Skip Navigation



QJM Advance Access published online on September 20, 2006
QJM, doi:10.1093/qjmed/hcl095
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
99/10/683    most recent
hcl095v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Harkness, M.
Right arrow Articles by Wanklyn, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Harkness, M.
Right arrow Articles by Wanklyn, P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Association of Physicians. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: Journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
Received February 28, 2006
Accepted June 14, 2006

Original Article

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation: capacity, discussion and documentation

M. Harkness 1 and P. Wanklyn 1

1 From the Department of Elderly Medicine, Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds, UK


  Abstract

Background: End-of-life care decisions, including treatment such as cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), are complex issues requiring a patient to have the capacity for effective decision-making.

Aim: To assess the prevalence and documentation of CPR decisions in our hospital in patients aged >65 years.

Design: Prospective audit.

Methods: Review of patient notes and resuscitation forms within our acute Trust on Elderly Care and General Medicine wards, including the decisions made, involvement of patient and/or family members and whether an assessment of capacity was made.

Results: On the Elderly Care wards, 37 CPR decisions were made on 104 patients, and nearly all of these were clearly documented. On the General Medical wards, only one decision out of 40 patients was made. Geriatricians incorporated patient views in one quarter of decisions; all but one of these patients wanted CPR. Of those patients ‘not for CPR’, family members were informed in only one third of cases, according to the documentation. Capacity was documented on only four occasions.

Discussion: Geriatricians make significantly more CPR decisions than general physicians do, but still involve patient and family views in only a minority of cases, and an assessment of capacity is rarely explicitly documented. We suggest a three-step approach to clinical decision making, to increase both the volume and the quality of CPR decisions, which may be improved further by the use of information leaflets for patients and their families.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.