Attitude of elderly patients towards cardiopulmonary resuscitation in Greece

Resuscitation of people with a do-not-resuscitate order: when does it happen and what are the outcomes?

BACKGROUND

Do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders allow competent individuals to state their wishes to not receive resuscitation. Despite the existence of a DNR order, resuscitative efforts may still occur.

METHODS

The statewide out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) registry in Victoria, Australia (population 6.5 million) identified rates of DNR orders and resuscitative efforts in ≥60-year-olds from 2006-2021.

RESULTS

Of 47,322 patients ≥60 years old with OHCA, 2,688 (5.7%) had a DNR order. DNR order was communicated to emergency call-takers in only 332 (12.4%) cases. Bystander resuscitation was commenced in 1,074 (40.0%) patients, with EMS terminating efforts in 346 (32.2%) patients on arrival but commencing resuscitation in 189 others. Strongest predictors of bystander resuscitation were shockable rhythm (OR 7.75, 95% CI 5.04-11.9) and OHCA in public location (OR 4.8, 95% CI 2.0-11.3). Predictors of EMS terminating resuscitation efforts were OHCA in residential aged care facility (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.47-2.5) and older age (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.00-1.04). Transfer to hospital was undertaken in 107 patients, with strongest predictors being return of spontaneous circulation (OR 91.1, 95% CI 51.7-160.7) and witnessed OHCA (OR 7.5, 95% CI 3.9-14.5). Only 7 (0.3%) transported patients survived to discharge, with 5 deceased at 12-month follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Approximately 5% of EMS-attended OHCAs in ≥60-year-olds involve a patient with a DNR order, with low rates of awareness of DNR orders. Resuscitation is commenced in 47% of patients, and 4% are transported to hospital with very poor outcomes. Strategies to communicate DNR status and respect patients' autonomy are extremely important.

Bioethical Decisions in Neonatal Intensive Care: Neonatologists' Self-Reported Practices in Greek NICUs

This study presents, for the first time, empirical data on practices regarding bioethical decision-making in treatment of preterm and ill newborns in Greece. The aim of the study was to: (a) record self-reported practices and involvement of Greek physicians in decisions of withholding and withdrawing neonatal intensive care, and (b) explore the implication of cultural, ethical, and professional parameters in decision-making. Methods: 71 physicians, employed fulltime in all public Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICUs) (n = 17) in Greece, completed an anonymous questionnaire between May 2009 and May 2011. Results: One-third of the physicians in our sample admitted that they have, at least once in the past, decided the limitation of intensive care of a newborn close to death (37.7%) and/or a newborn with unfavorable neurological prognosis (30.8%). The higher the physicians’ support towards the value of quality of human life, the more probable it was that they had taken a decision to withhold or withdraw neonatal intensive care (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Our research shows that Greek NICU physicians report considerably lower levels of ethical decision-making regarding preterm and ill newborns compared to their counterparts in other European countries. Clinical practices and attitudes towards ethical decision-making appear to be influenced mainly by the Greek physicians’ values.

Views of cancer patients regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation in Greece

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in patients with cancer is an ethical issue of worldwide interest. A questionnaire-based study was carried out in a Greek oncology hospital aiming to explore the attitude of Greek cancer patients towards CPR. Overall, 200 patients (94 male, 106 female) of a mean age of 62.8 years took part in the study. Only 42 (21%) patients indicated that they knew what CPR really involves and only 20 (10%) patients thought that CPR has serious side effects, while the mean estimated in-hospital CPR survival rate to hospital discharge was 56.6% (minimum = 2%, maximum = 99%, standard deviation [SD] = 25.16) and 42.1% (minimum = 0%, maximum = 90%, SD = 24.56%) in case of unselected and cancer patients respectively. Despite their poor knowledge, 177 (88.5%) patients were willing to undergo CPR in case of an in-hospital arrest, 127 (63.5%) thought that they had the right to choose their CPR status and 141 (70.5%) believed that they should be asked about it when they enter the hospital. Most patients (36%) wanted their CPR status to be decided by themselves, their family and their doctor jointly. These findings indicate that specific measures should be applied to clinical practice in order to best manage this ethical issue, and consequently, improve cancer care.