Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jun;63(6):e621-e632.
doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2022.03.009.

Evolution of Investigating Informed Assent Discussions about CPR in Seriously Ill Patients

Affiliations

Evolution of Investigating Informed Assent Discussions about CPR in Seriously Ill Patients

Renee D Stapleton et al. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2022 Jun.

Abstract

Context: Outcomes after cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) remain poor. We have spent 10 years investigating an "informed assent" (IA) approach to discussing CPR with chronically ill patients/families. IA is a discussion framework whereby patients extremely unlikely to benefit from CPR are informed that unless they disagree, CPR will not be performed because it will not help achieve their goals, thus removing the burden of decision-making from the patient/family, while they retain an opportunity to disagree.

Objectives: Determine the acceptability and efficacy of IA discussions about CPR with older chronically ill patients/families.

Methods: This multi-site research occurred in three stages. Stage I determined acceptability of the intervention through focus groups of patients with advanced COPD or malignancy, family members, and physicians. Stage II was an ambulatory pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) of the IA discussion. Stage III is an ongoing phase 2 RCT of IA versus attention control in in patients with advanced chronic illness.

Results: Our qualitative work found the IA approach was acceptable to most patients, families, and physicians. The pilot RCT demonstrated feasibility and showed an increase in participants in the intervention group changing from "full code" to "do not resuscitate" within two weeks after the intervention. However, Stages I and II found that IA is best suited to inpatients. Our phase 2 RCT in older hospitalized seriously ill patients is ongoing; results are pending.

Conclusions: IA is a feasible and reasonable approach to CPR discussions in selected patient populations.

Keywords: Code status; cardiopulmonary resuscitation; communication; end-of-life; seriously ill patients.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:
Informed Assent Discussion Guide/Checklist
Figure 1:
Figure 1:
Informed Assent Discussion Guide/Checklist

Similar articles

References

    1. https://www.heart.org/en/professional/quality-improvement/get-with-the-g..., accessed Dec. 27, 2021.
    1. Ehlenbach WJ, Barnato AE, Curtis JR, et al. Epidemiologic study of in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the elderly. N Engl J Med 2009;361:22–31. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Stapleton RD, Ehlenbach WJ, Deyo RA, Curtis JR. Long-term outcomes after in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation in older adults with chronic illness. Chest 2014. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Schluep M, Gravesteijn BY, Stolker RJ, Endeman H, Hoeks SE. One-year survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Resuscitation 2018;132:90–100. - PubMed
    1. Halpern SD, Ubel PA, Asch DA. Harnessing the power of default options to improve health care. N Engl J Med 2007;357:1340–4. - PubMed

Publication types