Resuscitating Patient Rights during the Pandemic: COVID-19 and the Risk of Resurgent Paternalism.

The COVID-19 Pandemic a stress test for clinical medicine and medical ethics, with a confluence over questions of the proportionality of resuscitation. Drawing upon his experience as a clinical ethicist during the surge in New York City during the Spring of 2020, the author considers how attitudes regarding resuscitation have evolved since the inception of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders decades ago. Sharing a personal narrative about a DNR quandry he encountered as a medical intern, the author considers the balance of patient rights versus clinical discretion, warning about the risk of resurgent physician paternalism dressed up in the guise of a public health crisis.

Quality of life after in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation for patients over the age of 80 years.

OBJECTIVES: Success of in-hospital resuscitation decreases with age; however, national data show that 11.3% of patients over 80 years survive to discharge. There are few published qualitative data about the quality of life for these patients postsuccessful resuscitation. We aimed to investigate postresuscitation quality of life in patients over the age of 80 through a series of case studies. METHODS: All patients over the age of 80 years, who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) at our district general hospital in 2015-2016, were included. Success of resuscitation, survival at day 1 and to discharge were recorded. For patients who survived to 1 day and beyond, case reports were written to create individual patient stories. RESULTS: 47 patients over the age of 80 years received CPR at Musgrove Park Hospital over a 2-year period. Five (10.6%) survived to discharge. Of those surviving to discharge, two had substantial functional decline, requiring discharge to nursing homes having previously been independent. Of the five families/patients who commented on their experience, only one expressed a positive view. When discussed, the majority of patients/families opted for a Do Not Attempt CPR. CONCLUSION: Our results have shown that there is a risk of substantial functional decline associated with successful CPR in those patients over the age of 80 years. The majority of patients and relatives contacted after successful resuscitation expressed a negative view of the experience. Our study highlights the importance of having early informed discussions with patients and families about CPR in order to avoid detrimental outcomes and ensure patient wishes are correctly represented.

An alternative approach to developing guidelines for the management of an anticipated extremely preterm infant.

Objectives To identify the probability of survival and severe neurodevelopmental impairment (sNDI) at which perinatal physicians would or would not offer or recommend resuscitation at birth for extremely preterm infants. Methods A Delphi process consisting of five rounds was implemented to seek consensus (>80% agreement) amongst British Columbia perinatal physicians. The first-round consisted of neonatal and maternal-fetal-medicine Focus Groups. Rounds two to five surveyed perinatal physicians, building upon previous rounds. Draft guidelines were developed and agreement sought. Results Based on 401 responses across all rounds, consensus was obtained that resuscitation should not be offered if survival probability <5%, not recommended if survival probability 5 to <10%, resuscitation recommended if survival without sNDI probability >70 to 90% and resuscitation standard care if survival without sNDI >90%. Conclusions This physician consensus-based, objective framework for the management of an anticipated extremely preterm infant is a transparent alternative to existing guidelines, minimizing gestational-ageism and allowing for individualized management utilizing up-to-date data. Further input from other key stakeholders will be required prior to guideline implementation.

Parents' Descriptions of Neonatal Palliation as a Treatment Option Prior to Periviable Delivery.

During periviable deliveries, parents are confronted with overwhelming and challenging decisions. This study aimed to qualitatively explore the language that pregnant women and important others utilize when discussing palliation, or "comfort care," as a treatment option in the context of periviability. We prospectively recruited women admitted for a threatened periviable delivery (22-25 weeks) at 2 hospitals between September 2016 and January 2018. Using a semistructured interview guide, we investigated participants' perceptions of neonatal treatment options, asking items such as "How was the choice of resuscitation presented to you?" and "What were the options presented?" Conventional content analysis was used and matrices were created to facilitate using a within- and across-case approach to identify and describe patterns. Thirty women and 16 important others were recruited in total. Participants' descriptions of treatment options included resuscitating at birth or not resuscitating. Participants further described the option to not resuscitate as "comfort care," "implicit" comfort care, "doing nothing," and "withdrawal of care." This study revealed that many parents facing periviable delivery may lack an understanding of comfort care as a neonatal treatment option, highlighting the need to improve counseling efforts in order to maximize parents' informed decision-making.

Why DCD Donors Are Dead.

Critics of organ donation after circulatory death (DCD) argue that, even if donors are past the point of autoresuscitation, they have not satisfied the "irreversibility" requirement in the circulatory and respiratory criteria for determining death, since their circulation and respiration could be artificially restored. Thus, removing their vital organs violates the "dead-donor" rule. I defend DCD donation against this criticism. I argue that practical medical-ethical considerations, including respect for do-not-resuscitate orders, support interpreting "irreversibility" to mean permanent cessation of circulation and respiration. Assuming a consciousness-related formulation of human death, I then argue that the loss of circulation and respiration is significant, because it leads to the permanent loss of consciousness and thus to the death of the human person. The DNR request by an organ donor should thus be interpreted to mean "do not restore to consciousness." Finally, I respond to an objection that if "irreversibility" has a medical-ethical meaning, it would entail the absurd possibility that one of two individuals in the same physical state could be alive and the other dead-an implication that some think is inconsistent with understanding death as an objective biological state of the organism. I argue that advances in medical technology have created phenomena that challenge the assumption that human death can be understood in strictly biological terms. I argue that ethical and ontological considerations about our nature bear on the definition and determination of death and thus on the permissibility of DCD.

Treating or Killing? The Divergent Moral Implications of Cardiac Device Deactivation.

In this article, I argue that there is a moral difference between deactivating an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and turning off a cardiac pacemaker (CP). It is, at least in most cases, morally permissible to deactivate an ICD. It is not, at least in most cases, morally permissible to turn off a pacemaker in a fully or significantly pacemaker-dependent patient. After describing the relevant medical technologies-pacemakers and ICDs-I continue with contrasting perspectives on the issue of deactivation from practitioners involved with these devices: physicians, nurses, and allied professionals. Next, I offer a few possible analyses of the situation, relying on recent work in medical ethics. Considerations of intention, responsibility, and replacement support my distinguishing between ICDs and CPs. I conclude by recommending a change in policy of one of the leading cardiac societies.

Time Trends in Race-Ethnic Differences in Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders After Stroke.

Background and Purpose- Do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders are common after stroke, though there are limited data on trends over time. We investigated time trends in DNR orders in a community with a large minority population. Methods- Cases of ischemic stroke (IS) or intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) were identified from the BASIC study (Brain Attack Surveillance in Corpus Christi) from June 2007 through October 2016. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess time to DNR orders, with an interaction term added to allow separate hazard ratios for early (≤24 hours) and late (>24 hours) DNR. Stroke type-specific calendar trends were assessed with an interaction term between calendar year (linear) and stroke type. Results- Two thousand six hundred seventy-two cases were included (ICH, 14%). Mean age was 69, 50% were female, and race-ethnicity was Mexican American (58%), non-Hispanic white (37%), and African American (5%). Overall, 16% had a DNR order during the hospitalization. For ICH, DNR orders (early and late) were stable over the study period. However, early DNR orders became more common over time after ischemic stroke (hazard ratio for 2016 versus 2007: 1.89; 95% CI, 1.06-3.39), with no change over time for late DNR orders after ischemic stroke. Mexican Americans (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.50-0.86) and African Americans (hazard ratio, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.04-0.71) were less likely than non-Hispanic whites to have early DNR orders, though there were no race-ethnic differences in late DNR orders. There was no change in race-ethnic difference in DNR orders over the time of the study (interaction P>0.60). Conclusions- Despite revised national guidelines cautioning against early DNR orders in ICH, presence of DNR orders after ICH was stable between 2007 and 2016, with only slight increases in early DNR orders after ischemic stroke. Mexican Americans and African Americans remain less likely than non-Hispanic whites to have early DNR orders after stroke.

We don't need unilateral DNRs: taking informed non-dissent one step further.

Although shared decision-making is a standard in medical care, unilateral decisions through process-based conflict resolution policies have been defended in certain cases. In patients who do not stand to receive proportional clinical benefits, the harms involved in interventions such as cardiopulmonary resuscitation seem to run contrary to the principle of non-maleficence, and provision of such interventions may cause clinicians significant moral distress. However, because the application of these policies involves taking choices out of the domain of shared decision-making, they face important ethical and legal problems, including a recent challenge to their constitutionality. In light of these concerns, we suggest a re-conceptualization of informed non-dissent as an alternative approach in cases where the application of process-based policies is being considered. This clinician-directed communication model still preserves what is valuable in such policies and salvages professional integrity, while minimising ethical and legal challenges.

End-of-life decisions: A retrospective study in a tertiary care teaching hospital in India.

Background & objectives: In developing countries like India, there is a lack of clarity regarding the factors that influence decisions pertaining to life supports at the end-of-life (EOL). The objectives of this study were to assess the factors associated with EOL-care decisions in the Indian context and to raise awareness in this area of healthcare. Methods: This retrospectively study included all patients admitted to the medical unit of a tertiary care hospital in southern India, over one year and died. The baseline demographics, economic, physiological, sociological, prognostic and medical treatment-related factors were retrieved from the patient's medical records and analysed. Results: Of the 122 decedents included in the study whose characteristics were analyzed, 41 (33.6%) received full life support and 81 (66.4%) had withdrawal or withholding of some life support measure. Amongst those who had withdrawal or withholding of life support, 62 (76.5%) had some support withheld and in 19 (23.5%), it was withdrawn. The documentation of the disease process, prognosis and the mention of imminent death in the medical records was the single most important factor that was associated with the EOL decision (odds ratio - 0.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.74; P=0.03). Interpretation & conclusions: The documentation of poor prognosis was the only factor found to be associated with EOL care decisions in our study. Prospective, multicentric studies need to be done to evaluate the influence of various other factors on the EOL care.

A comparative study on decision and documentation of refraining from resuscitation in two medical home care units in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: A decision to refrain from cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in the case of cardiac arrest is recommended in terminally ill patients to avoid unnecessary suffering at time of death. The aim of this study was to describe the frequency of decisions and documentation of "do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation" (DNACPR) in two Medical Home Care Units in Stockholm. Unit A had written guidelines about how to document CPR-decisions in the medical records, including a requirement for a decision to be taken (CPR: yes/no) while Unit B had no such requirement. METHOD: The medical records for all patients in palliative phase of their disease at the two Units were reviewed. Data was collected on documentation of decisions about CPR (yes/no), DNACPR-decisions and documentation regarding whether the patient or next-of-kin had been informed about the DNACPR-decision. RESULTS: In the two Units, 316 and 219 patients in palliative phase were identified. In Unit A 100% of the patients had a CPR-decision (yes/no) compared to 79% in Unit B (p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in DNACPR-decisions between the two Units, 43 and 37%. Documentation about informing the patient regarding the decision was significantly higher in Unit A, 53% compared to 14% at Unit B (p < 0.001). Documentation about informing the next-of-kin was also significantly higher at Unit A; 42% compared to 6% at Unit B (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Less than 50% of patients in palliative phase had a decision of DNACPR in two Medical Home Care Units in Stockholm. The presence of written guidelines and a requirement for a CPR-decision did not increase the frequency of DNACPR-decisions but was associated with a higher frequency of documentation of decisions and of information given to both the patients and the next-of-kin.

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, Informed Consent, and Rescue: What Provides Moral Justification for the Provision of CPR?

Questions related to end-of-life decision making are common in clinical ethics and may be exceedingly difficult. Chief among these are the provision of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and do-not-resuscitate orders (DNRs). To better address such questions, clarity is needed on the values of medical ethics that underlie CPR and the relevant moral framework for making treatment decisions. An informed consent model is insufficient to provide justification for CPR. Instead, ethical justification for CPR rests on the rule of rescue and on substituted interest judgments. Patients' known wishes and values are relevant, particularly in protecting them from unwanted CPR. Clinicians should rescue patients with the means at their disposal, as a prima facie moral imperative, unless there are compelling reasons to refrain. We present a moral framework for making decisions regarding CPR and DNR.

Informed consent and the aftermath of cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Ethical considerations.

BACKGROUND:: Patients often are confronted with the choice to allow cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) should cardiac arrest occur. Typically, informed consent for CPR does not also include detailed discussion about survival rates, possible consequences of survival, and/or potential impacts on functionality post-CPR. OBJECTIVE:: A lack of communication about these issues between providers and patients/families complicates CPR decision-making and highlights the ethical imperative of practice changes that educate patients and families in those deeper and more detailed ways. DESIGN:: This review integrates disparate literature on the aftermath of CPR and the ethics implications of CPR decision-making as it relates to and is affected by informed consent and subsequent choices for code status by seriously ill patients and their surrogates/proxies within the hospital setting. Margaret Urban Walker's moral philosophy provides a framework to view informed consent as a practice of responsibility. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS:: Given nurses' communicative skills, ethos of care and advocacy, and expertise in therapeutic relationships, communication around DNAR decision-making might look quite different if institutional norms in education, healthcare, law, and public policy held nurses overtly responsible for informed consent in some greater measure. FINDINGS:: Analysis from this perspective shows where changes in informed consent practices are needed and where leverage might be exerted to create change in the direction of deeper and more detailed discussions about CPR survival rates and possible consequences of survival.

Adult Perianesthesia Do Not Resuscitate Orders: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review is to assess if Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) orders should be routinely rescinded during anesthesia, determine if consensus on retaining DNR orders exists in the literature, and explore the current state of clinical practice. DESIGN: This systematic review followed preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. METHODS: In June 2018, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and PubMed databases were systematically searched using defined inclusion/exclusion criteria. FINDINGS: Ninety-one articles from the databases were pooled with 16 works identified as formative to the research questions. Forty-nine articles were analyzed and included in this study. CONCLUSIONS: It is unethical to automatically rescind DNR orders during anesthesia. Patients have the right to retain their DNR orders unaltered or modify them for the perianesthesia period. Sufficient evidence exists to create meaningful policy at every level. A consensus exists among professional organizations that the standard of care is a required reconsideration of DNR orders before anesthesia.

Advance Care Planning Program and the Knowledge and Attitude Concerning Palliative Care.

OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to evaluate the effects of an advance care planning (ACP) program on knowledge and attitudes concerning palliative care, and decisions regarding DNR orders in the older residents in a long-term care institution. METHODS: A quasi-experimental design was used. Participants were cognitively unimpaired older residents in a long-term care institution in Taiwan. The experimental group (n = 29) received the intervention including an individual interview using an ACP handbook and a group patient education; whereas the control group (n = 28) received the group patient education only. RESULTS: There were significant positive effects of the ACP program on understanding of DNR and palliative care, willingness to sign a DNR order, and knowledge of and attitude towards palliative care; however, there was no significant effect on willingness to receive palliative care. Six participants signed the DNR order after the intervention compared to none in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: The ACP program can improve knowledge and attitudes towards palliative care in older residents in long-term care institutions. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The ACP program could incorporate multiple components, including individual interview using ACP handbook and group patient education, and address knowledge and attitudes towards palliative care.

Factors Influencing Family Surrogates' Intention with Regard to Do-Not-Resuscitate Directive for Patients with Dementia.

Objective: To investigate the prevalence of family surrogates' do-not-resuscitate (DNR) intention for patients with dementia (PwD), and factors influencing family surrogates' decisions. Methods: This is a descriptive and cross-sectional study. Patients with dementia and their family surrogates from Dementia Outpatient Clinic of a teaching hospital in southern Taiwan were included. Data were collected using chart review and questionnaire survey. Influential factors were analyzed using multiple logistic regression. Results: One hundred and forty of the 223 participants (62.8%) have intention to sign DNR consents for their dementia relatives. Factors influencing the intention were: (1) Comorbid with musculoskeletal diseases or diabetes (p < .05); (2) psychological symptoms of repetitive wording and behavior (p < .05); (3) spouse (p < .05) and lineal relatives (p < .01); (4) previous discussion between families and patient about DNR directive (p = .001); (5) believers of Taiwan folk belief (Buddhism or Taoism) (p < .05). Conclusions: Advanced dementia patients cannot express intention about their end-of-life care and depend on family surrogates to decide for them. Our study showed that spouse and direct relatives, comorbidities of musculoskeletal disease or diabetes, psychological symptoms of repetitive wording and behavior, previous discussion about patients' intention, and believers of Taiwan folk belief are all positive influencing factors for surrogates to consent DNR directive for patients. Our findings are important in promoting DNR directive for PwD. Clinical implications: Our results may help to promote DNR decisions for dementia patients, especially in Chinese populations.

The interactive effect of advanced cancer patient and caregiver prognostic understanding on patients' completion of Do Not Resuscitate orders.

OBJECTIVE: Advanced cancer patients' prognostic understanding is associated with completion of Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) orders, which often represent engagement in advance care planning (ACP). Given caregivers' critical roles in patient decision-making about ACP and end-of-life care, caregivers' prognostic understanding may have a large additive effect. The present study examined the association between the main and interactive effects of advanced cancer patient and caregiver prognostic understanding on DNR order completion. METHODS: Data were analyzed from a combined dataset of 2 sequential multi-institutional, longitudinal cohort studies of patients with advanced cancer and their informal caregivers (n = 279 dyads) from 2002 to 2008 (Coping with Cancer 1) and 2010 to 2015 (Coping with Cancer 2). Patients' and caregivers' prognostic understanding regarding life-expectancy (≤ 12 months [prognostic understanding], >12 months [lack of prognostic understanding]) was assessed. DNR order completion was assessed through self-report and confirmed through cross-checking with medical records. RESULTS: Multivariable modeling of the main and interactive effects revealed the interactive effect, but not the individual effects, of patients' and caregivers' prognostic understanding was significantly associated with higher odds of patients' DNR order completion, adjusting for potential confounds (AOR = 5.89, P = 0.04). For dyads in which both the patient and caregiver had prognostic understanding regarding life expectancy of ≤12 months, 70.7% of patients had completed DNR orders compared with 31.6% to 38.9% in which 1 or both lacked prognostic understanding. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the need for ensuring accurate patient and caregiver prognostic understanding in increasing DNR order completion, which may provide a framework for improving engagement in ACP more broadly.

Do-not-attempt-resuscitation (DNAR) orders: understanding and interpretation of their use in the hospitalised patient in Ireland. A brief report.

Following the introduction of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders in the 1970s, there was widespread misinterpretation of the term among healthcare professionals. In this brief report, we present findings from a survey of healthcare professionals. Our aim was to examine current understanding of the term do-not-attempt-resuscitate (DNAR), decision-making surrounding DNAR and awareness of current guidelines. The survey was distributed to doctors and nurses in a university teaching hospital and affiliated primary care physicians in Dublin via email and by hard copy at educational meetings from July to December 2014. A total of 519 completed the survey. The response rate in the hospital doctors group was 35.5% (187/527), 19.8% (292/1477) in the nurses group but 68.8% (150/218) in the specialist nurses group and 40% (40/100) in the primary care physician group.Alarmingly, our results demonstrate that 26.8% of staff nurses and 30% of primary care physicians surveyed believed that a patient with a DNAR order could not receive any/at least one of a list of simple treatments including antibiotics, physiotherapy, intravenous fluids, pain relief, oxygen, nasogastric feeding or airway suctioning, which were higher percentages compared to the other hospital doctors and experienced nurses groups with statistically significant differences (p<0.001). Furthermore, a higher percentage of staff nurses (26.8%) and primary care physicians (22.5%) believed that a patient with a DNAR order could not be referred to hospital from home/a nursing home, when compared with other healthcare groups (p<0.001). Our findings highlight continued misunderstanding and over-interpretation of DNAR orders. Further collaboration and information is required for meaningful Advance Care Plans.

Resuscitation decisions at the end of life: medical views and the juridification of practice.

BACKGROUND: Concerns about decision making related to resuscitation have led to two important challenges in the courts resulting in new legal precedents for decision-making practice. Systematic research investigating the experiences of doctors involved in decisions about resuscitation in light of the recent changes in law remains lacking. AIM: To analyse the practice of resuscitation decision making on hospital wards from the perspectives of doctors. DESIGN: The data presented in this paper were collected as part of a wider research study of end-of-life care in an acute hospital setting. Data collection comprised ethnographic non-participant observation on two acute hospital wards and individual interviews with patients, relatives and healthcare professionals caring for patients thought to be approaching the end of life. Data were analysed using a constructivist grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Discussions and decision making about resuscitation present many challenges for those involved on acute medical wards. The data highlight the potential for multiple interpretations of legal precedents, creating misunderstandings that may impact patient care in less positive ways. CONCLUSIONS: This paper provides unique insights into how doctors respond to the changing medico-legal culture and the subsequent effects on patient care. It demonstrates how the juridification of medical practice can occur. It highlights the potential benefit of a structure to support clinicians, patients and relatives in discussing and navigating decisions around care at the end of life in line with the patient's wishes and preferences. Recommendations for future research are made and legal ramifications are discussed.