• Ian N Olver, Jaklin A Eliott, and Jane Blake-Mortimer.
• Royal Adelaide Hospital Cancer Center, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. ian.olver@adelaide.edu.au
• Psychooncology. 2002 May 1;11(3):181-7.

AbstractPatients' perceptions of do not resuscitate (DNR) orders and how and when to present the information were sought to aid in framing DNR policy. Semi-structured interviews of 23 patients being treated for cancer, were conducted by a clinical psychologist. The interviews were transcribed and analysed with the aid of a qualitative software package. Discourse analysis enabled hypotheses to be formed based on consistencies and variations of the language used. Most patients understood what DNR meant and preferred DNR orders to 'good palliative care' orders. They saw it as their autonomous right and responsibility to make such decisions. They would seek information on the likely medical outcomes of resuscitation but also would use non-rational criteria based on emotional and social factors to make their decisions. Family considerations suggest that personal autonomy is not the overriding basis of the decision. Patients were unsure of the best timing of a DNR discussion and were prepared to defer to doctors' intuition. Most advocated written DNR orders but few had them. Families were construed as advocates but also seen as constraining individual autonomy. When considering DNR orders, patients recognise the diversity of preferences likely to exist that belie a one policy fits all approach.Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

19 keywords...

hide…