17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Insights into Chinese perspectives on do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders from an examination of DNR order form completeness for cancer patients

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          Discussing end-of-life care with patients is often considered taboo, and signing a do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order is difficult for most patients, especially in Chinese culture. This study investigated distributions and details related to the signing of DNR orders, as well as the completeness of various DNR order forms.

          Methods

          Retrospective chart reviews were performed. We screened all charts from a teaching hospital in Taiwan for patients who died of cancer during the period from January 2010 to December 2011. A total of 829 patient records were included in the analysis. The details of the DNR order forms were recorded.

          Results

          The DNR order signing rate was 99.8 %. The percentage of DNR orders signed by patients themselves (DNR-P) was 22.6 %, while the percentage of orders signed by surrogates (DNR-S) was 77.2 %. The percentage of signed DNR forms that were completely filled out was 78.4 %. The percentage of DNR-S forms that were completed was 81.7 %, while the percentage of DNR-P forms that were completely filled out was only 67.6 %.

          Conclusion

          Almost all the cancer patients had a signed DNR order, but for the majority of them, the order was signed by a surrogate. Negative attitudes of discussing death from medical professionals and/or the family members of patients may account for the higher number of signed DNR-S orders than DNR-P orders. Moreover, early obtainment of signed DNR orders should be sought, as getting the orders earlier could promote the quality of end-of-life care, especially in non-oncology wards.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          End-of-life care discussions among patients with advanced cancer: a cohort study.

          National guidelines recommend that physicians discuss end-of-life (EOL) care planning with patients with cancer whose life expectancy is less than 1 year. To evaluate the incidence of EOL care discussions for patients with stage IV lung or colorectal cancer and where, when, and with whom these discussions take place. Prospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with lung or colorectal cancer from 2003 to 2005. Participants lived in Northern California, Los Angeles County, North Carolina, Iowa, or Alabama or received care in 1 of 5 large HMOs or 1 of 15 Veterans Health Administration sites. 2155 patients with stage IV lung or colorectal cancer. End-of-life care discussions reported in patient and surrogate interviews or documented in medical records through 15 months after diagnosis. 73% of patients had EOL care discussions identified by at least 1 source. Among the 1470 patients who died during follow-up, 87% had EOL care discussions, compared with 41% of the 685 patients who were alive at the end of follow-up. Of the 1081 first EOL care discussions documented in records, 55% occurred in the hospital. Oncologists documented EOL care discussions with only 27% of their patients. Among 959 patients with documented EOL care discussions who died during follow-up, discussions took place a median of 33 days before death. The depth and quality of EOL care discussions was not evaluated. Much of the information about discussions came from surrogates of patients who died before baseline interviews could be obtained. Although most patients with stage IV lung or colorectal cancer discuss EOL care planning with physicians before death, many discussions occur during acute hospital care, with providers other than oncologists, and late in the course of illness. National Cancer Institute and Department of Veterans Affairs.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Physician factors associated with discussions about end-of-life care.

            Guidelines recommend advanced care planning for terminally ill patients with <1 year to live. Few data are available regarding when physicians and their terminally ill patients typically discuss end-of-life issues. A national survey was conducted of physicians caring for cancer patients about timing of discussions regarding prognosis, do not resuscitate (DNR) status, hospice, and preferred site of death with their terminally ill patients. Logistic regression was used to identify physician and practice characteristics associated with earlier discussions. Among 4074 respondents, 65% would discuss prognosis "now" (defined as patient has 4 months to 6 months to live, asymptomatic). Fewer would discuss DNR status (44%), hospice (26%), or preferred site of death (21%) immediately, with most physicians waiting for patient symptoms or until there are no more treatments to offer. In multivariate analyses, younger physicians more often discussed prognosis, DNR status, hospice, and site of death "now" (all P < .05). Surgeons and oncologists were more likely than noncancer specialists to discuss prognosis "now" (P = .008), but noncancer specialists were more likely than cancer specialists to discuss DNR status, hospice, and preferred site of death "now" (all P < .001). Most physicians report they would not discuss end-of-life options with terminally ill patients who are feeling well, instead waiting for symptoms or until there are no more treatments to offer. More research is needed to understand physicians' reasons for timing of discussions and how their propensity to aggressively treat metastatic disease influences timing, as well as how the timing of discussions influences patient and family experiences at the end of life.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Hospital do-not-resuscitate orders: why they have failed and how to fix them.

              Do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders have been in use in hospitals nationwide for over 20 years. Nonetheless, as currently implemented, they fail to adequately fulfill their two intended purposes--to support patient autonomy and to prevent non-beneficial interventions. These failures lead to serious consequences. Patients are deprived of the opportunity to make informed decisions regarding resuscitation, and CPR is performed on patients who would have wanted it withheld or are harmed by the procedure. This article highlights the persistent problems with today's use of inpatient DNR orders, i.e., DNR discussions do not occur frequently enough and occur too late in the course of patients' illnesses to allow their participation in resuscitation decisions. Furthermore, many physicians fail to provide adequate information to allow patients or surrogates to make informed decisions and inappropriately extrapolate DNR orders to limit other treatments. Because these failings are primarily due to systemic factors that result in deficient physician behaviors, we propose strategies to target these factors including changing the hospital culture, reforming hospital policies on DNR discussions, mandating provider communication skills training, and using financial incentives. These strategies could help overcome existing barriers to proper DNR discussions and align the use of DNR orders closer to their intended purposes of supporting patient self-determination and avoiding non-beneficial interventions at the end of life.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                +886-3-5381183 , +886-3-6102332 , ling5966@yahoo.com.tw
                Journal
                Support Care Cancer
                Support Care Cancer
                Supportive Care in Cancer
                Springer Berlin Heidelberg (Berlin/Heidelberg )
                0941-4355
                1433-7339
                8 May 2013
                8 May 2013
                2013
                : 21
                : 9
                : 2593-2598
                Affiliations
                [ ]Department of Nursing, National Taiwan University Hospital, Hsinchu Branch, Taiwan
                [ ]Department of Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Hsinchu Branch, Taiwan
                [ ]Department of Nursing, Yuanpei University, 306 Yuanpei Rd., Hsinchu, 30015 Taiwan
                Article
                1827
                10.1007/s00520-013-1827-2
                3728434
                23653012
                50fce28a-ec68-4c9f-b7f3-665338910aa6
                © The Author(s) 2013

                Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.

                History
                : 21 January 2013
                : 21 April 2013
                Categories
                Original Article
                Custom metadata
                © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                chinese culture,palliative care,do-not-resuscitate (dnr),end-of-life care discussion,cancer

                Comments

                Comment on this article