Richard A Field1, Zoë Fritz2, Annalie Baker3, Amy Grove4, Gavin D Perkins5. 1. Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust, Bordesley Green East, Birmingham B9 5SS, United Kingdom; University of Warwick, Gibbett Hill, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom. 2. University of Warwick, Gibbett Hill, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom; Department of Acute Medicine, Cambridge University Hospitals, United Kingdom. 3. Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust, Bordesley Green East, Birmingham B9 5SS, United Kingdom. 4. University of Warwick, Gibbett Hill, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom. 5. Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust, Bordesley Green East, Birmingham B9 5SS, United Kingdom; University of Warwick, Gibbett Hill, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom. Electronic address: g.d.perkins@warwick.ac.uk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The treatment for a cardiac arrest, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), may be lifesaving following an acute, potentially reversible illness. Yet this treatment is unlikely to be effective if cardiac arrest occurs as part of the dying process towards the end of a person's natural life. Do not attempt CPR (DNACPR) decisions allow resuscitation to be withheld when it has little chance of success, or where the patient, or those close to the patient, indicate the burdens of CPR outweigh the benefits. This review sought to identify evidence for systems that improve the appropriate use of DNACPR decisions. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched (Medline, CINAHL and Embase) for English language articles from 2001 to 2014. RESULTS: 4090 citations were identified of which 37 studies were relevant. The overall quality of evidence was moderate to poor. Thematic synthesis identified key interventions which may improve DNACPR decision making. The most promising interventions involved structured discussion at the time of acute admission to hospital and review by specialist teams at the point of an acute deterioration. Linking DNACPR decisions to discussions about overall treatment plans provided greater clarity about goals of care, aided communication between clinicians and reduced harms. Standardised documentation proved helpful for improving the frequency and quality of recording DNACPR decisions. Patient and clinician education in isolation were associated with limited or no effects. CONCLUSION: Relatively simple process changes may enhance the appropriate use of and outcomes associated with DNACPR decisions. Systematic review registration number: PROSPERO2012:CRD42012002669.
BACKGROUND: The treatment for a cardiac arrest, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), may be lifesaving following an acute, potentially reversible illness. Yet this treatment is unlikely to be effective if cardiac arrest occurs as part of the dying process towards the end of a person's natural life. Do not attempt CPR (DNACPR) decisions allow resuscitation to be withheld when it has little chance of success, or where the patient, or those close to the patient, indicate the burdens of CPR outweigh the benefits. This review sought to identify evidence for systems that improve the appropriate use of DNACPR decisions. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched (Medline, CINAHL and Embase) for English language articles from 2001 to 2014. RESULTS: 4090 citations were identified of which 37 studies were relevant. The overall quality of evidence was moderate to poor. Thematic synthesis identified key interventions which may improve DNACPR decision making. The most promising interventions involved structured discussion at the time of acute admission to hospital and review by specialist teams at the point of an acute deterioration. Linking DNACPR decisions to discussions about overall treatment plans provided greater clarity about goals of care, aided communication between clinicians and reduced harms. Standardised documentation proved helpful for improving the frequency and quality of recording DNACPR decisions. Patient and clinician education in isolation were associated with limited or no effects. CONCLUSION: Relatively simple process changes may enhance the appropriate use of and outcomes associated with DNACPR decisions. Systematic review registration number: PROSPERO2012:CRD42012002669.
Authors: Caitlin Richardson-Royer; Imran Naqvi; Christopher Riffel; Lawrence Harvey; Domonique Smith; Dagmawe Ayalew; Nasim Motayar; Yaw Amoateng-Adjepong; Constantine A Manthous Journal: Int J Gen Med Date: 2018-02-12
Authors: Spyros D Mentzelopoulos; Keith Couper; Patrick Van de Voorde; Patrick Druwé; Marieke Blom; Gavin D Perkins; Ileana Lulic; Jana Djakow; Violetta Raffay; Gisela Lilja; Leo Bossaert Journal: Notf Rett Med Date: 2021-06-02 Impact factor: 0.826