Ji Stephanie, Pisciotti Alexa, Patel Mitsu, Chen Catherine, Steinberg Michael B, Kota Karthik J
Department of Anesthesiology, New York Presbyterian - Columbia, New York, NY, United States.
Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, NJ, United States.
Resusc Plus. 2025 Apr 29;24:100967. doi: 10.1016/j.resplu.2025.100967. eCollection 2025 Jul.
While patients in the United States generally have final say in their code status, discussion with their physician plays an important role in decision-making. However, physicians do not discuss code status with every patient, and do not consistently mention patients' prognosis following cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Understanding how physicians perceive patients' CPR decisions is prerequisite to improving code status discussions.
We report a planned secondary analysis from a prospective randomized controlled trial of 102 English-speaking adults aged ≥65 evaluating whether "Allow Natural Death" was preferred to "Do Not Resuscitate" as the "no code" option in code status discussions. We measured physician agreement/disagreement with patient code status decisions and the correlation with objective outcome measures. Two clinically validated instruments-measuring likelihood of surviving resuscitation (Good Outcomes Following Attempted Resuscitations (GO-FAR)) and morbidity level/1- and 10-year mortality (Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI))-were calculated for each participant.
Physicians agreed with patients' code status decisions 88.3% of the time. Physician agreement with code status was not correlated with GO-FAR or CCI scores. GO-FAR and CCI scores do not always align, indicating that illness severity and CPR outcome are not directly linked.
This study highlights that while physicians tend to agree with patient's code status, their decisions do not align with data from clinically validated predictors of coding success or illness severity/mortality prediction. Further research is required as to how physicians perceive whether attempting CPR is appropriate or not.
在美国,虽然患者通常对其急救状态拥有最终决定权,但与医生的讨论在决策过程中起着重要作用。然而,医生并非与每位患者都讨论急救状态,也并非始终提及患者心肺复苏(CPR)后的预后情况。了解医生如何看待患者的心肺复苏决策是改善急救状态讨论的先决条件。
我们报告了一项对102名年龄≥65岁的英语使用者进行的前瞻性随机对照试验的计划二次分析,该试验评估在急救状态讨论中,“允许自然死亡”作为“不进行心肺复苏”选项是否比“不复苏”更受青睐。我们测量了医生对患者急救状态决策的同意/不同意情况以及与客观结果指标的相关性。为每位参与者计算了两种经过临床验证的工具——测量复苏存活可能性(复苏尝试后的良好结果(GO-FAR))和发病水平/1年及10年死亡率(查尔森合并症指数(CCI))。
医生在88.3%的情况下同意患者的急救状态决策。医生对急救状态的同意与GO-FAR或CCI评分无关。GO-FAR和CCI评分并不总是一致,这表明疾病严重程度和心肺复苏结果并非直接相关。
本研究强调,虽然医生倾向于同意患者的急救状态,但他们的决策与来自临床验证的编码成功预测指标或疾病严重程度/死亡率预测数据不一致。关于医生如何看待尝试进行心肺复苏是否合适,还需要进一步研究。