• D E Clarke, M K Goldstein, and T A Raffin.
• Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, California.
• Clin. Geriatr. Med. 1994 Feb 1;10(1):91-101.

AbstractElderly people in the United States often receive treatment through an enormous array of medical technology when they become critically ill. Some, or all, such interventions may be unwanted, and patients have the right to be informed about what prospects lie ahead. CPR, with survival rates of 2% to 20%, rarely has the effect for which it was intended, as studies over the last two decades have repeatedly demonstrated. Although it is not clear that elderly people are at higher risk for poor outcomes of CPR, it is clear most of them do not possess sufficient knowledge about either CPR or its usual outcome to make an informed choice. Ideally, an individual should choose his or her own resuscitation status, but evidence exists indicating surrogates more often than not make this decision. This is unfortunate, because both surrogates and physicians are poor judges of patients' resuscitation preferences. Advance directives, especially when coupled with effective physician-patient communication, will aid elderly persons in making decisions about life support. We encourage all physicians who care for the elderly to avert many of tomorrow's ethical dilemmas by communicating with their healthy patients today.

15 keywords...

hide…