Article Text
PDFClinical ethics
“Allow natural death” versus “do not resuscitate”: three words that can change a life
Abstract
Physician-written “do not resuscitate” DNR orders elicit negative reactions from stakeholders that may decrease appropriate end-of-life care. The semantic significance of the phrase has led to a proposed replacement of DNR with “allow natural death” (AND). Prior to this investigation, no scientific papers address the impact of such a change. Our results support this proposition due to increased likelihood of endorsement with the term AND.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Physicians’ confidence in discussing do not resuscitate orders with patients and surrogates
- End of life decisions: attitudes of Finnish physicians
- The do-not-resuscitate order: associations with advance directives, physician specialty and documentation of discussion 15 years after the Patient Self-Determination Act
- Honouring patient's resuscitation wishes: a multiphased effort to improve identification and documentation
- Evaluation of do not resuscitate orders (DNR) in a Swiss community hospital
- A patient and relative centred evaluation of treatment escalation plans: a replacement for the do-not-resuscitate process
- Evaluation of end of life care in cancer patients at a teaching hospital in Japan
- Effect of do-not-resuscitate orders on patients with sepsis in the medical intensive care unit: a retrospective, observational and propensity score-matched study in a tertiary referral hospital in Taiwan
- Do Not Resuscitate orders and ethical decisions in a neonatal intensive care unit in a Muslim community
- Increasing use of DNR orders in the elderly worldwide: whose choice is it?