Cancer patients' perceptions of do not resuscitate orders.

Patients' perceptions of do not resuscitate (DNR) orders and how and when to present the information were sought to aid in framing DNR policy. Semi-structured interviews of 23 patients being treated for cancer, were conducted by a clinical psychologist. The interviews were transcribed and analysed with the aid of a qualitative software package. Discourse analysis enabled hypotheses to be formed based on consistencies and variations of the language used. Most patients understood what DNR meant and preferred DNR orders to 'good palliative care' orders. They saw it as their autonomous right and responsibility to make such decisions. They would seek information on the likely medical outcomes of resuscitation but also would use non-rational criteria based on emotional and social factors to make their decisions. Family considerations suggest that personal autonomy is not the overriding basis of the decision. Patients were unsure of the best timing of a DNR discussion and were prepared to defer to doctors' intuition. Most advocated written DNR orders but few had them. Families were construed as advocates but also seen as constraining individual autonomy. When considering DNR orders, patients recognise the diversity of preferences likely to exist that belie a one policy fits all approach.

Olver IN ，Eliott JA ，Blake-Mortimer J 《PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY》

The perceptions of do-not-resuscitate policies of dying patients with cancer.

Patients in hospitals must authorize do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders or the default cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) occurs. Using discursive analysis, we examined the speech of 28 cancer patients, judged as within 3 months of death, to determine how they justified preferences for DNR orders. Most saw these as a positive outcome of not interfering with a natural death with the decision being personal and the legal right of a competent autonomous person. If surrogates were required, they needed knowledge of the medical facts and the patient's wishes. The doctor was crucial, while family although likely to be supportive may be burdened by the responsibility. Some favored an early DNR discussion, but the majority favored a later discussion when it was applicable. At interview, 58% patients had a DNR order, rising to 82% by the time of death. Written orders were favored, yet 9 of 21 who did not want CPR had no DNR order. Hope was mentioned spontaneously by 25 patients, both as a thing over which patients had little control and as the desire of a positive future outcome. If doctors' and patients' assessments of eligibility for DNR orders do not coincide, the process and documentation of decision-making needs revision.

Olver I ，Eliott JA 《-》

The implications of dying cancer patients' talk on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and do-not-resuscitate orders.

Eliott JA ，Olver IN 《QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH》

The surrogate's experience in authorizing a do not resuscitate order.

Handy CM ，Sulmasy DP ，Merkel CK ，Ury WA ... -  《Palliative & Supportive Care》

Legitimating do-not-resuscitate orders: a discursive study of cancer patients' speech.

Eliott JA ，Olver IN 《-》