Audit of Not for Resuscitation Orders in an Australian Hospital
Author Information
Author(s): Salins Naveen Sulakshan, Jansen Wendy
Primary Institution: Lyell McEwin Hospital, South Australia
Hypothesis
How accurately are anticipatory Not for Resuscitation (NFR) orders documented in a major metropolitan teaching hospital in Australia?
Conclusion
Improved discussion and documentation of NFR orders can enhance the quality of care for dying patients.
Supporting Evidence
- Prognosis was documented in only 40% of cases.
- Two-thirds of patients with documented NFR were offered palliative care.
- Documentation of CPR process or outcomes was missing in most cases.
- Less than 50% of cases had evidence that the NFR decision aligned with patient choices.
Takeaway
This study looked at how well doctors write down decisions about not resuscitating patients, and found that many times important details were missing.
Methodology
Retrospective hospital-based study using a questionnaire to review NFR documentation in patient case records.
Potential Biases
Potential bias due to the retrospective nature of the study and reliance on existing documentation.
Limitations
Only 88 out of 196 eligible files could be accessed for review.
Participant Demographics
Patients aged 27 to 101 years, with a mean age of 70; 61.36% male and 38.64% female.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website