A Retrospective Study on the Decision to Prohibit Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Patients with Premenarcheal Cancer in a University Hospital.
- Author:
Il Sang SHIN
1
;
Hyun Jeung KIM
;
Jina YUN
;
Se Hyung KIM
;
Chan Kyu KIM
;
Seong Kyu PARK
;
Dae Sik HONG
Author Information
1. Department of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University Bucheon Hospital, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Bucheon, Korea. skpark@schmc.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Resuscitation orders;
Terminal care;
Neoplasm
- MeSH:
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation*;
Consent Forms;
Gyeonggi-do;
Humans;
Intensive Care Units;
Korea;
Medical Records;
Nuclear Family;
Observational Study;
Resuscitation Orders;
Retrospective Studies*;
Terminal Care;
Ventilators, Mechanical
- From:Soonchunhyang Medical Science
2018;24(2):181-187
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: Whether to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) or do-not-resuscitate (DNR) is not only a medical problem but also a decision that should be made carefully with self-autonomy in accordance with life values. We conducted a retrospective observational study to identify the characteristics of current CPR and DNR at a practical level. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from medical records with regard to the clinical status of DNR decision in 356 patients with cancer who expired between October 2014 and September 2015 in Soonchunhyang University Bucheon Hospital. RESULTS: DNR was decided significantly more frequently in patients with solid cancers than in patients with hematological cancer (87.7% vs. 71.4%, P=0.003). No other significant factor influenced the DNR decision in this study. The main persons who signed the DNR consent form were mostly sons or daughters (60.7%), never the patients themselves. The median time from the DNR order to death was longer in the ward than in the intensive care unit (ICU; 3.0 days vs. 1.0 days). The mean time from the DNR order to death was 6.6 days (median, 2 days). Among the patients with a DNR order, 110 (36.7%) were hospitalized in the ICU and 73 (24.3%) were treated with ventilator support. CONCLUSION: Most patients expired 6.6 days after DNR permission was given and could not decide their treatment plan by themselves. For better end-of-life care, the sensitive DNR decision with consideration of the individualized environment of the patient for life-sustaining treatment should be settled in Korea.
