Doctors should not discuss resuscitation with terminally ill patients: FOR

BMJ

Volumn 327, Issue 7415, 2003, Pages 614-

  Manisty, Charlotte ^a   Waxman, Jonathan ^a  

^a IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER PATIENT; DEATH; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; DYING; HEART ARREST; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL ETHICS; METASTASIS; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; RESPIRATORY ARREST; RESUSCITATION; REVIEW; RISK; TERMINALLY ILL PATIENT;

DEATH AND EUTHANASIA;

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CARDIOPULMONARY RESUSCITATION; COMMUNICATION; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; MEDICAL FUTILITY; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; RESUSCITATION ORDERS; TERMINALLY ILL;

EID: 0141724820     PISSN: 09598138     EISSN: 14685833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.327.7415.614     Document Type: Article

References (4)

1. BMA. Decisions relating to cardiopulmonary resuscitation. http://www.bma.org.uk/ap.nsf/Content/cardioresus?OpenDocument&Highlight=2,cpr (accessed 8 August 2003).
2. Ewer MS, Kish SK, Martin CG, Price KJ, Feeley TW. Characteristics of cardiac arrest in cancer patients as a predictor of survival after cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Cancer 2001; 92: 1905–1912.
3. Varon J, Walsh GL, Marik PE, Fromm RE. Should a cancer patient be resuscitated following an in-hospital cardiac arrest? Resuscitation 1998; 36: 165–168.
4. Haidet P, Hamel MB, Davis RB, Wenger N, Reding D, Kussin PS, et al. Outcomes, preferences for resuscitation, and physician-patient communication among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. SUPPORT investigation (Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment). Am J Med 1998; 105: 222–229.