Language and understanding of cardiopulmonary resuscitation amongst an aged inpatient population.

Greater patient involvement in health decision-making requires exchange of information between the patient and the healthcare professionals. Decisions regarding healthcare at the end of life include consideration of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The stated objectives of this study were to determine how often language around concepts of resuscitation is used in the community by examination of the English language corpora (ELC); to explore the understanding of the same language by a group of older hospital patients; and to determine the patients' knowledge of the process and success of CPR, as well as the sources of their information. Medical inpatients aged 75 years and older were surveyed to this end in the setting of a tertiary university teaching hospital. Interrogation of the Australian, British and American English Corpora was accomplished by a linguist, and a questionnaire and semi-structured interview were administered to ascertain patient knowledge. We demonstrated that although medical inpatients have some familiarity with terms relating to resuscitation, there is a lack of understanding of the context, process and outcomes of CPR. The predominant sources of information were television and print media. Examination of the ELC revealed a paucity of the use of terms related to resuscitation. This finding indicates that physicians have a duty of care to determine patients' understanding around resuscitation language, and terms used, in discussions of their preferences before assuming their engagement in shared decision-making. More open public discussion around death and resuscitation would increase the general knowledge of the population and would provide a better foundation for the discussions in times of need.

The impact of intensive care in a private hospital on patients aged 80 and over: health-related quality of life, functional status and burden versus benefit.

BACKGROUND: Greater numbers of persons aged over 80 years are admitted to intensive care units (ICU) compared with 15 years ago. Outcomes other than death such as physical dependence and cognitive impairment and treatment burden are important to older people. AIMS: The aims of this study were to determine the long-term outcomes of functional impairment, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and the self-reported burden of treatment in a sample of patients aged 80 years and above admitted to ICU. Half of the cohort were admitted for elective cardiac surgery, the rest for non-cardiac surgery and medical conditions. METHODS: In this longitudinal cohort study, in a tertiary level ICU, we measured HRQoL using the SF-36 and functional status using the modified Barthel Index at several time points over a 2-year follow-up period. We also assessed treatment burden by asking participants whether they thought the episode of care was worthwhile. RESULTS: A total of 348 patients was recruited into the study. One-fifth of the cohort had died by the 2-year follow-up data collection point. There was an improvement in physical functioning in the cardiac surgery group at 6 months which was not sustained. There was no change in HRQoL at 2 years in either group. The majority valued the episode of care. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that HRQoL and previous lifestyle is preserved in the majority following ICU admission, associated with a high level of patient valuation of the episode of care.

Comparison of not for resuscitation (NFR) forms across five Victorian health services.

BACKGROUND: Within Australian hospitals, cardiac and respiratory arrests result in a resuscitation attempt unless the patient is documented as not for resuscitation. AIM: To examine the consistency of policies and documentation for withholding in-hospital resuscitation across health services. METHOD: An observational, qualitative review of hospital policy and documentation was conducted in June 2013 in three public and two private sector hospitals in metropolitan Melbourne. Not for resuscitation (NFR) forms were evaluated for physical characteristics, content, authorisation and decision-making. Hospital policies were coded for alerts, definition of futility and burden of treatment and management of discussions and dissent. RESULTS: There was a lack of standardisation, with each site using its own unique NFR form and accompanying site-specific policies. Differences were found in who could authorise the decision, what was included on the form, the role of patients and families, and how discussions were managed and dissent resolved. Futility and burden of treatment were not defined independently. These inconsistencies across sites contribute to a lack of clarity regarding the decision to withhold resuscitation, and have implications for staff employed across multiple hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: NFR forms should be reviewed and standardised so as to be clear, uniform and consistent with the legislative framework. We propose a two-stage process of documentation. Stage 1 facilitates discussion of patient-specific goals of care and consideration of limitations of treatment. Stage 2 serves to communicate a NFR order. Decisions to withhold resuscitation are inherently complex but could be aided by separating the decision-making process from the communication of the decision, resulting in improved end-of-life care.