Impediments to Writing Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders
Open Access
- 11 October 1999
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Medical Association (AMA) in Archives of internal medicine (1960)
- Vol. 159 (18) , 2213-2218
- https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.159.18.2213
Abstract
SINCE THE 1960s, American hospitals have had standing orders for medical personnel to initiate cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and call for emergency resuscitation upon the discovery of a patient who is pulseless or apneic.1 This requirement made no exceptions for the patient's underlying disease process or prognosis. During the 1970s, hospital regulations evolved to incorporate the moral principle of patient autonomy.2 Patients could request that CPR and other aggressive medical modalities not be initiated. Physicians would implement such a patient request by writing an order not to resuscitate the patient (a do-not-resuscitate [DNR] order).3 Furthermore, physicians have been exhorted to educate patients about the realities of their illnesses and to encourage acceptance of the physician's recommendation to forego aggressive medical interventions at the end of life.4,5 These changes in practice appeal to common sense and are widely accepted. These principles have been clearly supported by consensus statements from major medical societies6-10 and other organizations11,12 and have been codified in the Patient Self-determination Act of 1990.13This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- Marked improvement in recognition and completion of health care proxies. A randomized controlled trial of counseling by hospital patient representativesArchives of internal medicine (1960), 1996
- Advance end-of-life treatment planning. A research reviewArchives of internal medicine (1960), 1996
- Promoting inpatient directives about life-sustaining treatments in a community hospital. Results of a 3-year time-series intervention trialArchives of internal medicine (1960), 1995
- A controlled trial to improve care for seriously ill hospitalized patients. The study to understand prognoses and preferences for outcomes and risks of treatments (SUPPORT). The SUPPORT Principal InvestigatorsJAMA, 1995
- The Challenge of Medical Decision Making: Balancing Patient Autonomy and Physician ResponsibilityAmerican Review of Respiratory Disease, 1992
- Withholding and Withdrawing Life-Sustaining TherapyAmerican Review of Respiratory Disease, 1991
- Ethical and Moral Guidelines for the Initiation, Continuation, and Withdrawal of Intensive CareChest, 1990
- Ethics and Communication in Do-Not-Resuscitate OrdersNew England Journal of Medicine, 1988
- NIH workshop summary. Withholding and withdrawing mechanical ventilation.1986
- Deciding to Forego Life-Sustaining Treatment: A Report on the Ethical, Medical, and Legal Issues in Treatment DecisionsPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1984