Evans A L, Brody B A
JAMA. 1985 Apr 19;253(15):2236-9.
We studied the use of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders at three teaching hospitals that did not have official protocols for such orders to see whether their use meets the goals (decision making before a crisis and promoting patient autonomy) that have been identified for such orders. We found that 20% of all patients had or were being considered for DNR orders, that the patient and/or family was usually involved (83%) in the decision not to resuscitate, but rarely involved (25%) in decisions to resuscitate, or in cases of no decision, that a wide range of care was provided to patients with a DNR status, and that partial resuscitative efforts would be employed in some cases. Our main conclusion in light of our findings is that DNR orders are currently not fulfilling their major goals. We offer six proposals for improving future DNR protocols.
我们研究了三家教学医院中“不要复苏”(DNR)医嘱的使用情况,这三家医院没有关于此类医嘱的官方协议,目的是了解其使用是否符合为此类医嘱所确定的目标(危机前的决策制定和促进患者自主权)。我们发现,所有患者中有20%已下达或正在考虑下达DNR医嘱,患者和/或家属通常参与(83%)不进行复苏的决策,但很少参与(25%)进行复苏的决策或在未做决策的情况下,对于有DNR状态的患者提供了广泛的护理,并且在某些情况下会采取部分复苏措施。根据我们的研究结果,我们的主要结论是DNR医嘱目前未实现其主要目标。我们提出了六项改进未来DNR协议的建议。