Stevenson Elizabeth K, Mehter Hashim M, Walkey Allan J, Wiener Renda Soylemez
1 Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, North Shore Medical Center, Salem, Massachusetts.
2 Section of Critical Care Medicine, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington.
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2017 Apr;14(4):536-542. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201610-798OC.
Compared with their Full Code counterparts, patients with do not resuscitate/do not intubate (DNR/DNI) status receive fewer interventions and have higher mortality than predicted by clinical characteristics.
To assess whether internal medicine residents, the front-line providers for many hospitalized patients, would manage hypothetical patients differently based on code status. We hypothesized respondents would be less likely to provide a variety of interventions to DNR/DNI patients than to Full Code patients.
Cross-sectional, randomized survey of U.S. internal medicine residents. We created two versions of an internet survey, each containing four clinical vignettes followed by questions regarding possible interventions; the versions were identical except for varying code status of the vignettes. Residency programs were randomly allocated between the two versions.
Five hundred thirty-three residents responded to the survey. As determined by Chi-squared and Fisher's exact test, decisions to intubate or perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation were largely dictated by patient code status (>94% if Full Code, <5% if DNR/DNI; P < 0.0001 for all scenarios). Resident proclivity to deliver noninvasive interventions (e.g., blood cultures, medications, imaging) was uniformly high (>90%) and unaffected by code status. However, decisions to pursue other aggressive or invasive options (e.g., dialysis, bronchoscopy, surgical consultation, transfer to intensive care unit) differed significantly based on code status in most vignettes.
Residents appear to assume that patients who would refuse cardiopulmonary resuscitation would prefer not to receive other interventions. Without explicit clarification of the patient's goals of care, potentially beneficial care may be withheld against the patient's wishes.
与接受全力抢救的患者相比,选择不进行心肺复苏/不进行插管(DNR/DNI)的患者接受的干预措施较少,且死亡率高于根据临床特征所预测的水平。
评估内科住院医师,即许多住院患者的一线医疗服务提供者,是否会根据抢救状态对假设的患者采取不同的治疗方式。我们假设,与全力抢救的患者相比,受访者对DNR/DNI患者提供各种干预措施的可能性较小。
对美国内科住院医师进行横断面随机调查。我们创建了两个版本的网络调查问卷,每个问卷包含四个临床案例,随后是关于可能的干预措施的问题;除了案例的抢救状态不同外,两个版本完全相同。住院医师培训项目被随机分配到两个版本中。
533名住院医师回复了调查。通过卡方检验和费舍尔精确检验确定,插管或进行心肺复苏的决定在很大程度上取决于患者的抢救状态(如果是全力抢救,>94%;如果是DNR/DNI,<5%;所有情况P<0.0001)。住院医师提供非侵入性干预措施(如血培养、药物治疗、影像学检查)的倾向普遍较高(>90%),且不受抢救状态的影响。然而,在大多数案例中,是否采取其他积极或侵入性措施(如透析、支气管镜检查、手术会诊、转入重症监护病房)的决定因抢救状态而有显著差异。
住院医师似乎认为,拒绝心肺复苏的患者可能也不愿意接受其他干预措施。如果不明确说明患者的治疗目标,可能会违背患者意愿而不提供潜在有益的治疗。