Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Orders Research Articles

A global pandemic is not a good time to introduce ‘opt-out’ for organ donation

Following several international examples, England introduced a system of deemed consent for organ donation in May 2020. This had been planned for over a year. However, the unprecedented circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic raise issues that make the timing of this change unfortunate. The planned public awareness campaign has thus far been overshadowed by media coverage of the pandemic, and will likely continue to be, creating a situation in which a significant portion of the population may be unaware of having become potential organ donors. Further, the immediate impact of the new policy is likely to be significantly weakened by the suspension of the majority of organ donation and transplant activity. In this article, we first outline the details of the new model introduced in England, before considering the impact of the pandemic on transplantation services. We put forward three ethical reasons why, given the unprecedented circumstances, the change should have been postponed. We argue that (1) COVID-19 dominating headlines will prevent widespread awareness of the change, thereby undermining the autonomy of those who do not wish to be donors; (2) a lack of transplant activity during the pandemic will make the impact of the change difficult to measure; and (3) trust in the new system may be damaged given controversial decisions regarding Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation orders and the allocation of scarce intensive care resources. These reasons combined make for a shaky start at best and present a risk of the new system failing to achieve its desired and essential effect of increasing the number of voluntary organ donors.

Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Orders in General Surgery - Are we Getting It Right?

Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Orders in General Surgery - Are we Getting It Right?

Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation orders in acute medical settings: a qualitative study

Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) orders have been shown to be independently associated with patients receiving fewer treatments, reduced admission to intensive care and worse outcomes even after accounting for known confounders. The mechanisms by which they influence practice have not previously been studied. To present a rich qualitative description of the use of the DNACPR form in a hospital ward setting and explore what influence it has on the everyday care of patients. Multi-source qualitative study, primarily using direct observation and semi-structured interviews based on two acute wards in a typical middle-sized National Health Service hospital in UK. The study identified a range of ways in which DNACPR orders influence ward practice, beyond dictating whether or not cardiopulmonary resuscitation should be attempted. Five key themes encapsulate the range of potential impacts emerging from the data: the specific design and primacy of the form, matters relating to clinical decision making, staff reflections on how the form can affect care, staff concern over 'inappropriate' resuscitation, and discussions with patients/relatives about DNACPR decisions. Overall, it was found that while the DNACPR form is recognized as serving a useful purpose, its influence negatively permeated many aspects of clinical practice. DNACPR orders can act as unofficial 'stop' signs and can often signify the inappropriate end to clinical decision making and proactive care. Many clinicians were uncomfortable discussing DNACPR orders with patients and families. These findings help understand why patients with DNACPR orders have worse outcomes, as such they may inform improvements in resuscitation policies.