Venlafaxine''s effects on healthy volunteers'' driving, psychomotor, and vigilance performance during 15-day fixed and incremental dosing regimens

Patients, providers, and families are increasingly involved in end-of-life decisions (advance directives, health care proxy, do-not-resuscitate [DNR] status consents). These decisions can be complex processes whereby the participants in the process must come to terms with often painful and difficult decisions. The role perception of the nurse in end-of-life decision making is not well delineated. This chapter explores the results of a study that addresses the question, "What are the experiences of oncology nurses as they interact with patients and/or family members during the process of patients/families signing DNR consents. The grounded theory method of data collection and analysis was used to explore this question. The results of the study indicate that central to the process of consenting to DNR status is the degree of shared understanding about the meaning of DNR status among participants and the conflict that can occur when meanings are not shared. A model is presented that illustrates the connections between the meanings of DNR (patient, family, and provider) and congruence and conflict in the DNR consent process. Strategies are discussed that facilitate prevention or resolution of conflict in the DNR status decision-making process. Strategies used by the nurse to facilitate decision making by patient and families include communicating with, caring for, educating, advocating for, and collaborating with patients, families, and other providers.     

Usefulness of ultrasound in Sudeck''s atrophy of the foot

A study was carried out to evaluate burn nurses' attitudes toward do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders. Questionnaires were submitted to 57 staff members, 52 of whom responded. Seventy-five percent of those responding ranged in age from 30 to 49 years. Seventy-one percent were registered nurses or licensed practical nurses. Sixty-five percent of the respondents had been in health care for more than 10 years; 25% had been in burn care for more than 10 years. Fifty percent were Protestants. Thirty-seven percent of the total described themselves as very religious. Ninety-four percent of respondents felt that DNR orders are sometimes appropriate. Eighty-eight percent felt that DNR decisions should not be made solely by the physician. Ninety-five percent felt that input from patients, family members, or both is essential. Having formal ethics committees make such decisions was opposed by 75% of the respondents. Fifty-six percent felt nurses should be involved in such decisions and 21% opposed such involvement. There was considerable uncertainty, disagreement, or both about whether a DNR order should include stopping all medical treatment, ventilators, intravenous fluids, gastric feedings, and medication. The study indicated statistically significant support for the view that DNR orders are appropriate in some cases. Which patients should be given DNR status and who should make the decision about writing DNR orders were more controversial questions.     

When the severely ill elderly patient refuses food. Ethical reasoning among nurses

Forty registered nurses (RNs) regarded as "good and experienced" in either cancer or dementia care, were asked about their decision to feed or not feed a severely ill elderly woman (a hypothetical case). In order to compare ethical reasoning in the two groups of nurses and to illuminate what it means to RNs to face a situation where the patients can/cannot decide for themselves, a phenomenological hermeneutic approach was used for the analysis. Both groups saw themselves as the advocate for their patients but in different ways. The RNs who talked about a mentally alert patient emphasized that they encouraged their patient to speak up for herself, while the RNs who talked about a severely demented patient emphasized that they tried very hard to interpret their patient's vague and unclear communicative cues and to act as her advocate, especially in relation to physicians. Transcending experiences of dying relatives and patients as well as role models helped them to achieve their ambition of putting themselves in the patient's shoes in order to respect and understand her or his wish and/or what was best for them. The majority of RNs strongly rejected active euthanasia.     

Communicating do-not-resuscitate orders with a computer-based system

BACKGROUND: Do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders for critically ill patients are frequently miscommunicated between attending physicians, house staff, and nurses. A computer-based system was developed to improve the communication of a procedure-specific DNR order form. METHODS: Concordance of understanding of patients' DNR status was measured with the use of unstructured DNR orders (period 1), procedure-specific DNR order forms (period 2), and procedure-specific DNR order forms administered with a computer-based communication system (period 3). The 3 components of the DNR order assessed were (1) the clinical events to which the DNR order applied, (2) whether the DNR order withheld all elements of cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and (3) whether other treatments were to be withheld. RESULTS: For the 147 patients, the computer-based system in period 3 (n = 71) improved concordance for attending physicians and nurses or residents for all 3 of the DNR components compared with period 1 (n = 40) and some of the DNR components compared with period 2 (n = 36). Concordance was "substantial" or "almost perfect" as measured by the K statistic during period 3. The proportion of agreement for the composite of all 3 components of the DNR order increased during each period (P<.001, period 3 vs period 1). Overall agreement between all caregivers for the composite DNR order also improved from period 1 (22.2%) to period 2 (47.8%) and period 3 (61.9%; P<.001 vs period 1). Errors in order entry were detected by physicians because of the computer system and corrected in 9.9% of DNR orders in period 3. Progress note documentation of DNR status did not improve during period 3. The procedures of period 3 were considered acceptable by the physician and nursing staff. CONCLUSION: A computer-based system combined with a procedure-specific DNR order form improves communication of patients' DNR status in a critical care setting.     

The continuing ethical dilemma of the do-not-resuscitate order

The continued use of the do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order remains very confusing to health care workers, especially when surgical intervention is undertaken either by choice or necessity. Although ethics committees can aid in clarification, and the use of advance directives can further define patient wishes, patient and family member education is necessary to ascertain what a surgical patient really desires. As technology advances, perioperative nurses will continue to be bombarded with ethical issues surrounding the DNR order. This article addresses how nurses can be proactive in obtaining answers to these difficult questions and learn how to deal with this dilemma.     

Microbiological quality of recreational waters in Araraquara, SP, Brazil

This replication of Ott's study [Ott, B. (1986). An Ethical Problem Facing Nurses: The Support of Patient Autonomy in the Do Not Resuscitate Decision. University Microfilms International, Dissertation, Texas Women's University] and McLaughlin et al.'s study [McLaughlin, T., Brown, O. and Herman, J. (1988). Nurses' Perception of the Support of Patient Autonomy in Do Not Resuscitate Situations. Unpublished Research Report] explored hospital staff nurses' perceptions of their role in supporting patient autonomy in the do-not-resuscitate (DNR) decision. One-hundred and sixty-five registered nurses (RNs) participated: 93 from the Veterans Administration Medical Center and 72 from a private non-profit hospital. Ott's questionnaire had four hypothetical cases in which a DNR decision would probably be made with three questions about whose opinion would most support patient autonomy and whose opinion would actually be regarded as the most appropriate for making the DNR decision. Seventy per cent of perceptions of the person whose decision would be best able to support the patient's autonomy in the DNR decision and 51% of the people perceived to actually be deemed most appropriate to make the DNR decision were consistent with Ott's DNR Decision Model.     

Physician perspectives on the ethical aspects of disability determination

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate physician's attitudes and responses to the ethical conflicts involved in certifying patients for welfare disability. DESIGN: A mailed questionnaire survey that used case scenarios and general questions. SETTING: Massachusetts. PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of 347 internists and family practitioners and a convenience sample of 100 neighborhood health center physicians from three large cities (NHC sample). The response was 53% and 76%, respectively. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Physician responses to case scenarios representing difficult decisions about patient requests for welfare disability determination and general questions about the welfare disability system. Physicians reported a willingness to exaggerate clinical data to help a patient they thought deserving of welfare disability benefits (39% random sample; 56% NHC sample). Physicians did not report confidence in their ability to determine who was disabled as measured by a visual analog scale (4.4 cm random sample, 4.6 cm NHC sample; 0 = very confident, 10 = very uncertain). They did feel burdened by their participation in welfare disability determinations when compared with other administrative chores as measured on a visual analog scale (2.8 cm random sample, 2.5 cm NHC sample; 0 = more burdensome, 10 = less burdensome). Eighty-two percent of the random sample physicians and 86% of the NHC sample physicians thought that filling out a disability form could adversely affect the physician-patient relationship, and 62% of physicians in each sample thought that it represented a conflict of interest. Eighty percent of physicians in both samples thought that it would be better if an independent group of physicians were designated to determine disability. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians perceive an ethical bind as they try to satisfy the conflicting demands of patients and the welfare disability system. They will frequently decide in favor of their patient's interests. This has implications for welfare policy planners.     

Ethical decisions making in neonatal intensive care. Survey among nursing staff in 2 French centers

A European Concerted Action, Euronic, has been set up to study the attitudes and self-reported practices of the staff working in neonatal intensive care units about parent's information and ethical decisionmaking. This paper presents the results of a preliminary qualitative survey conducted in two French units and including 23 physicians and nurses. The answers indicate that withdrawal of treatments are part of their practices. Parents are never directly involved in the decision-making process. The decision to withdraw life sustaining treatments generate psychological distress among the caregivers. Nurses consider that they are more emotionally involved with the baby and the parents. They express concerns about painful treatments and life-prolonging therapies. Most respondents believe that an ethical committee would be of little help in the decision-making process and that the actual legislation should not be modified as it gives obligation for more in-depth consideration of each case.     

Do clinical and formal assessments of the capacity of patients in the intensive care unit to make decisions agree?

BACKGROUND: The complex environment and technology of intensive care unit (ICU) care may impair the ability of patients to participate in medical decision making or give informed consent. We studied the agreement of the intuitive assessments of residents and nurses of ICU patients' cognition, judgment, and decision-making capacity, and whether those assessments agreed with abbreviated formal mental status testing. METHODS: Using a prospective survey case study, we assessed 200 English-speaking patients within 24 hours of their ICU admission. Formal assessment of cognition, judgment, and insight was performed by a research assistant. We obtained independent intuitive ratings by nurses and residents of patient cognition, judgment, and ability to participate in medical decision making or give informed consent. RESULTS: Residents' and nurses' assessment of cognition and judgment showed a high degree of agreement with weighted ks of greater than 0.76. Assessments of cognition by residents and nurses agreed with Folstein Mini-Mental State Examination in 70% and 73.6% of cases, respectively. Forty percent of the population had an unimpaired Mini-Mental State Examination score of greater than 23, and an additional 12% of the subjects were mildly impaired with scores of 20 to 23. When asked whether they would approach patient or family for consent for an invasive procedure, nurses and physicians said they would request informed consent from 66% and 62% of the patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Residents and nurses caring for patients newly admitted to the ICU agree in their assessment of cognition, judgment, and capacity to participate in medical decision making, and are not unduly influenced by ventilator status. Their assessments correlate highly with abbreviated formal mental status testing.     

What role do patients wish to play in treatment decision making?

BACKGROUND: Although current ideology suggests patients should be active participants in decision making about their care, the literature suggests that patients wish to be informed but not involved. OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that most patients want their physicians to take the responsibility for problem solving (PS, identifying the one right answer), but that many want to be involved in decision-making (DM, selecting the most desired bundle of outcomes) tasks. METHODS: Survey responses from 300 patients undergoing angiogram at a Toronto, Ontario, hospital were analyzed (response rate, 72%). Survey items included scales to measure desire for information and participation, including Autonomy Preference Index, the Krantz Health Opinion Survey, and the Deber-Kraetschmer Problem-Solving Decision-Making Scale measured on a scale from, 1 (doctor only) to 5 (patient only). RESULTS: Patients had a relatively high desire for information. On the Problem-Solving Decision-Making Scale, they overwhelmingly wished the PS tasks to be performed by or shared with the physician (98.4% of the 12 PS scores are between 1 and 3), but wanted to be involved in DM (78% of the 6 DM scores are between 3 and 5). Preference for handing over control to the physician was significantly greater for the vignette involving potential mortality (chest pain) than for the vignettes involving mainly morbidity (urinary problems) or quality of life (fertility). CONCLUSIONS: Although patients do not wish to be involved in PS tasks, few wish to hand over DM control to their physician. These findings suggest 2 major roles for clinicians--assisting patients in PS to structure choices and supporting them in making often difficult decisions.     

End-of-life issues: a survey of English-speaking Canadian nurses in AIDS care

This anonymous postal survey explored attitudes and experiences concerning end-of-life decisions. Respondents were English-speaking members of the Canadian Association for Nurses in AIDS Care (CANAC) and other nurses identified as working primarily in HIV/AIDS settings. Seventy-three percent believed that the law should be changed to allow physicians to practice voluntary euthanasia (VE) and assisted suicide (AS). Fifty-three percent indicated that nurses should be allowed to practice VE and AS. Although VE and AS are illegal, fewer than one in five nurses would report a colleague whom they knew to be involved in such acts. More than one in five nurses have received requests from patients to hasten their deaths by VE. Nearly 98% believe that the nursing profession should be involved in policy development concerning VE and AS, and nearly 78% believe that nurses should be involved in the decision-making process with patients if such acts were legal. Given that ethical codes for Canadian nurses promote client self-determination and that nurses are the largest group of care providers for the terminally ill, the profession must promote discussion and research if it is to take a leadership role with respect to end-of-life issues.     

PAK-104P, a pyridine analogue, reverses paclitaxel and doxorubicin resistance in cell lines and nude mice bearing xenografts that overexpress the multidrug resistance protein

For ethical decision-making near the end of life, autonomy is the moral North Star. At the same time, for some treatments, the burdens so clearly outweigh benefits that physicians may make a judgment not to offer the treatment. This is often clearer in surgery. A person with colon cancer and metastases may not insist on resection of the metastases. For some reason, some treatments have escaped these logical constraints. Attempted resuscitation of a dying patient is a good example. The circumstances in which a physician may make choices on behalf of a competent, terminally-ill patient without consent, and even without notification, are hotly debated, but data suggest that physicians do so frequently. Patients who lack capacity present even more difficult challenges. Advance directives, when available, can be extremely helpful, but even with them difficult problems can remain. If advance directives have not been established, family and close friends are an obvious source of guidance. Their legal role varies in different jurisdictions; in practice, they are crucial in bedside decision-making. Guardianship and alternatives to it remain a poor last resort. Euthanasia is a very difficult problem. We believe it is semantically misleading to lump under the term "passive euthanasia" those circumstances where potentially life-sustaining treatment is withheld or withdrawn. The tension between patient autonomy and medical common sense remains unresolved within the "futility" controversy. The authors believe it serves no purpose to discuss carefully with dying patients propositions that are nonsense. At the same time, physicians must not confuse decisions about quality of life with judgements about treatment effectiveness. We believe that what many, although not all, dying patients want are physicians with intelligent compassion who can take care of them through the dying process.     

The decision-making process for the treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding

This pilot study was conducted to investigate the treatment decision-making process of patients and physicians for abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB). Frequently, women with AUB are referred for hysterectomy without diagnostic workup, alternative therapeutic management, or patient input (i.e., patient treatment preferences). Variations in treatment strategies used for patients may be related to a number of factors external to the patient's underlying disease. However, little is known about which factors are most influential or about the extent to which they influence physicians' and patients' decisions. We prospectively followed the management and treatment of 52 women with complaints of AUB and examined differences in treatment among these patients. Extensive previsit interviews were conducted with these women to identify each patient's symptoms, health status, functional status, and preferences for and expectations of treatment. We then conducted telephone interviews within a week of the visit and again 9-12 months later to determine the treatment plan, patient level of participation in and satisfaction with the treatment, symptoms, and functional status. Overall, our findings suggest that patients want to be involved in making treatment decisions and that when women were presented with alternatives to hysterectomy, many chose alternative medical therapy or other surgical procedures. In addition, women reported that these alternative treatments produced significant improvement in symptom intensity and functioning. Increased patient participation in decision making enhanced patient satisfaction. These findings suggest that hysterectomy rates may be decreased by offering women alternative treatments and by finding ways to increase women's participation in their treatment decisions.     

Breast neoplasms: information in question(s). A survey of patients and physicians at a cancer treatment center

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to know the wishes of our patients for information and to compare them with the point of view of our colleagues in a cancer center. METHODS: We gave 100 consecutive new patients with breast cancer a questionnaire about their needs. The same questionnaire was given in duplicate to all our colleagues in the cancer center (n = 53) asking: 1) their own needs of information if they had breast cancer 2) how they thought the patients would answer. RESULTS: Seventy-five percent of the patients and 81% of the doctors returned the questionnaire (28 were men and 15 women; 81% were involved in the management of breast cancer). On one hand, concerning information about the disease and about the treatment, there was no difference between the needs expressed by patients of doctors (as patients). As expected, the two groups wanted to be well informed. On the other hand, there was always a statistically significant difference between the needs expressed by patients and the opinion of doctors who systematically underestimated them. Concerning information to the family, 21% of doctors and only 4% of patients didn't want any information to be given to their family. Interestingly, 67% of the patients thought the decision had to be taken together with the doctor and 56% of the doctors (as patients) wished the decision to be taken by the doctor. CONCLUSION: Patients and physicians if they were patients, expressed the same high level need of information, but the patients needs seemed underestimated by the majority of doctors.     

The frequency of "do-not-resuscitate" order in aged in-patients: effect of patient- and non-patient-related factors

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of patient- and non-patient-related factors (co-morbidity, demographics, and method of surveillance) on the frequency of "do-not-resuscitate" (DNR) orders in aged inpatients. METHODS: On a geriatric ward, during three different periods within 1 year, we used two different methods of data collection (with or without a form) and two different time-frames (prevalence or incidence) in studying the frequency of DNR orders, demographic data and the Pre-Arrest Morbidity (PAM) Index. RESULTS: In a sample of 261 patients the DNR decision was related to patient-related factors, including the PAM score and age. Only 3 patients with a score above 4 had no DNR order and in the group of 142 patients > 83 years 85 (59.9%) had a DNR order, compared to 52 (43.7%) of the 119 patients of 83 years or less (p < 0.05). In contrast, gender and marital status were not related to the presence of a DNR order. The variables PAM score, age, form and time-frame classified 76.6% of the cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) decisions correctly and 71.5% of the DNR decisions correctly. Without attention to the resuscitation decision, the written DNR order frequency decreased significantly from 64-59% to 23%. An explanation for this variance may be the passive process of data collection, a non-patient-related factor. CONCLUSIONS: The DNR decision is related to the PAM index score and age. The variance in DNR decisions is partly related to the method of data collection, a non-patient-related factor in DNR decision-making. Without attention to the DNR/CPR decision, the DNR frequency decreased markedly.     

Eyeball position in Graves orbitopathy and its significance for eyelid surgery

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to identify and compare the attitudes of patients and health care professionals towards advance directives. Advance directives promote recognition of the patient's autonomy, letting the individual exercise a certain measure of control over life-sustaining care and treatment in the eventuality of becoming incompetent. DESIGN: Attitudes to advance directives were evaluated using a 44-item self-reported questionnaire. It yields an overall score as well as five factor scores: autonomy, beneficence, justice, external norms, and the affective dimension. SETTING: Health care institutions in the province of Québec, Canada. Survey sample: The sampling consisted of 921 subjects: 123 patients, 167 physicians, 340 nurses and 291 administrators of health care institutions. RESULTS: Although the general attitude of each population was favourable to the expression of autonomy, multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) indicated that physicians attached less importance to this subscale than did other populations (p < .001). Above all, they favoured legal external norms and beneficence. Physicians and administrators also attached less importance to the affective dimension than did patients and nurses. Specifically, physicians' attitudes towards advance directives were shown to be less positive than patients' attitudes. CONCLUSION: More attention should be given to the importance of adequately informing patients about advance directives because they may not represent an adequate means for patients to assert their autonomy.     

Brain metastasis model in athymic nude mice using a novel MUC1-secreting human breast-cancer cell line, MA11

OBJECTIVES: This study explored parental attitudes about their interactions with their children's providers when decision making involved critical life situations. We evaluated parents' attitudes regarding the following questions: What was the parents' understanding of their children's health care issues, and what was the parental perception of the professionals' understanding of their children and of themselves? Who should be the principal decision makers for the children? What was the parents' knowledge about advance directives? Did parents want to participate in a process of advance planning to assist with critical life decision making for their children? METHODS: We surveyed all parents attending a conference sponsored by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health for parents of children with special needs. The questionnaire was provided to all parents attending the conference. An announcement was made at the conference requesting parental participation. The 76 respondents constitute a convenience sample of parents of children with special needs sufficient for this preliminary stage of investigation. RESULTS: Of 177 parents attending the conference, 76 (43%) completed the questionnaire. Eighty-eight percent of the participants strongly agreed that they understood their children's conditions. Twenty-one percent stated that they had sufficient understanding of their children's future medical needs, and 21% thought that they had a sufficient understanding of their children's developmental potential. Ninety-nine percent of parents strongly agreed that physicians should share information with parents no matter how serious or potentially upsetting. Ninety-four percent of those parents who thought that their children's physicians understood their own needs also thought that the physicians understood their children's needs. In contrast, only half (55%) of those parents who thought the physicians did not understand their needs thought the physicians understood their children's needs. Ninety-two percent of parents who thought that the physicians understood their needs agreed that the physicians would make the best decisions in crises versus 60% of those who did not think the physicians understood their needs. Seventy-four percent stated that they would consider written guidelines for their children that dealt with critical life situations. All parents who thought their children's conditions were not understood wanted written guidelines. Of those parents who had thought their children would not survive (15 parents), 94% wanted written guidelines. All seven parents who had been told their children would not survive wanted written guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Parents in this study were generally satisfied with care being provided to their children. Nevertheless, the results clearly suggest goals that could lead to improved capacity for parents and providers to make critical life decisions for and with children. First, physicians must understand the needs of parents to be able to make decisions that would be in the children's best interests. Second, parents should participate fully in critical life decisions for their children and should use written guidelines to assist with the process of these critical life decisions. Our findings strongly support the development of a longitudinal process, initiated early after the onset or discovery of illness and maintained longitudinally throughout the course of a child's illness, to help parents and providers work together in this vital area of health care to children.