Annotated Bibliography Resuscitation
Samson chirchir
Prof. M Bacon
English. 170 sect. 13
Annotated bibliography
10/25/2011
Resuscitation
Blackhall, Leslie J. ‘Must we always use CPR?’ New England Journal of medicine;
November 12, 1987; 317(20): 1281-1285.
This article present a case in which the patient and the family made a decision in favor of resuscitation that ran contrary to the physician’s medical judgement. The author argues that, where a patient request for treatment in conflict with physician’s responsibility to provide what he or she believes to be good medical care, a resort to autonomy alone is insufficient. The principal of autonomy, which allow patient to refuse any procedure or choose among different beneficial treatment, does not allow them to demand nonbeneficial and potentially harmful procedure. This is important because CPR should not be considered an alternative to be offered by physicians in such cases. Instead, the physician should have listened to the patient’s hopes and fears, reassured him that the physician should would continue to be there and provide appropriate therapy, and, if necessary, refer the patient to psychiatric personnel or clergy.
Brunetti, Louis L,; Weiss, matthew J.; Studenski, Stephanie A.; Clipp, Elizabeth C. cardiopulmonary …show more content…
resuscitation policies and practices: a statewide nursing home study. Archives of internal medicine ; Jan. 1990; 150 (1): 121-126.
The author compare the content of written resuscitation policies of North Carolina nursing homes to ten model criteria regarded as important to the decisionmaking process: autonomy, informed consent, competency, dignity and quality of life, treatment alternatives, authorization, documentation, patient identification, review and medical condition.
They found that nursing home policies were most likely to contain provisions that could be objectively measured and easily documented as required by law. This study is helpful because it has ten criteria that would help enhance autonomy and the quality of decision making by nursing home
residents.
Hackler, J. Chris, F. Family Consent to Oder Not to Resuscitate: Reconsidering hospital policy. Journal of the American medical association; Sep. 12, 2009; 45(2): 80-82
This article propose that physicians should not be required to offer cardiopulmonary resuscitation to patients or families where, in the physician’s professional judgement, the intervention would be futile. Hackler and Chris also propose that CPR be withheld, even over family objection in a case where first, the patient personally lacks decisionmaking capacity, secondly, the burdens of treatment are disproportionate to the benefits, Thirdly, the surrogate cannot justify CPR in terms of patient value, preference, or best interest and lastly where the physician as made serious efforts to negotiate and resolve the issue informally with the family. The authors opine that the legal risks to the physician of acting on their consciences even over family objections are very slight
Moss, Alvin H. ‘Informing the patients about cardiopulmonary resuscitation:’ when the risks outweigh the benefits. Journal of general internal medicine; July/August 1998 4(4): 349-355.
The author reviews extensive literature documenting every poor results for patients receiving cardiopulmonary resuscitation, in terms of survival and recovery. He argues that physicians have an obligation to educate patients and their families accurately about the risks and benefits of treatment alternatives, to maximize their informed participation in treatment decitionmaking. He also comment on resolving differences where the patient or family insists upon remaining eligible to receive CPR despite the physician’s judgement that such intervention would be medically futile.
Prof. M Bacon
English. 170 sect. 13
Annotated bibliography
10/25/2011
Resuscitation
Blackhall, Leslie J. ‘Must we always use CPR?’ New England Journal of medicine;
November 12, 1987; 317(20): 1281-1285.
This article present a case in which the patient and the family made a decision in favor of resuscitation that ran contrary to the physician’s medical judgement. The author argues that, where a patient request for treatment in conflict with physician’s responsibility to provide what he or she believes to be good medical care, a resort to autonomy alone is insufficient. The principal of autonomy, which allow patient to refuse any procedure or choose among different beneficial treatment, does not allow them to demand nonbeneficial and potentially harmful procedure. This is important because CPR should not be considered an alternative to be offered by physicians in such cases. Instead, the physician should have listened to the patient’s hopes and fears, reassured him that the physician should would continue to be there and provide appropriate therapy, and, if necessary, refer the patient to psychiatric personnel or clergy.
Brunetti, Louis L,; Weiss, matthew J.; Studenski, Stephanie A.; Clipp, Elizabeth C. cardiopulmonary …show more content…
resuscitation policies and practices: a statewide nursing home study. Archives of internal medicine ; Jan. 1990; 150 (1): 121-126.
The author compare the content of written resuscitation policies of North Carolina nursing homes to ten model criteria regarded as important to the decisionmaking process: autonomy, informed consent, competency, dignity and quality of life, treatment alternatives, authorization, documentation, patient identification, review and medical condition.
They found that nursing home policies were most likely to contain provisions that could be objectively measured and easily documented as required by law. This study is helpful because it has ten criteria that would help enhance autonomy and the quality of decision making by nursing home
residents.
Hackler, J. Chris, F. Family Consent to Oder Not to Resuscitate: Reconsidering hospital policy. Journal of the American medical association; Sep. 12, 2009; 45(2): 80-82
This article propose that physicians should not be required to offer cardiopulmonary resuscitation to patients or families where, in the physician’s professional judgement, the intervention would be futile. Hackler and Chris also propose that CPR be withheld, even over family objection in a case where first, the patient personally lacks decisionmaking capacity, secondly, the burdens of treatment are disproportionate to the benefits, Thirdly, the surrogate cannot justify CPR in terms of patient value, preference, or best interest and lastly where the physician as made serious efforts to negotiate and resolve the issue informally with the family. The authors opine that the legal risks to the physician of acting on their consciences even over family objections are very slight
Moss, Alvin H. ‘Informing the patients about cardiopulmonary resuscitation:’ when the risks outweigh the benefits. Journal of general internal medicine; July/August 1998 4(4): 349-355.
The author reviews extensive literature documenting every poor results for patients receiving cardiopulmonary resuscitation, in terms of survival and recovery. He argues that physicians have an obligation to educate patients and their families accurately about the risks and benefits of treatment alternatives, to maximize their informed participation in treatment decitionmaking. He also comment on resolving differences where the patient or family insists upon remaining eligible to receive CPR despite the physician’s judgement that such intervention would be medically futile.