ArticleResuscitation plus2022
Comparison of clinicians' perceptions of the Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing Safety and Quality of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation During Coronavirus Pandemic.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) process encourages collaboration between clinicians, patients, and relatives on emergency care wishes and resuscitation decisions. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinicians' views of the ReSPECT process was unknown. We examined whether there were changes in clinicians' knowledge, skills, and attitudes regarding ReSPECT during the pandemic.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey of clinicians at one acute hospital in the UK. We developed a questionnaire with a defined 5-point Likert scale and asked clinicians to recall their pre-pandemic views on ReSPECT and report their current views at the time of survey distribution (May 2020, end of the first COVID-19 wave in the UK). We compared their self-reported views before and during the pandemic.
resultsWe analysed 171 questionnaire responses. Clinicians reported ReSPECT telephone discussions with relatives were more challenging (pre-pandemic median 4, IQR 3-4; during pandemic median 4, IQR 4-5; p < 0.001) and negative emotions whilst conducting these discussions with relatives increased during the pandemic (pre-pandemic median 3, IQR 2-3.5; during pandemic median 3, IQR 2-4; p < 0.001). Clinicians also reported an increase in the importance of reaching a shared understanding of decisions with patients and relatives (pre-pandemic median 4, IQR 4-5; during pandemic median 5, IQR 4-5; p < 0.001).
conclusionsThere were differences in clinicians' knowledge, skills, and attitudes scores before and during the pandemic. Our findings highlighted that clinicians could benefit from training in remote ReSPECT conversations with relatives.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.