Introduction: This study was performed to assess perioperative reevaluation of Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) orders by practicing anesthesiologists.
Methods: As part of an Anesthesia Crisis Resource Management course, an anesthesiologist interviewed a patient-actor with prostate cancer and bone metastases scheduled for a central venous catheter placement. The chart included a properly documented DNR order and the patient-actor's scripted responses emphasized that he would accept resuscitative efforts only "if the adverse clinical events were believed to be both temporary and reversible." Later, the subject assumed responsibility for the anesthesia in which the patient subsequently developed an iatrogenically induced pneumothorax, became apneic, and had a cardiovascular arrest requiring a prolonged resuscitation. Responses to these events and a following survey were evaluated.
Results: Fifty-seven percent of the subjects (17/30) addressed resuscitation during the preoperative interview; 27% (8/30) decided to suspend the DNR order and 30% (9/30) instituted a goal-directed or procedure-directed DNR order. Ninety percent (27/30) of the groups chose to continue resuscitative efforts until the simulation ended. Of the surveyed participants, over 90% would place a chest tube, intubate the trachea, do chest compressions, and perform cardiac defibrillation. Common reasons for intervening were reversibility, iatrogenicity, and that intervention would be consistent with the patient's goals.
Conclusions: Inadequacies in perioperative reevaluation of DNR orders existed at all stages. Simulation of perioperative DNR orders is a useful way to elicit anesthesiologist's actions in the heat of the moment, which may bring us closer to understanding the actions of anesthesiologists during clinical practice.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0b013e31819e137b | DOI Listing |
Sci Prog
January 2025
Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Objective: The physician order for life-sustaining treatment has been implemented in clinical practice for several years. However, the determination that a patient is in the terminal phase of life, a prerequisite for the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment, lacks objective criteria. This study aimed to evaluate whether hyperlactatemia could serve as a reliable objective indicator for determining the terminal phase.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Palliat Med
January 2025
Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Despite long-standing recognition that providers should discuss DNR (do-not-resuscitate) orders prior to surgery, there is evidence that perioperative code status discussions are frequently of limited quality. Limited attention has been paid to patient perspectives. Determine the scope of literature on management of perioperative DNR orders from the patient perspective.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFUntil the beginning of the century, bleeding management was similar in elective surgeries or exsanguination scenarios: clotting tests were used to guide blood product orders and, while awaiting these results, an aggressive resuscitation with crystalloids was recommended. The high mortality rate in severe hemorrhages managed with this strategy endorsed the need for a special resuscitation plan. As a result, modifications were recommended to develop a new clinical approach to these patients, called "Damage Control Resuscitation".
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Anesth
December 2024
Department of Anesthesiology, Tokyo Metropolitan Institute for Geriatrics and Gerontology, 35-2, Sakae-Cho, Itabashi-Ku, Tokyo, 173-0015, Japan.
Purpose: We investigated whether patients who have been issued a do-not-attempt-resuscitation order (DNAR) preoperatively (hereafter, DNAR patients) are informed of the DNAR code change when they undergo anesthesia. We also conducted a survey of the awareness of medical staff regarding perioperative DNARs, and investigated the current situation at a single-center in Japan.
Methods: For DNAR patients managed by anesthesiologists from January 2019 to September 2022, we retrospectively investigated whether the patient was informed of the DNAR code change or the DNAR was automatically suspended without explanation.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!