Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Variation in the rates of do not resuscitate orders after major trauma and the impact of intensive care unit environment.

Journal of Trauma 2008 January
BACKGROUND: There is an increased emphasis on benchmarking of trauma mortality outcomes as a measure of quality. Differences in approaches to end-of-life care or perceptions of salvageability might account for some of the variability in outcomes across centers. We postulated that these differences in perceptions or practice might lead to significant variation in the use of do not resuscitate (DNR) orders and sought to identify institutional characteristics associated with their use.

METHODS: Patients surviving >24 hours and admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) in one of 68 centers across the United States were identified from a large prospective cohort study of severely injured patients. Independent predictors of a DNR order at both the patient and institutional level were identified using multivariate hierarchical modeling stratified by age <55 or >/=55.

RESULTS: Of 6,765 patients, 7% had a DNR order, of whom 88% died. The proportion of patients in each center with a DNR order ranged from 0% to 57%. Independent patient-level predictors associated with a DNR order were increasing age, preinjury comorbidity burden, severe injury, and organ failure. Institutional predictors of DNR orders differed by age. Care in an open ICU was associated with a DNR order (odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-3.0) in the elderly, whereas care in a combined medical-surgical ICU (vs. surgical or trauma ICU) was associated with greater likelihood (odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-4.1) of a DNR order in the young.

CONCLUSIONS: DNR orders are relatively common in seriously injured trauma patients, and there is significant variability in their use across centers. Given the institutional characteristics independently associated with DNR status, it is likely that both differences in the ethos of end-of-life care and perceptions of salvageability affect decision making.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app