Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33136221›Full record

ArticleHEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues2022

Experience with a Revised Hospital Policy on Not Offering Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation.

Andrew M Courtwright, Emily Rubin, Kimberly S Erler, Julia I Bandini, Mary Zwirner, M Cornelia Cremens, Thomas H McCoy, Ellen M Robinson

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Andrew M CourtwrightDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9511-5975
Emily RubinEdwin H. Cassem Optimum Care Committee, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Kimberly S ErlerEdwin H. Cassem Optimum Care Committee, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Julia I BandiniRAND Corporation, Boston, MA, USA.
Mary ZwirnerEdwin H. Cassem Optimum Care Committee, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
M Cornelia CremensEdwin H. Cassem Optimum Care Committee, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Thomas H McCoyEdwin H. Cassem Optimum Care Committee, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Ellen M RobinsonEdwin H. Cassem Optimum Care Committee, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. ERobinson1@mgh.harvard.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Critical care society guidelines recommend that ethics committees mediate intractable conflict over potentially inappropriate treatment, including Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) status. There are, however, limited data on cases and circumstances in which ethics consultants recommend not offering cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) despite patient or surrogate requests and whether physicians follow these recommendations. This was a retrospective cohort of all adult patients at a large academic medical center for whom an ethics consult was requested for disagreement over DNR status. Patient demographic predictors of ethics consult outcomes were analyzed. In 42 of the 116 cases (36.2%), the patient or surrogate agreed to the clinician recommended DNR order following ethics consultation. In 72 of 74 (97.3%) of the remaining cases, ethics consultants recommended not offering CPR. Physicians went on to write a DNR order without patient/surrogate consent in 57 (79.2%) of those cases. There were no significant differences in age, race/ethnicity, country of origin, or functional status between patients where a DNR order was and was not placed without consent. Physicians were more likely to place a DNR order for patients believed to be imminently dying (p = 0.007). The median time from DNR order to death was 4 days with a 90-day mortality of 88.2%. In this single-center cohort study, there was no evidence that patient demographic factors affected ethics consultants' recommendation to withhold CPR despite patient/surrogate requests. Physicians were most likely to place a DNR order without consent for imminently dying patients.

Indexed as

Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationEthics ConsultationAdultCohort StudiesHospitalsHumansPolicyResuscitation OrdersRetrospective StudiesCardiopulmonary resuscitationDo Not ResuscitateEnd of lifeEthics consultationMedical ethicsMedical futility

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.