'Do not resuscitate' orders. Incidence and implications in a medical-intensive care unit.

"Do not resuscitate" (DNR) decisions were examined in a medical intensive care unit (MICU) of a 1,000-bed hospital. Seventy-one (14%) of 506 study patients were designated DNR; nine survived hospitalization. Severity of illness, age, and prior health were predictive of DNR orders; race and socioeconomic factors were not. The DNR patients consumed more resources, both before and after DNR orders. Interventions started before DNR designation were continued in at least 76% of patients. Documented justifications of DNR decisions included poor prognosis (59%), poor quality of life (24%), and patients' wishes (15%). There were no written justifications for the DNR decisions in 30 cases (42%). Although willingness to write DNR orders in an MICU and continued active treatment of DNR patients are both reassuring in a general sense, they raise questions about the consistency of treatment plans and goals for individual patients.

[1]  C. Cassel,et al.  The ethical and legal framework for the decision not to resuscitate. , 1984, The Western journal of medicine.

[2]  C. Shear,et al.  Do-not-resuscitate orders in a county hospital. , 1984, The Western journal of medicine.

[3]  H. L. Lipton,et al.  The decision to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation , 1983, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  R. Cranford,et al.  The do-not-resuscitate order in a teaching hospital: considerations and a suggested policy. , 1982, Annals of internal medicine.

[5]  J. Paris.  Comfort measures only for "DNR" orders. , 1982, Connecticut medicine.

[6]  M. Chassin.  Costs and Outcomes of Medical Intensive Care , 1982, Medical care.

[7]  D. E. Lawrence,et al.  APACHE—acute physiology and chronic health evaluation: a physiologically based classification system , 1981, Critical care medicine.

[8]  B. Lo,et al.  Clinical decisions to limit treatment. , 1980, Annals of internal medicine.