Factors associated with physician decision making on withholding cardiopulmonary resuscitation in prehospital medicine

Treatment patterns and clinician stress related to care of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with a do not attempt resuscitation order

Objective

This research investigated treatment patterns for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with Do Not Attempt Resuscitation orders in Japanese emergency departments and the associated clinician stress.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was conducted at 9 hospitals in Okayama, Japan, targeting emergency department nurses and physicians. The questionnaire inquired about the last treated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patient with a Do Not Attempt Resuscitation. We assessed emotional stress on a 0-10 scale and moral distress on a 1-5 scale among clinicians.

Results

Of 208 participants, 107 (51%) had treated an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patient with a Do Not Attempt Resuscitation order in the past 6 months. Of these, 65 (61%) clinicians used a "slow code" due to perceived futility in resuscitation (42/65 [65%]), unwillingness to terminate resuscitation upon arrival (38/65 [59%]), and absence of family at the time of patient's arrival (35/65 [54%]). Female clinicians had higher emotional stress (5 vs. 3; P = 0.007) and moral distress (3 vs. 2; P = 0.002) than males. Nurses faced more moral distress than physicians (3 vs. 2; P < 0.001). Adjusted logistic regression revealed that having performed a "slow code" (adjusted odds ratio, 5.09 [95% CI, 1.68-17.87]) and having greater ethical concerns about "slow code" (adjusted odds ratio, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.19-0.58]) were associated with high stress levels.

Conclusions

The prevalent use of "slow code" for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with Do Not Attempt Resuscitation orders underscores the challenges in managing these patients in clinical practice.

Ethical considerations in the prehospital treatment of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A multi-centre, qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Prehospital emergency physicians have to navigate complex decision-making in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) treatment that includes ethical considerations. This study explores Danish prehospital physicians' experiences of ethical issues influencing their decision-making during OHCA.

METHODS

We conducted a multisite ethnographic study. Through convenience sampling, we included 17 individual interviews with prehospital physicians and performed 22 structured observations on the actions of the prehospital personnel during OHCAs. We collected data during more than 800 observation hours in the Danish prehospital setting between December 2019 and April 2022. Data were analysed with thematic analysis.

RESULTS

All physicians experienced ethical considerations that influenced their decision-making in a complex interrelated process. We identified three overarching themes in the ethical considerations: Expectations towards patient prognosis and expectations from relatives, bystanders, and colleagues involved in the cardiac arrest; the values and beliefs of the physician and values and beliefs of others involved in the cardiac arrest treatment; and dilemmas encountered in decision-making such as conflicting values.

CONCLUSION

This extensive qualitative study provides an in-depth look at aspects of ethical considerations in decision-making in prehospital resuscitation and found aspects of ethical decision-making that could be harmful to both physicians and patients, such as difficulties in handling advance directives and potential unequal outcomes of the decision-making. The results call for multifaceted interventions on a wider societal level with a focus on advance care planning, education of patients and relatives, and interventions towards prehospital clinicians for a better understanding and awareness of ethical aspects of decision-making.

Decision-making on the fly: a qualitative study of physicians in out-of-hospital emergency medical services

BACKGROUND

Out-of-hospital Emergency Medical Services (OHEMS) require fast and accurate assessment of patients and efficient clinical judgment in the face of uncertainty and ambiguity. Guidelines and protocols can support staff in these situations, but there is significant variability in their use. Therefore, the aim of this study was to increase our understanding of physician decision-making in OHEMS, in particular, to characterize the types of decisions made and to explore potential facilitating and hindering factors.

METHODS

Qualitative interview study of 21 physicians in a large, publicly-owned and operated OHEMS in Croatia. Data was subjected to an inductive content analysis.

RESULTS

Physicians (mostly young, female, and early in their career), made three decisions (transport, treat, and if yes on either, how) after an initial patient assessment. Decisions were influenced by patient needs, but to a greater extent by factors related to themselves and patients (microsystem), their organization (mesosystem), and the larger health system (macrosystem). This generated a high variability in quality and outcomes. Participants desired support through further training, improved guidelines, formalized feedback, supportive management, and health system process redesign to better coordinate and align care across organizational boundaries.

CONCLUSIONS

The three decisions were made complex by contextual factors that largely lay outside physician control at the mesosystem level. However, physicians still took personal responsibility for concerns more suitably addressed at the organizational level. This negatively impacted care quality and staff well-being. If managers instead adopt a learning orientation, the path from novice to expert physician could be more ably supported through organizational demands and practices aligned with real-world practice. Questions remain on how managers can better support the learning needed to improve quality, safety, and physicians' journey from novice to expert.

Quantifying physician's bias to terminate resuscitation. The TERMINATOR Study

Context Deciding on "termination of resuscitation" (TOR) is a dilemma for any physician facing cardiac arrest. Due to the lack of evidence-based criteria and scarcity of the existing guidelines, crucial arbitration to interrupt resuscitation remains at the practitioner's discretion.

AIM

Evaluate with a quantitative method the existence of a physician internal bias to terminate resuscitation.

METHOD

We extracted data concerning OHCAs managed between January 2013 and September 2021 from the RéAC registry. We conducted a statistical analysis using generalized linear mixed models to model the binary TOR decision. Utstein data were used as fixed effect terms and a random effect term to model physicians personal bias towards TOR.

RESULTS

5,144 OHCAs involving 173 physicians were included. The cohort's average age was 69 (SD 18) and was composed of 62% of women. Median no-flow and low-flow times were respectively 6 (IQR [0,12]) and 18 (IQR [10,26]) minutes. Our analysis showed a significant (p<0.001) physician effect on TOR decision. Odds ratio for the "doctor effect" was 2.48 [2.13-2.94] for a doctor one SD above the mean, lower than that of dependency for activities of daily living (41.18 [24.69-65.50]), an age of more than 85 years (38.60 [28.67-51.08]), but higher than that of oncologic, cardiovascular, respiratory disease or no-flow duration between 10 to 20 minutes (1.60 [1.26-2.00]).

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate the existence of individual physician biases in their decision about TOR. The impact of this bias is greater than that of a no-flow duration lasting ten to twenty minutes. Our results plead in favor developing tools and guidelines to guide physicians in their decision.

Smart Glasses: A New Tool for Assessing the Number of Patients in Mass-Casualty Incidents

Introduction:

Mass-casualty incidents (MCIs) are events in which many people are injured during the same period of time. This has major implications in regards to practical concerns and planning for both personnel and medical equipment. Smart glasses are modern tools that could help Emergency Medical Services (EMS) in the estimation of the number of potential patients in an MCI. However, currently there is no study regarding the advantage of employing the use of smart glasses in MCIs in Thailand.

Study Objective:

This study aims to compare the overall accuracy and amount of time used with smart glasses and comparing it to manual counting to assess the number of casualties from the scene.

Methods:

This study was a randomized controlled trial, field exercise experimental study in the EMS unit of Srinagarind Hospital, Thailand. The participants were divided into two groups (those with smart glasses and those doing manual counting). On the days of the simulation (February 25 and 26, 2022), the participants in the smart glasses group received a 30-minute training session on the use of the smart glasses. After that, both groups of participants counted the number of casualties on the simulation field independently.

Results:

Sixty-eight participants were examined, and in the smart glasses group, a total of 58.8% (N = 20) of the participants were male. The mean age in this group was 39.4 years old. The most experienced in the EMS smart glasses group had worked in this position for four-to-six years (44.1%). The participants in the smart glasses group had the highest scores in accurately assessing the number of casualties being between 21-30 (98.0%) compared with the manual counting group (89.2%). Additionally, the time used for assessing the number of casualties in the smart glasses group was shorter than the manual counting group in tallying the number of casualties between 11-20 (6.3 versus 11.2 seconds; P = .04) and between 21-30 (22.1 versus 44.5 seconds; P = .02).

Conclusion:

The use of smart glasses to assess the number of casualties in MCIs when the number of patients is between 11 and 30 is useful in terms of greater accuracy and less time being spent than with manual counting.

Rationale for withholding professional resuscitation in emergency medical system-attended out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

BACKGROUND

Half of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) are deemed inappropriate for resuscitation by emergency medical services (EMS). We investigated patient characteristics and reasons for non-treatment of OHCAs, and determined the proportion involving illicit drug use.

METHODS

We reviewed consecutive EMS-untreated OHCA from the British Columbia Cardiac Arrest Registry (2019-2020). We abstracted patient characteristics and categorized reasons for EMS non-treatment: (1) prolonged interval from the OHCA to EMS arrival ("non-recent OHCA") with or without signs of "obvious death"; (2) do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order; (3) terminal disease; (4) verbal directive; and (5) unspecified. We abstracted clinical details regarding a history of, or evidence at the scene of, illicit drug use.

RESULTS

Of 13 331 cases, 5959 (45%) were not treated by EMS. The median age was 67 (IQR 54-81) and 1903 (32%) were female. EMS withheld resuscitation due to: non-recent OHCA, with and without signs of "obvious death" in 4749 (80%) and 108 (1.8%), respectively; DNR order in 952 (16%); terminal disease in 77 (1.3%); family directive in 41 (0.69%); and unspecified in 32 (0.54%). Overall and among those with non-recent OHCA, 695/5959 (12%) and 691/4857 (14%) had either a history of or evidence of recent illicit drug use, respectively.

CONCLUSION

A prolonged interval from the OHCA until EMS assessment was the predominant reason for withholding treatment. Innovative solutions to decrease this interval may increase the proportion of OHCA that are treated by EMS and overall outcomes. Targeted interventions for illicit-drug use-related OHCAs may add additional benefit.

Factors Influencing Physician Decision Making to Attempt Advanced Resuscitation in Asystolic Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

The objective of this study was to identify the key elements used by prehospital emergency physicians (EP) to decide whether or not to attempt advanced life support (ALS) in asystolic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). From 1 January 2009 to 1 January 2017, all adult victims of asystolic OHCA in Geneva, Switzerland, were retrospectively included. Patients with signs of “obvious death” or with a Do-Not-Attempt-Resuscitation order were excluded. Patients were categorized as having received ALS if this was mentioned in the medical record, or, failing that, if at least one dose of adrenaline had been administered during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Prognostic factors known at the time of EP’s decision were included in a multivariable logistic regression model. Included were 784 patients. Factors favourably influencing the decision to provide ALS were witnessed OHCA (OR = 2.14, 95% CI: 1.43–3.20) and bystander CPR (OR = 4.10, 95% CI: 2.28–7.39). Traumatic aetiology (OR = 0.04, 95% CI: 0.02–0.08), age > 80 years (OR = 0.14, 95% CI: 0.09–0.24) and a Charlson comorbidity index greater than 5 (OR = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.06–0.27) were the factors most strongly associated with the decision not to attempt ALS. Factors influencing the EP’s decision to attempt ALS in asystolic OHCA are the relatively young age of the patients, few comorbidities, presumed medical aetiology, witnessed OHCA and bystander CPR.