Review of Ordering Don't Resuscitate in Iranian Dying Patients

Trust in Intensive Care Patients, Family, and Healthcare Professionals: The Development of a Conceptual Framework Followed by a Case Study

Intensive care patients experience anxiety, pain, uncertainty, and total dependency. In general, it is important to develop trust between the healthcare professionals (HCPs), patients, and their family. Trust building in the ICU setting is challenging because of the time sensitivity of decision making and the dependency of patients on health care professionals. The objectives of this study are the development of a trust framework and then to use this framework in a case study in the intensive care. In three steps we developed a comprehensive trust framework from the literature concerning trust. First, we identified the elements of trust. Second, we adapted and integrated the dimensions to six concepts to construct the trust framework. Third, these concepts are incorporated into a comprehensive trust framework. In a case study we explored the facilitators and barriers within this framework in eight semi-open interviews with healthcare professionals and eight patients or partners. Trust was first explored inductively and then deductively. We showed that HCPs, patients, and family have largely the same perspective regarding the facilitators of trust, in which communication emerged as the most important one. Other facilitators are maintaining an open feedback culture for HCPs and being aware of patients' physical and informational privacy. Patients want to be approached as an individual with individual needs. Dishonesty and differences in values and norms were the most important barriers. To contribute to a positive perception of health delivery and to avoid conflicts between HCP and patients or their family we formulated five practical recommendations.

Do-Not-Resuscitate in Iranian Muslim Families: A Conventional Content Analysis

Families of patients who are dying have a key role in decisions regarding do-not-resuscitate orders. The objective of this study was to explore the aspects and characteristics of this decision by the families of Muslim patients with cancer. This study is a conventional content analysis. Eighteen families who met the inclusion criteria participated in this study and were selected by purposive sampling. Data collection was done by a semistructured interview (each interview was 60-110 minutes). The data analysis was performed using content analysis. The data analysis introduced 4 main categories and 8 subcategories: (a) feeling duality ("sacrifice against selfishness," and "logic against emotion"), (b) religious beliefs ("guilt" and "miracle"), (c) stigmatized ("purgatory talk" and "family rejection") and (d) decision-making mediators ("religious clergymen" and "the application of the deceased"). Maybe, since the effect of religion in Iran is more significant than other elements such as ethnicity and law, it is possible to receive help from clergymen. It seems necessary for Iran's Ministry of Health and Medical Education to plan clinical guidelines in this context.