Ethical Issues of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Survey of Emergency Physicians

Presented at the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine\u27s Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, May 5-8, 1996

Ethical Issues of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: Comparison of Emergency Physician Practices from 1995 to 2007

Objectives:  The objectives were to determine current practice among emergency physicians (EPs) regarding the initiation and termination of cardiopulmonary resuscitative (CPR) efforts and to compare responses to those from a similar study performed in 1996. Methods:  This anonymous self-administered survey was mailed to 4,991 randomly selected EPs. Main outcome measures included responses regarding current practices related to advance directives and initiation and termination of resuscitative attempts. Results from 1995 and 2007 surveys were compared, using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the difference between groups. Results:  Among 928 respondents (18% response rate), most (86%) honor legal advance directives, an increase over 78% reported in 1996 (8% increase, 95% CI = 5% to 11%). Few honor unofficial documents (7%) or verbal reports (12%) of advance directives. Many (58%) make decisions regarding resuscitation because of fear of litigation or criticism. Most respondents (62%) attempt resuscitation in 10% or more of cases of cardiac arrest. A majority (56%) have attempted more than 10 resuscitations in the past 3 years, despite expectations that such efforts would be futile. Factors reported to be “very important” in making resuscitation decisions were advance directives (78%), witnessed arrest (77%), downtime (73%), family wishes (40%), presenting rhythm (38%), age (28%), and prearrest state of health (25%). A significant majority of respondents (80%) indicated that ideally, legal concerns should not influence physician practices regarding resuscitation, but that in the current environment, legal concerns do influence practice (92%). Other than the increase in respondents who honor legal advance directives, these results do not differ substantially from responses in 1996. Conclusions:  Most EPs attempt to resuscitate patients in cardiopulmonary arrest regardless of poor outcomes, except in cases where a legal advance directive is available. Many EPs’ decisions regarding resuscitation are based on concerns of litigation and criticism, rather than professional judgment of medical benefit. Most results did not differ significantly from the previous study of 1995, although more physicians honor legal advance directives than previously noted

Ethical Issues of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Survey of Emergency Physicians

Presented at the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine\u27s Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, May 5-8, 1996

Ethical Issues of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: Comparison of Emergency Physician Practices from 1995 to 2007

Objectives:  The objectives were to determine current practice among emergency physicians (EPs) regarding the initiation and termination of cardiopulmonary resuscitative (CPR) efforts and to compare responses to those from a similar study performed in 1996. Methods:  This anonymous self-administered survey was mailed to 4,991 randomly selected EPs. Main outcome measures included responses regarding current practices related to advance directives and initiation and termination of resuscitative attempts. Results from 1995 and 2007 surveys were compared, using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the difference between groups. Results:  Among 928 respondents (18% response rate), most (86%) honor legal advance directives, an increase over 78% reported in 1996 (8% increase, 95% CI = 5% to 11%). Few honor unofficial documents (7%) or verbal reports (12%) of advance directives. Many (58%) make decisions regarding resuscitation because of fear of litigation or criticism. Most respondents (62%) attempt resuscitation in 10% or more of cases of cardiac arrest. A majority (56%) have attempted more than 10 resuscitations in the past 3 years, despite expectations that such efforts would be futile. Factors reported to be “very important” in making resuscitation decisions were advance directives (78%), witnessed arrest (77%), downtime (73%), family wishes (40%), presenting rhythm (38%), age (28%), and prearrest state of health (25%). A significant majority of respondents (80%) indicated that ideally, legal concerns should not influence physician practices regarding resuscitation, but that in the current environment, legal concerns do influence practice (92%). Other than the increase in respondents who honor legal advance directives, these results do not differ substantially from responses in 1996. Conclusions:  Most EPs attempt to resuscitate patients in cardiopulmonary arrest regardless of poor outcomes, except in cases where a legal advance directive is available. Many EPs’ decisions regarding resuscitation are based on concerns of litigation and criticism, rather than professional judgment of medical benefit. Most results did not differ significantly from the previous study of 1995, although more physicians honor legal advance directives than previously noted

Ethical Issues of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: Current Practice among Emergency Physicians

Objective: To determine current practice and attitudes among emergency physicians (EPs) regarding the initiation and termination of CPR. Methods: An anonymous survey was mailed to randomly selected EPs. Main outcome measures included respondents\u27 answers to questions regarding outcome of resuscitation, and current practice regarding initiation, continuation, and termination of resuscitation for victims of cardiopulmonary arrest. Results: The 1,252 respondents were from all 50 states, a variety of practice settings, and varying board certification. Most (78%) respondents honor legal advance directives regarding resuscitation. Few (7%) follow unofficial documents, or verbal reports of advance directives (6%). Many (62%) make decisions regarding resuscitation because of fear of litigation or criticism. A majority (55%) have recently attempted numerous resuscitations despite expectations that such efforts would be futile. Most respondents indicated that ideally, legal concerns should not influence physician practice regarding resuscitation (78%), but that in the current environment, legal concerns do influence practice (94%). Conclusions: Most EPs attempt to resuscitate patients in cardiopulmonary arrest, regardless of futility, except in cases where a legal advance directive is available. Many EPs\u27 decisions regarding resuscitation are based on concerns of litigation and criticism, rather than their professional judgment of medical benefit or futility. Compliance with patients\u27 wishes regarding resuscitation is low unless a legal advance directive is present. Possible solutions to these problems may include standardized guidelines for the initiation and termination of CPR, tort reform, and additional public education regarding resuscitation and advance directives

Ethical Issues of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: Current Practice among Emergency Physicians

Objective: To determine current practice and attitudes among emergency physicians (EPs) regarding the initiation and termination of CPR. Methods: An anonymous survey was mailed to randomly selected EPs. Main outcome measures included respondents\u27 answers to questions regarding outcome of resuscitation, and current practice regarding initiation, continuation, and termination of resuscitation for victims of cardiopulmonary arrest. Results: The 1,252 respondents were from all 50 states, a variety of practice settings, and varying board certification. Most (78%) respondents honor legal advance directives regarding resuscitation. Few (7%) follow unofficial documents, or verbal reports of advance directives (6%). Many (62%) make decisions regarding resuscitation because of fear of litigation or criticism. A majority (55%) have recently attempted numerous resuscitations despite expectations that such efforts would be futile. Most respondents indicated that ideally, legal concerns should not influence physician practice regarding resuscitation (78%), but that in the current environment, legal concerns do influence practice (94%). Conclusions: Most EPs attempt to resuscitate patients in cardiopulmonary arrest, regardless of futility, except in cases where a legal advance directive is available. Many EPs\u27 decisions regarding resuscitation are based on concerns of litigation and criticism, rather than their professional judgment of medical benefit or futility. Compliance with patients\u27 wishes regarding resuscitation is low unless a legal advance directive is present. Possible solutions to these problems may include standardized guidelines for the initiation and termination of CPR, tort reform, and additional public education regarding resuscitation and advance directives

Factors Associated With Emergency Department Length of Stay for Patients With Hip Fracture

Time to surgery, which includes time in the emergency department (ED), is important for all patients with hip fracture. We hypothesized that patients with hip fracture spend significantly more time in the ED than do patients with the top 5 most common conditions. In addition, we hypothesized that there are patient, physician, and hospital factors that affect the length of time spent in the ED. We retrospectively reviewed our institution’s hip fracture database and identified 147 elderly patients with hip fractures who presented to our ED from December 18, 2005, through April 30, 2009. We reviewed their records for patient, practitioner, and hospital factors of interest associated with ED time and for 6 specified time intervals. Average working, boarding (waiting for an inpatient room), and total times were calculated and compared with respective averages for admitted ED patients with the top 5 most common conditions. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed before and after adjusting for confounders (significance, P = .05). The mean total ED time (7 hours and 25 minutes) and working time (4 hours and 31 minutes) for patients with hip fracture were similar to the respective overall averages for admitted ED patients. However, the average boarding time for patients with hip fracture was 2 hours 44 minutes, longer than that for other patients admitted through the ED. Factors significantly associated with longer ED times were a history of hypertension, history of atrial fibrillation, the number of computed tomography scans ordered, and the occupancy rate. Admission to the hip fracture service decreased working time but not overall time. Substantial multidisciplinary work among the ED, hospital admission services, and physicians is needed to dramatically decrease the boarding time and thus the overall time to surgery