 %, p < 0.0001) and intubation (64 % vs.19 %, p < 0.0001) by hospital discharge, documented discussions about their preferences (81 % vs. 43 %, p < 0.0001), and higher mean knowledge scores (4.11 vs. 2.45; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Seriously ill patients who viewed a video about CPR and intubation were more likely not to want these treatments, be better informed about their options, have orders to forgo CPR/ intubation, and discuss preferences with providers. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01325519 Registry Name: A prospective randomized trial using video images in advance care planning in seriously ill hospitalized patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1071-1080
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of general internal medicine
Issue number8
StatePublished - Aug 28 2015

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine


Dive into the research topics of 'A Randomized Controlled Trial of a CPR and Intubation Video Decision Support Tool for Hospitalized Patients'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this