Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders in the Neonatal ICU: Experiences and Beliefs Among Staff.

OBJECTIVES: Studies in adult patients have shown that do-not-resuscitate orders are often associated with decreased medical intervention. In neonatology, this phenomenon has not been investigated, and how do-not-resuscitate orders potentially affect clinical care is unknown. DESIGN: Retrospective medical record data review and staff survey responses about neonatal ICU do-not-resuscitate orders. SETTING: Four academic neonatal ICUs. SUBJECTS: Clinical staff members working in each neonatal ICU. INTERVENTIONS: Survey response collection and analysis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Participating neonatal ICUs had 14-48 beds and 120-870 admissions/yr. Frequency range of do-not-resuscitate orders was 3-11 per year. Two-hundred fifty-seven surveys were completed (46% response). Fifty-nine percent of respondents were nurses; 20% were physicians. Over the 5-year period, 44% and 17% had discussed a do-not-resuscitate order one to five times and greater than or equal to 6 times, respectively. Fifty-seven percent and 22% had cared for one to five and greater than or equal to 6 patients with do-not-resuscitate orders, respectively. Neonatologists, trainees, and nurse practitioners were more likely to report receiving training in discussing do-not-resuscitate orders or caring for such patients compared with registered nurses and respiratory therapists (p < 0.001). Forty-one percent of respondents reported caring for an infant in whom interventions had been withheld after a do-not-resuscitate order had been placed without discussing the specific withholding with the family. Twenty-seven percent had taken care of an infant in whom interventions had been withdrawn under the same circumstances. Participants with previous experiences withholding or withdrawing interventions were more likely to agree that these actions are appropriate (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Most neonatal ICU staff report experience with do-not-resuscitate orders; however, many, particularly nurses and respiratory therapists, report no training in this area. Variable beliefs with respect to withholding and withdrawing care for patients with do-not-resuscitate orders exist among staff. Because neonatal ICU patients with do-not-resuscitate orders may ultimately survive, withholding or withdrawing interventions may have long-lasting effects, which may or may not coincide with familial intentions.

Developing expert-derived rating standards for the peer assessment of lectures.

PURPOSE: For peer review of teaching to be credible and reliable, peer raters must be trained to identify and measure teaching behaviors accurately. Peer rater training, therefore, must be based on expert-derived rating standards of teaching performance. The authors sought to establish precise lecture rating standards for use in peer rater training at their school. METHOD: From 2008 to 2010, a panel of experts, who had previously helped to develop an instrument for the peer assessment of lecturing, met to observe, discuss, and rate 40 lectures, using a consensus-building model to determine key behaviors and levels of proficiency for each of the instrument's 11 criteria. During this process, the panelists supplemented the original instrument with precise behavioral descriptors of lecturing. The reliability of the derived rating standards was assessed by having the panelists score six sample lectures independently. RESULTS: Intraclass correlation coefficients of the panelists' ratings of the lectures ranged from 0.75 to 0.96. There was moderate to high positive association between 10 of the 11 instrument's criteria and the overall performance score (r = 0.752-0.886). There were no statistically significant differences among raters in terms of leniency or stringency of scores. CONCLUSIONS: Two relational themes, content and style, were identified within the instrument's variables. Recommendations for developing expert-derived ratings standards include using an interdisciplinary group for observation, discussion, and verbal identification of behaviors; asking members to consider views that contrast with their own; and noting key teaching behaviors for use in future peer rater training.