Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Research Articles

Evaluating the Documentation of Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) among Older Adults Inpatients

Abstract Background Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) can save a person’s life, but rate of success is low especially in older frail cohort. Attempted CPR is not without harm and many patients long for a natural dignified death. DNACPR orders provide a means by which decisions to withhold CPR & set ceilings of appropriate care in hospital can be recorded in advance of a potential cardiac event. Our department aims enhance the overall quality of end-of-life care for our patients. The objectives of this project were to evaluate the documentation around end-of-life care to support the introduction of a new DNACPR policy in September 2023. Methods A retrospective review of the deaths in the department for the period between July 2021 to July 2023 was undertaken. Thirty random charts from the deaths were examined, assessing the timing and quality of the DNACPR documentation and communication. A further random 30 charts of patients discharged alive were reviewed to assess any existing care plan for DNACPR. Results There were 202 deaths within the study period (mean age was 85, 114 (56%) male). Of the deaths examined, there were 50% male & mean age of 83. The average length of stay (LOS) was14.5 days. This was a dependent group with 56.7% having a clinical frailty score of >/= 6 and 43.4% having known dementia. DNACPR decisions and evidence of communication was documented in 29 patients (96.7%). Ceilings of care were documented in the majority. We also assessed 30 medical notes of community discharged patients (36.7% male, mean age 83, mean LOS 13.86). Pneumonia (33%) was the most common diagnosis. Only 13.3% had DNACPR and ceiling of care documentation. Conclusion Recognition of dying seems good in the department with room for improvement in broader advanced care discussions. Further training on end-of-life conversations is planned with regular simulation sessions.

Coaching doctors to improve ethical decision-making in adult hospitalized patients potentially receiving excessive treatment. The CODE stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial.

The aim of this study was to assess whether coaching doctors to enhance ethical decision-making in teams improves (1) goal-oriented care operationalized via written do-not-intubate and do-not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNI-DNACPR) orders in adult patients potentially receiving excessive treatment (PET) during their first hospital stay and (2) the quality of the ethical climate. We carried out a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial in the medical intensive care unit (ICU) and 9 referring internal medicine departments of Ghent University Hospital between February 2022 and February 2023. Doctors and nurses in charge of hospitalized patients filled out the ethical decision-making climate questionnaire (ethical decision-making climate questionnaire, EDMCQ) before and after the study, and anonymously identified PET via an electronic alert during the entire study period. All departments were randomly assigned to a 4-month coaching. At least one month of coaching was compared to less than one month coaching and usual care. The first primary endpoint was the incidence of written DNI-DNACPR decisions. The second primary endpoint was the EDMCQ before and after the study period.Because clinicians identified less PET than required to detect a difference in written DNI-DNACPR decisions, a post-hoc analysis on the overall population was performed. To reduce type I errors, we further restricted the analysis to one of our predefined secondary endpoints (mortality up to 1year). Of the 442 and 423 clinicians working before and after the study period, respectively 270 (61%) and 261 (61.7%) filled out the EDMCQ. Fifty of the 93 (53.7%) doctors participated in the coaching for a mean (standard deviation [SD]) of 4.36 (2.55) sessions. Of the 7254 patients, 125 (1.7%) were identified as PET, with 16 missing outcome data. Twenty-six of the PET and 624 of the overall population already had a written DNI-DNACPR decision at study entry, resulting in 83 and 6614 patients who were included in the main and post hoc analysis, respectively. The estimated incidence of written DNI-DNACPR decisions in the intervention vs. control arm was, respectively, 29.7% vs. 19.6% (odds ratio 4.24, 95% confidence interval 4.21-4.27; P < 0.001) in PET and 3.4% vs. 1.9% (1.65, 1.12-2.43; P = 0.011) in the overall study population. The estimated mortality at one year was respectively 85% vs. 83.7% (hazard ratio 2.76, 1.26-6.04; P = 0.011) and 14.5% vs. 15.1% (0.89, 0.72-1.09; P = 0.251). The mean difference in EDMCQ before and after the study period was 0.02 points (- 0.18 to 0.23; P = 0.815). This study suggests that coaching doctors regarding ethical decision-making in teams safely improves goal-oriented care operationalized via written DNI-DNACPR decisions in hospitalized patients, however without concomitantly improving the quality of the ethical climate.

A study of the documentation of withholding and withdrawing life‐sustaining therapies in a tertiary intensive care unit in Hong Kong

AbstractBackgroundIn the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), recommended end‐of‐life (EOL) care practice encompasses do‐not‐attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR), withholding (WH), and withdrawing (WD) life‐sustaining treatment (LST).ObjectivesOur study aims to evaluate the adequacy of physicians' documentation of EOL care practices.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective observational study, which evaluated the documentation of 18 pre‐identified critical components related to decision‐making, implementation, and communication of WD and WH of LST in a general medical‐surgical ICU of a tertiary hospital in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) of the People's Republic of China. One hundred twenty‐nine patients with EOL care before death were enrolled from 1 January 2013 to 31 March 2015. For documentation to be considered clear, the responsible ICU physician had to record notes in written form on the medical record.ResultsIn documenting the decision‐making process, the indication of patients' decision‐making capacity was present in 6.2% of the reviewed records. DNACPR orders were documented substantially poorer (51.6%) than WH/WD other LSTs (71.4%–96.9%) in documenting the implementation process. Reviewing the communication documentation showed that 15.5% detailed the process of determining the patient's previously expressed wishes, 16.3% included explanations of shared decisions and 5.4% covered substituted decisions. None of the patient records met the complete documentation criteria while 17% met the minimal compliance level, defined as records missing 30% or fewer items.ConclusionsDespite following international standards for EOL care, documentation by ICU physicians for key aspects of decision‐making, implementation, and communication for LST limitations was inadequate. Strategies to improve documentation should be encouraged.

Evaluating implementation of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator deactivation discussions in do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) forms: Audit from a tertiary care hospital in the United Kingdom

Evaluating implementation of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator deactivation discussions in do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) forms: Audit from a tertiary care hospital in the United Kingdom

Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) and treatment escalation plan (TEP) decisions: Developing a trust-wide audit

Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) and treatment escalation plan (TEP) decisions: Developing a trust-wide audit

Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation decision-making process: scoping review

ObjectivesTo conduct a scoping review to explore the evidence of the process of do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) decision-making.MethodsWe conducted a systematic search and review of articles from 1...

GPs' views on emergency care treatment plans: an online survey.

A holistic approach to emergency care treatment planning is needed to ensure that patients' preferences are considered should their clinical condition deteriorate. To address this, emergency care and treatment plans (ECTPs) have been introduced. Little is known about their use in general practice. To find out GPs' experiences of, and views on, using ECTPs. Online survey of GPs practising in England. A total of 841 GPs were surveyed using the monthly online survey provided by medeConnect, a market research company. Forty-one per cent of responders' practices used Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) plans for ECTP, 8% used other ECTPs, and 51% used Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) forms. GPs were the predominant professional group completing ECTPs in the community. There was broad support for a wider range of community-based health and social care professionals being able to complete ECTPs. There was no system for reviewing ECTPs in 20% of responders' practices. When compared with using a DNACPR form, GPs using a ReSPECT form for ECTP were more comfortable having conversations about emergency care treatment with patients (odds ratio [OR] = 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.1 to 2.69) and family members (OR =1.85, 95% CI = 1.19 to 2.87). The potential benefits and challenges of widening the pool of health and social care professionals initiating and/or completing the ECTP process needs consideration. ReSPECT plans appear to make GPs more comfortable with ECTP discussions, supporting their implementation. Practice-based systems for reviewing ECTP decisions should be strengthened.

Intensive care following in-hospital cardiac arrest / periarrest calls—experience from one Scottish hospital

BackgroundIn-hospital cardiac arrest/periarrest is a recognised trigger for consideration of admission to the intensive care unit (ICU). We aimed to investigate the rates of ICU admission following in-hospital cardiac arrest/periarrest, evaluate the outcomes of such patients and assess whether anticipatory care planning had taken place prior to the adult resuscitation team being called.MethodsAnalysis of all referrals to the ICU page-holder within our district general hospital is between 1st November 2018 and 31st May 2019. From this, the frequency of adult resuscitation team calls was determined. Case notes were then reviewed to determine details of the events, patient outcomes and the use of anticipatory care planning tools on wards.ResultsOf the 506 referrals to the ICU page-holder, 141 (27.9%) were adult resuscitation team calls (114 periarrests and 27 cardiac arrests). Twelve patients were excluded due to health records being unavailable. Admission rates to ICU were low — 17.4% for cardiac arrests (4/23 patients), 5.7% (6/106) following periarrest. The primary reason for not admitting to ICU was patients being “too well” at the time of review (78/129 — 60.5%). Prior to adult resuscitation team call, treatment escalation plans had been completed in 27.9% (36/129) with Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) forms present in 15.5% of cases (20/129). Four cardiac arrest calls were made in the presence of a valid DNACPR form, frequently due to a lack of awareness of the patient’s resuscitation status.ConclusionsThis study highlights the significant workload for the ICU page-holder brought about by adult resuscitation team calls. There is a low admission rate from these calls, and, at the time of resuscitation team call, anticipatory planning is frequently either incomplete or poorly communicated. Addressing these issues requires a collaborative approach between ICU and non-ICU physicians and highlights the need for larger studies to develop scoring systems to aid objective admission decision-making.

Family Medicine Residents' Knowledge and Attitudes About End-of-Life Care in Taif City, Saudi Arabia.

Background End-of-life care is essential for individuals with advanced illness and their families, providing comfort, symptom control, and dignity in the final year of life. Additionally, physician competence requires the ability to communicate, make decisions, and create relationships in end-of-life care. This study assesses family physicians' knowledge and attitude regarding end-of-life care in Taif, Saudi Arabia. Methods Thisdescriptive cross-sectional study conducted between October and November 2021 assessed the knowledge and attitudes of 163 family physicians in Taif City, Saudi Arabia, regarding end-of-life care. Using a convenient sampling technique, an adapted and validated questionnaire was administered electronically, collecting sociodemographic information and assessing participants' knowledge and attitudes. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics in Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS, version 28) (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Armonk, NY). Results Findings included that 41.1% of residents believed the patient and family should be informed about diagnoses and prognoses in advanced diseases. At the same time, attitudes varied, with 45.4% agreeing that discussing such information could lead to patient depression and 42.9% believing it held no privilege for patients. Additionally, 57.7% recognized that grief reactions would occur, but patients would eventually adjust, and 44.8% agreed that discussing diagnoses would decrease patient anxiety. However, limited awareness of advance directives was evident, with 12.3% reporting being well aware and 45.4% having never heard of them. There was uncertainty and hesitancy regarding Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions, with 39.9% being well aware and 46% having heard of it without a strong understanding. Conclusion The findings revealed a mixed landscape, with physicians demonstrating awareness of the importance of transparent communication but needing more knowledge in areas such as advance directives and complex decision-making. The study highlighted the need for targeted education to address these gaps and promote a more informed and consistent approach to end-of-life care.

77 Introducing a Do Not Attempt Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) and treatment escalation plan (TEP) guideline in an acute hospital.

Abstract Background In hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation has a 13–20% survival rate to hospital discharge. Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) orders reduce resuscitation activity in people who are unlikely to survive due to underlying co-morbidities. The project aimed to identify current DNACPR practice and cardiac arrest calls in an acute care hospital and to improve communicating and documentation of DNACPR decisions. Methods A baseline audit of 20 medical charts identified variable practice on documenting DNACPR, inappropriate cardiac arrest calls and poor communication between the multidisciplinary team and patients on DNACPR decisions. A sub-committee of Medical Clinical Governance developed a hospital wide Guideline and Proforma for DNACPR that included a treatment escalation plan (TEP). Using quality improvement methodology and plan-do-study-act cycles the DNACPR proforma and decision support framework was refined and tested. Implementation strategies included stakeholder engagement, education, re-formatting documentation and recruitment of ward champions over a six month period. Post implementation audit measured compliance with completing the proforma and resuscitation calls. Results Clinical audit in February 2023 of 33 patient medical records identified 100% (n = 33) of patients with a DNACPR decision had the correct form in use. 96% documented communication with patients. All proformas were signed by a senior decision maker, included a TEP and were filed correctly in the patients notes. There was a 25% reduction in cardiac arrest calls. Only 56% of proformas were signed by nursing staff. Conclusion Implementing a standardised DNACPR proforma was feasible and improved documentation, visibility and ease of locating DNACPR decisions. It promoted timely communication with patients and families setting realistic goals of care in the TEP. In turn there has been a reduction in cardiac arrest calls. Nurses role in the process remains sub-optimal and there is a need to understand the experience of patients and families.

Code status orders in hospitalized patients with COVID-19

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic created complex challenges regarding the timing and appropriateness of do-not-attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) and/or Do Not Intubate (DNI) code status orders. This paper sought to determine differences in utilization of DNACPR and/or DNI orders during different time periods of the COVID-19 pandemic, including prevalence, predictors, timing, and outcomes associated with having a documented DNACPR and/or DNI order in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. MethodsA cohort study of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 at two hospitals located in the Midwest. DNACPR code status orders including, DNI orders, demographics, labs, COVID-19 treatments, clinical interventions during hospitalization, and outcome measures including mortality, discharge disposition, and hospice utilization were collected. Patients were divided into two time periods (early and late) by timing of hospitalization during the first wave of the pandemic (March–October 2020). ResultsAmong 1375 hospitalized patients with COVID-19, 19% (n = 258) of all patients had a documented DNACPR and/or DNI order. In multivariable analysis, age (older) p =< 0.01, OR 1.12 and hospitalization early in the pandemic p = 0.01, OR 2.08, were associated with having a DNACPR order. Median day from DNACPR order to death varied between cohorts p => 0.01 (early cohort 5 days versus late cohort 2 days). In-hospital mortality did not differ between cohorts among patients with DNACPR orders, p = 0.80. ConclusionsThere was a higher prevalence of DNACPR and/or DNI orders and these orders were written earlier in the hospital course for patients hospitalized early in the pandemic versus later despite similarities in clinical characteristics and medical interventions. Changes in clinical care between cohorts may be due to fear of resource shortages and changes in knowledge about COVID-19.

One death doesn't fit all: how should we approach end-of-life care in very frail adults?

Death is inevitable. When, however, is bound by uncertainty in frailty. A purely proactive approach to dying - exemplified by the DNACPR (do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation) form - is unrealistic. What does a good death look like - and who decides? To understand the experiences of primary care clinicians and bereaved relatives in end-of-life (EOL) care and inform future service provision for frail and dying people. We conducted 21 semi-structured interviews with 12 GPs and 9 relatives of recently deceased patients and completed an inductive thematic analysis. We identified four themes: 1) relationships and duty of care: many participants identified the responsibility - medical and familial - associated with EOL care. Discussions and decision-making around death, while crucial, create a significant emotional burden; 2) power and authority: the decision-making process involves multilayered power dynamics between families, patients, and clinicians in attempts to manage uncertainty. Medical judgements' authority can be simultaneously welcomed and challenged. Advanced care planning can become symbolic of hidden tensions around acceptance of death; 3) conflicting ideologies: conflicting binary ideas around a 'good death' recurred, with no universal preferences. Understanding where families, the dying, and the doctor sit on these spectra is crucial and rarely communicated; 4) resource limitations (for example, lack of social care support) constrain the decision-making process. You only get one chance to die well. Thoughtful and empathetic decision-making in a reactive and complex environment is crucial to supporting patients, loved ones, and clinicians. A one-size-fits-all proactive 'death conveyor belt' is unrealistic.

'That's as hard a decision as you will ever have to make': the experiences of people who discussed Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation on behalf of a relative during the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 brought additional challenges to Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decision-making, which was already a contentious issue. In the UK, reports of poor DNACPR decision-making and communication emerged in 2020, including from the regulator, the Care Quality Commission. This paper explores the experiences of people who discussed DNACPR with a healthcare professional on behalf of a relative during the coronavirus pandemic, with the aim of identifying areas of good practice and what needs to be improved. a total of 39 people participated in semi-structured interviews via video conferencing software or telephone. Data were evaluated using Framework Analysis. results are presented around three main themes: understanding, communication and impact. Participants' understanding about DNACPR was important, as those with better understanding tended to reflect more positively on their discussions with clinicians. The role of relatives in the decision-making process was a frequent source of misunderstanding. Healthcare professionals' communication skills were important. Where discussions went well, relatives were given clear explanations and the opportunity to ask questions. However many relatives felt that conversations were rushed. DNACPR discussions can have a lasting impact-relatives reported them to be significant moments in care journeys. Many relatives perceived that they were asked to decide whether their relative should receive CPR and described enduring emotional consequences, including guilt. the pandemic has illuminated deficiencies in current practice around DNACPR discussion, which can have difficult to anticipate and lasting negative consequences for relatives. This research raises questions about the current approach to DNACPR decision-making.

Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation documentation: a quality improvement project

ObjectivesThis quality improvement project looked at enhancing do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) documentation in a Welsh National Health Service trust.MethodsA full clinical review cycle was carried out, evaluating 50...

A step-by-step guide to DNACPR from the Resuscitation Council UK

Resuscitation Council UK ReSPECT (Recommended summary plan for emergency care and treatment) clinical lead Catherine Baldock and legal adviser for the ReSPECT process Alex Ruck Keene KC (Hon) answer some of the questions most commonly asked about do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) recommendations.

Preparing for end-of-life: learning from Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation decision-making during COVID-19.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions were made differently. This included more prominent roles for specialties such as psychiatry and doctors in training. Concerns about inappropriate DNAR decisions led to anxiety for doctors, patients and the public. Positive outcomes may have included earlier and better-quality end-of life-discussions. However, COVID-19 exposed the need for support, training and guidance in this area for all doctors. It also highlighted the importance of effective public education about advanced care planning.

1292P A review of in-hospital end-of-life care (EOLC) for oncology patients during the COVID-19 pandemic

Globally, 40 to 60% of all patient deaths occur in an acute hospital setting. Patients with cancer make up a significant proportion of those who die in hospitals. Clinicians involved in their care should be competent at recognising dying and documenting the quality of EOLC delivered to patients and families. Continued evaluation and audit of the care of the dying patient is essential for quality improvement at an organisational level. The management of patients who died in Cork University Hospital under the Oncology Service’s care between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2021 was analysed. Paper and electronic records were reviewed, and patient care was assessed using the Oxford Quality Indicators (QIs) for EOLC. Ethical approval was granted by the Cork University Hospital Quality and Patient Safety Department. 66 patients were identified (M:F 29:37). The median age at time of death was 64 years [30-82]. The average length of admission resulting in death was 12.4 days [0-44]. 6% of patients died in the emergency department and 12% of patients died in the intensive care unit. The risk of dying was documented in 95.5% of cases and was communicated to 65.2% of patients and 82.8% of patients’ families. There was a do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) order in place for 89.4% of patients. Unnecessary investigations and interventions were stopped for 71.2% of patients. Symptom assessment was documented in 81.8% of cases. What was important to the patient was documented as explored in 24.2% of cases. 10.6% of patients were offered a chaplain or faith advisor. The inpatient palliative care team were involved in 77.2% of cases. Using the Oxford QIs for EOLC, the average quality score was 3.5, on a scale of 1-5: 1 (very poor): 0%, 2 (poor): 21.2%, 3 (satisfactory): 33.3%, 4 (good): 19.7%, 5 (excellent): 25.8%. The average EOLC quality score was 3.5. Oncology patients at our centre received, on average, satisfactory-to-good quality EOLC. Shortcomings identified have led to the development of a care of the dying Pro-forma to improve EOLC delivery and a survey of bereaved relatives to identify gaps in care. Holistic care of the dying is a fundamental part of the cancer care spectrum and needs to be prioritised in the acute hospital setting.

How is COVID-19 changing the ways doctors make end-of-life decisions?

BackgroundThis research explores how the COVID-19 pandemic has changed the ways doctors make end-of-life decisions, particularly around Do Not Attempt Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR), treatment escalation and doctors’ views on the...

978 ADVANCED CARE PLANNING IN PATIENTS WITH PARKINSONIAN DISORDERS

Abstract Introduction Advanced care planning (ACP) supports individuals to make decisions regarding their future care. Guidelines (NICE, 2017) recommend offering ACP discussions to people with Parkinson’s Disease (PD), but uptake lags behind other countries (Sokol, NPJ Parkinson’s Dis, 2019, 22:5–24). As part of a project to improve ACP in the community we audited ACP practice at North Bristol NHS Trust. Method Records for 100 patients with idiopathic PD or atypical Parkinsonian syndromes seen in Movement Disorders clinics from March to October 2021 were scrutinised. ACP was defined as including: Do not attempt cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR), Advanced Statement of Wishes, Advanced Decision to Refuse Treatment (ADRT) and Lasting Power of Attorney (LPOA). Disease severity was assessed using Hoehn and Yahr (H&amp;Y) score. Results 87 records were audited, 13 were excluded due to non-Parkinsonian disorders (11) or unavailable records (2). ACP was completed for 22 (25%) cases, (18 DNACPR and 11 Advanced Statements, 1 LPA, 0 ADRT). Informal ACP, such as documentation of wishes in clinic letters, were present in 5 cases. Of the 22 instances of ACP, 20 were recorded on Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) forms. Preferences included ventilation (10), hospital admission (6), life prolonging treatments (6), preferred place of care (4), nutrition (0). Completed ACP was associated with higher H&amp;Y scores or atypical syndromes. Conclusion It is recognised that there is a need to further investigate how ACP is delivered for patients with Parkinsonian Disorders. Three US studies estimated ACP rates ranging from 14.6%–53%. (Nimmons, European Journal of Neurology 2020, 27:1971–1987). We are not aware of any comparable UK data. This is a preliminary audit for a project to improve ACP within our MD Service. We are collecting further data on the views of our community movement disorders team with a view to upskilling in ACP.

The Vicissitude of Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) Order During COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan - A Retrospective Cohort Study.

IntroductionJapan went through five surges of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) or “waves”. However, their impacts on the do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) of the patients are not known.MethodsA retrospective single-center cohort study was conducted for all hospitalized patients with COVID-19 from March 1, 2020, to September 30, 2021. Their code status was retrieved, and its association with the waves and other parameters, such as in-hospital mortality, was investigated. The relationship between DNACPR status and each wave was examined, as well as the effect on in-hospital mortality.ResultsA total of 1153 patients were hospitalized with the diagnosis of COVID-19 during the study period. On admission, 117 patients (10.1%) had DNACPR orders, 373 patients (32.4%) were on full code, 45 patients (3.9%) stated that they cannot decide code status. DNACPR rate appeared to increase at the summit of each wave. Subsequently, 160 patients (13.9%) became DNACPR status, 385 patients (33.4%) became full code, and 12 patients (1.0%) stated that they remained unable to decide code status. There was no association between DNACPR status and each wave, and DNACPR status was not associated with higher mortality (P = 0.87), both by logistic regression analysis.ConclusionDNACPR status among hospitalized COVID-19 patients appeared to have changed over multiple waves in Japan, but it is more likely due to the change of the patients’ demographics, particularly their age. DNACPR was common among the elderly, but it was not independently associated with higher mortality.