Field Richard A, Fritz Zoë, Baker Annalie, Grove Amy, Perkins Gavin D
Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust, Bordesley Green East, Birmingham B9 5SS, United Kingdom; University of Warwick, Gibbett Hill, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom.
University of Warwick, Gibbett Hill, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom; Department of Acute Medicine, Cambridge University Hospitals, United Kingdom.
Resuscitation. 2014 Nov;85(11):1418-31. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.08.024. Epub 2014 Sep 4.
The treatment for a cardiac arrest, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), may be lifesaving following an acute, potentially reversible illness. Yet this treatment is unlikely to be effective if cardiac arrest occurs as part of the dying process towards the end of a person's natural life. Do not attempt CPR (DNACPR) decisions allow resuscitation to be withheld when it has little chance of success, or where the patient, or those close to the patient, indicate the burdens of CPR outweigh the benefits. This review sought to identify evidence for systems that improve the appropriate use of DNACPR decisions.
Electronic databases were searched (Medline, CINAHL and Embase) for English language articles from 2001 to 2014.
4090 citations were identified of which 37 studies were relevant. The overall quality of evidence was moderate to poor. Thematic synthesis identified key interventions which may improve DNACPR decision making. The most promising interventions involved structured discussion at the time of acute admission to hospital and review by specialist teams at the point of an acute deterioration. Linking DNACPR decisions to discussions about overall treatment plans provided greater clarity about goals of care, aided communication between clinicians and reduced harms. Standardised documentation proved helpful for improving the frequency and quality of recording DNACPR decisions. Patient and clinician education in isolation were associated with limited or no effects.
Relatively simple process changes may enhance the appropriate use of and outcomes associated with DNACPR decisions. Systematic review registration number: PROSPERO2012:CRD42012002669.
心脏骤停的治疗方法——心肺复苏术(CPR),对于急性、可能可逆的疾病可能挽救生命。然而,如果心脏骤停是在一个人自然生命末期的濒死过程中发生的,这种治疗不太可能有效。不尝试心肺复苏术(DNACPR)的决定允许在复苏成功几率很小,或者患者或其近亲表示心肺复苏术的负担超过益处时停止复苏。本综述旨在确定改善DNACPR决定合理使用的系统的证据。
检索电子数据库(Medline、CINAHL和Embase),查找2001年至2014年的英文文章。
共识别出4090条引用文献,其中37项研究相关。证据的总体质量为中等至较差。主题综合分析确定了可能改善DNACPR决策的关键干预措施。最有前景的干预措施包括在急性入院时进行结构化讨论,以及在急性病情恶化时由专家团队进行复查。将DNACPR决定与关于总体治疗计划的讨论联系起来,能更清晰地明确护理目标,有助于临床医生之间的沟通并减少危害。标准化文件记录有助于提高记录DNACPR决定的频率和质量。单独的患者和临床医生教育产生的效果有限或没有效果。
相对简单的流程改变可能会提高DNACPR决定的合理使用及其相关结果。系统评价注册号:PROSPERO2012:CRD42012002669。