Within oncology and hematology care, patients are sometimes considered to have such a poor prognosis that they can receive a do not resuscitate order from the physician responsible, stipulating that neither basic nor advanced coronary pulmonary rescue be performed in the event of a cardiac arrest. Studies on do not resuscitate decisions within oncology and hematology units, focusing on the specific role of the nurse in relation to these decisions, are scarce.
Objective:
The aim of this study was to investigate hematology and oncology nurses’ experiences and perceptions of do not resuscitate orders, in order to achieve a deeper understanding of the nurses’ specific role in these decisions.
Research design:
A qualitative, descriptive methodology with individual semi-structured interviews was used.
Participants and research context:
A total of 15 nurses from eight hematology/oncology wards in four hospitals in Sweden were interviewed individually.
Ethical considerations:
In accordance with national regulations, an ethical review was not required for this study. The research followed international guidelines for empirical research, as outlined in the Helsinki Declaration.
Findings:
The nurses strived for good nursing care through balancing harms and goods and observing integrity and quality of life as important values. Experienced hindrances for good care were unclear and poorly documented decisions, uninformed patients and relatives, and disagreements among the caregivers and family. The nurses expressed a need for an ongoing discussion on do not resuscitate decisions, including all concerned parties.
Conclusion:
In order to provide good nursing care, nurses need clear and well-documented do not resuscitate orders, and patients and relatives need to be well informed and included in the decisions. To increase the understanding for each other’s opinions within the medical team, regular ethical discussions are required.
ForteDNVincentLVVelascoIT. Association between education in EOL care and variability in EOL practice: a survey of ICU physicians. Intensive Care Med2012; 38: 404–412.
2.
SaltbaekLTvedegaardE. Decision to resuscitate or not in patients with chronic diseases. Dan Med Bull2012; 59: 1–4.
Svenska Läkaresällskapet (Swedish Society of Medicine). Riktlinjer för beslut angående Hjärt-lungräddning(Guidelines for decisions regarding Cor Pulmonary Rescue). Stockholm: Svenska Läkaresällskapet, http://www.sls.se/PageFiles/225/000012135.pdf(2000, accessed 5 April 2013).
6.
SvantessonMSjökvistPThorsénH. End-of-life decisions in Swedish ICUs. Intensive Crit Care Nurs2003; 19: 241–251.
7.
MahonMMMcAuleyWJ. Oncology nurses’ personal understandings about palliative care. Oncol Nurs Forum2010; 37: 141–150.
8.
BecerraMHurstSAJunod PerronN. “Do not attempt resuscitation” and “cardiopulmonary resuscitation” in an inpatient setting: factors influencing physicians’ decisions in Switzerland. Gerontology2011; 57: 414–421.
9.
RobinsonFCupplesMCorriganM. Implementing a resuscitation policy for patients at the end of life in an acute hospital setting: qualitative study. Palliat Med2007; 21: 305–312.
10.
SulmasyDPHeMKMcAuleyR. Beliefs and attitudes of nurses and physicians about do not resuscitate orders and who should speak to patients and families about them. Crit Care Med2008; 36: 1817–1822.
11.
SilenMSvantessonMAhlstromG. Nurses’ conceptions of decision making concerning life-sustaining treatment. Nurs Ethics2008; 15: 160–173.
12.
MurrayMAWilsonKKryworuchkoJ. Nurses’ perceptions of factors influencing patient decision support for place of care at the end of life. Am J Hosp Palliat Care2009; 26: 254–263.
YuenJKReidMCFettersMD. Hospital do-not-resuscitate orders: why they have failed and how to fix them. J Gen Intern Med2011; 26: 791–797.
15.
Kim doYLeeKENamEM. Do-not-resuscitate orders for terminal patients with cancer in teaching hospitals of Korea. J Palliat Med2007; 10: 1153–1158.
16.
LevinTLiYWeinerJ. How do-not-resuscitate orders are utilized in cancer patients: timing relative to death and communicating-training implications. Palliat Support Care2008; 6: 341–348.
17.
JezewskiMFinnellD. The meaning of DNR status: oncology nurses’ experiences with patients and families. Cancer Nurs1998; 21: 212–221.
18.
FridhIForsbergABergbomI. Doing one’s utmost: nurses’ descriptions of caring for dying patients in an intensive care environment. Intensive Crit Care Nurs2009; 25: 233–241.
19.
IranmaneshSHäggströmTAxelssonK. Swedish nurses’ experiences of caring for dying people, a holistic approach. Holist Nurs Pract2009; 23: 243–252.
20.
MurphyPAPriceDMStevensM. Under the radar: contributions of the SUPPORT nurses. Nurs Outlook2001; 49: 238–242.
21.
ThelenM. End-of-life decision making in intensive care. Crit Care Nurse2005; 25: 28–37.
22.
PuntilloKAMcAdamJL. Communication between physicians and nurses as a target for improving end-of-life care in the intensive care unit: challenges and opportunities for moving forward. Crit Care Med2006; 34: S332–S340.
23.
McMillenRE. End of life decisions: nurses perceptions, feelings and experiences. Intensive Crit Care Nurs2008; 24: 251–259.
24.
HendersonV. The nature of nursing. 2nd ed. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1967.
25.
HarmerBHendersonV. Textbook of the principles and practice of nursing. 5th ed. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1955.
26.
BeauchampTLChildressJF. Principles of biomedical ethics. 6th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
SvantessonMLöfmarkRThorsénH. Learning a way through ethical problems: Swedish nurses’ and doctors’ experiences from one model of ethics rounds. J Med Ethics2008; 34: 399–406.
30.
Kalvemark SporrongSArnetzBHanssonMG. Developing ethical competence in health care organizations. Nurs Ethics2007; 14: 825–837.
31.
SvantessonMAnderzen-CarlssonAThorsénH. Interprofessional ethics rounds concerning dialysis patients: staff’s ethical reflections before and after rounds. J Med Ethics2008; 34: 407–413.
32.
HabermasJ. Moral consciousness and communicative action. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1990.
33.
OlverIEliottJA. The perceptions of do-not-resuscitate policies of dying patients with cancer. Psychooncology2008; 17: 347–353.
34.
PolitDFBeckCT. Nursing research—generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice. 8th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2008.
35.
LöfmarkRNilstunT. Do-not-resuscitate orders—should the patient be informed. J Intern Med1997; 241: 421–425.
36.
LöfmarkRNilstunT. Informing patients and relatives about do-not-resuscitate decisions. Attitudes of cardiologists and nurses in Sweden. J Intern Med1998; 243: 191–195.
37.
LöfmarkRNilstunT. Do-not-resuscitate orders—experiences and attitudes of relatives. Eur J Intern Med2001; 12: 430–434.
CODEX. Forskning som involverar människan(Research involving human). Uppsala: Vetenskapsrådet (Swedish Research Council), http://www.codex.vr.se/forskningmanniska.shtml(2011, accessed 5 April 2013).
40.
World Medical Association (WMA). Declaration of Helsinki—ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Fortaleza, Brazil: WMA, 2013.
GraneheimULundmanB. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today2004; 24: 105–112.
43.
LincolnYSGubaGE. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1985.
44.
BeckstrandRLColletteJCallisterL. Oncology nurses’ obstacles and supportive behaviors in end-of-life care providing vital family care. Oncol Nurs Forum2012; 39: 398–406.
45.
BeckstrandRLMooreJCallisterL. Oncology nurses’ perceptions of obstacles and supportive behaviors at the end of life. Oncol Nurs Forum2009; 36: 446–453.
46.
SFS 1982:763 S. Hälso- och sjukvårdslagen(Act on Health and Medical Services). Stockholm: Socialdepartementet (Ministry of Health and Social Affairs), http://www.regeringen.se/sb/d/1474(2003, accessed 4 July 2013).
47.
SandersAScheppMBairdM. Partial do-not-resuscitate orders: a hazard to patient safety and clinical outcomes?Crit Care Med2011; 39: 14–18.
48.
ManiasE. Australian nurses’ experiences and attitudes in the “Do Not Resuscitate” decision. Res Nurs Health1998; 21: 429–441.
49.
MalterudK. Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet2001; 358: 483–488.
