Do not attempt resuscitation : the importance of consensual decisions

Aims: To describe the involvement and input of physicians and nurses in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (cpr / do not attempt resuscitation (dnar) decisions; to analyse decision patterns; and understand the practical implications. Design: A qualitative grounded theory study using one-time open-ended interviews with 40 volunteer physicians and 52 nurses drawn from acute care wards with mixes of heterogeneous cases in seven different hospitals in German-speaking Switzerland. Results: Establishing dnar orders in the best interests of patients was described as a challenging task requiring the leadership of senior physicians and nurses. Implicit decisions in favour of cpr predominated at the beginning of hospitalisation; depending on the context, they were relieved/superseded by explicit dnar decisions. Explicit decisions were the result of hierarchical medical expertise, of multilateral interdisciplinary expertise, of patient autonomy and/or of negotiated patient autonomy. Each type of decision, implicit or explicit, potentially represented a team consensus. Non-consensual decisions were prone to precipitate personal or team conflicts, and, occasionally, led to non-compliance. Conclusion: Establishing dnar orders is a demanding task. Reaching a consensus is of crucial importance in guaranteeing teamwork and good patient care. Communication and negotiation skills, professional and personal life experience and empathy for patients and colleagues are pivotal. Therefore, leadership by experienced senior physicians and nurses is needed and great efforts should be made with regard to multidisciplinary education

Safety and outcome of patients with an acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction transferred for primary coronary intervention: the Neuchâtel experience

BACKGROUND: Transferring patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) from a community hospital to a PCI centre has been evaluated in randomised trials and shown to be safe and effective. A prolonged transfer time may restrict the benefit of this strategy. AIM: We sought to assess 1) safety of transfer from Neuchâtel to Berne, 2) time intervals of patients transferred either directly from on-site or after evaluation in the local emergency room, and 3) clinical long-term outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: 42 patients with STEMI eligible for reperfusion therapy were prospectively included between January 2003 and June 2004. Twenty patients (48%, group 1) were directly transferred to the PCI centre from on-site. Twenty-two were transferred after initial treatment in the local emergency room: 11 patients (26%, group 2) presented spontaneously at the hospital and 11 patients (26%, group 3) were admitted by the rescue team. No major complication occurred during transport. Median transport time was 33 minutes. Median time from first healthcare contact to balloon consisted of 131 minutes in group 1, 158 minutes in group 2 and 174 minutes in group 3. The overall rate of Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE) at 6 months amounted to 9.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Transfer for primary PCI of our patients with acute STEMI was safe. Direct transfer from on-site to the PCI centre reduced the time of ischaemia. The overall MACE rate was low