Search

Background: There is some ambiguity concerning the do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders in the Arabic world. DNR is an order written by a doctor, approved by the patient or patient surrogate, which instructs health care providers to not do CPR when cardiac or respiratory arrest occurs. Therefore, this research study investigated the attitudes of Intensive Care Unit physicians and nurses on DNR order in Palestine., Materials and Methods: A total of 123 males and females from four different hospitals voluntarily participated in this study by signing a consent form; which was approved by the Ethical Committee at Birzeit University and the Ministry of Health. A non-experimental, quantitative, descriptive, and co-relational method was used, the data collection was done by a three page form consisting of the consent form, demographical data, and 24 item-based questionnaire based on a 5-point-Likert scale from strongly agree (score 1) to strongly disagree (score 5)., Results: The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software program version 17.0 was used to analyze the data. Finding showed no significant relationship between culture and opinion regarding the DNR order, but religion did. There was statistical significance difference between the physicians' and nurses' religious beliefs, but there was no correlation. Moreover, a total of 79 (64.3%) physicians and nurses agreed with legalizing the DNR order in Palestine., Conclusion: There was a positive attitude towards the legalization of the DNR order in Palestine, and culture and religion did not have any affect towards their attitudes regarding the legalization in Palestine.

Objectives: The Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) order is part of most hospitals' policies on the process of making and communicating decisions about a patient's resuscitation status. Yet it has not become a part of our society's ritual of dying in the Middle East especially among children. Given the diversity of pediatric patients, the DNR order continues to represent a challenge to all parties involved in the care of children including the medical team and the family. Methods: This was a retrospective review of the medical charts of patients who had died in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of a tertiary academic institution in Beirut, Lebanon within the period of January 2012 and December 2017. Results: Eighty-two charts were extracted, 79 were included in the analysis. Three were excluded as one patient had died in the Emergency Department (ED) and 2 charts were incomplete. Most patients were male, Lebanese, and from Muslim families. These patients clinically presented with primary cardiac and oncological diseases or were admitted from the ED with respiratory distress or from the operating room for post-operative management. The primary cause of death was multiorgan failure and cardiac arrest. Only 34% of families had agreed to a DNR order prior to death and 10% suggested "soft" resuscitation. Most discussions were held in the presence of the parents, the PICU team and the patient's primary physician. Conclusions: The DNR order presents one of the most difficult challenges for all care providers involved, especially within a culturally conservative setting such as Lebanon. As the numbers suggest, it is difficult for parents to reach the decision to completely withhold resuscitative measures for pediatric patients, instead opting for "soft" resuscitations like administering epinephrine without chest compressions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Turkey is constitutionally secular with a Muslim majority. There is no legal basis for limiting life-support at the end-of-life (EOL) in Turkey. We aimed to investigate the opinions and attitudes of intensive care unit (ICU) physicians regarding EOL decisions, for both their patients and themselves, and to evaluate if the physicians' demographic and professional variables predicted the attitudes of physicians toward EOL decisions. Methods: An online survey was distributed to national critical care societies' members. Physicians' opinions were sought concerning legalization of EOL decisions for terminally ill patients or by patient-request regardless of prognosis. Participants physicians' views on who should make EOL decisions and when they should occur were determined. Participants were also asked if they would prefer cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and/or intubation/mechanical ventilation (MV) personally if they had terminal cancer. Results: A total of 613 physicians responded. Religious beliefs had no effect on the physicians' acceptance of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) / do-not-intubate (DNI) orders for terminally ill patients, but atheism, was found to be an independent predictor of approval of DNR/DNI in cases of patient request (p<0.05). While medical experience (≥6 years in the ICU) was the independent predictor for the physicians' approval of DNI decisions on patient demand, the volume of terminal patients in ICUs (between 10–50% per year) where they worked was an independent predictor of physicians' approval of DNI for terminal patients. When asked to choose personal options in an EOL scenario (including full code, only DNR, only DNI, both DNR and DNI, and undecided), younger physicians (30–39 years) were more likely to prefer the "only DNR" option compared with physicians aged 40–49 years (p<0.05) for themselves and age 30–39 was an independent predictor of individual preference for "only DNR" at the hypothetical EOL. Physicians from an ICU with <10% terminally ill patients were less likely to prefer "DNR" or "DNR and DNI" options for themselves at EOL compared with physicians who worked in ICUs with a higher (>50%) terminally ill patient ratio (p<0.05). Conclusion: Most ICU physicians did not want legalization of DNR and DNI orders, based solely on patient request. Even if EOL decision-making were legal in Turkey, this attitude may conflict with patient autonomy. The proportion of terminally ill patients in the ICU appears to affect physicians' attitudes to EOL decisions, both for their patients and by personal preference, an association which has not been previously reported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The decision-making process for do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order has always been challenging. Cultural and religious issues have limited the issuance and execution of DNR orders in Iran. The purpose of this study was to assess the attitude of the nurses, physicians, patients, and their families toward the DNR order. Subjects and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 343 participants (201 patients, 95 family members, and 47 healthcare providers) from Omid Oncology Hospital, Mashhad, Iran, were surveyed during 2017–2018. All the participants were asked to fill in a checklist of demographic information and a validated questionnaire about their attitude toward DNR orders after giving consent. The data were analyzed using SPSS software and values of P < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: Overall, 201 patients and 95 of their family members, as well as 47 healthcare providers (doctors and nurses), were surveyed. The mean age of participants was 48.75 ± 15.62 years. The attitude of the participants regarding the DNR order was significantly different in 10 of the 11 items (P ≤ 0.005). Among the three groups of participants, healthcare providers showed the most positive attitude regarding the DNR order. The attitude of participants regarding the DNR orders was significantly associated with age, occupation status, residential place, educational status, and income level (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Various factors, such as economic status, level of education, place of residence, and gender, can be effective on decision-making regarding the DNR orders. Unified and sustained education regarding moral and cultural issues can be helpful in the reconciliation of the attitudes between caregivers and patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: One dilemma in the end-of-life care is making decisions for conducting cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). This dilemma is perceived in different ways due to the influence of culture and religion. This study aimed to understand the experiences of CPR team members about the do-not-resuscitate order. Methods: CPR team members were interviewed, and data were analyzed using a conventional content analysis method. Results: Three categories and six subcategories emerged: "The dilemma between revival and suffering" with the subcategories of "revival likelihood" and "death as a cause for comfort;" "conflicting situation" with the subcategories of "latent decision" and "ambivalent order;" and "low-quality CPR" with the subcategories of "team member demotivation" and "disrupting CPR performance." Conclusion: There is a need for the development of a contextual guideline, which is required for respecting the rights of patients and their families and providing legal support to health-care professionals during CPR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Individual physicians and physician-associated factors may influence patients'/surrogates' autonomous decision-making, thus influencing the practice of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders. The objective of this study was to examine the influence of individual attending physicians on signing a DNR order.Methods: This study was conducted in closed model, surgical intensive care units in a university-affiliated teaching hospital located in Northern Taiwan. The medical records of patients, admitted to the surgical intensive care units for the first time between June 1, 2011 and December 31, 2013 were reviewed and data collected. We used Kaplan-Meier survival curves with log-rank test and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models to compare the time from surgical intensive care unit admission to do-not-resuscitate orders written for patients for each individual physician. The outcome variable was the time from surgical ICU admission to signing a DNR order.Results: We found that each individual attending physician's likelihood of signing do-not-resuscitate orders for their patients was significantly different from each other. Some attending physicians were more likely to write do-not-resuscitate orders for their patients, and other attending physicians were less likely to do so.Conclusion: Our study reported that individual attending physicians had influence on patients'/surrogates' do-not-resuscitate decision-making. Future studies may be focused on examining the reasons associated with the difference of each individual physician in the likelihood of signing a do-not-resuscitate order. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]