HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES ON DO NOT RESUSCITATE ORDERS AND ADVANCE DIRECTIVES IN PATIENT CARE

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/165092
Category:
Abstract
Type:
Presentation
Title:
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES ON DO NOT RESUSCITATE ORDERS AND ADVANCE DIRECTIVES IN PATIENT CARE
Author(s):
Payne, Judith
Author Details:
Judith Payne, PHD RN AOCN, Assistant Professor, Duke University School of Nursing, Durham, North Carolina, USA, email: payne031@mc.duke.edu
Abstract:
Advances in medical technology have created a new relationship between medicine and society. Decisions about resuscitation and other life-sustaining treatments, once intensely private, have become matters of public debate and community concern. It is no longer clear whether all available technology must be used to preserve life. Rather, in light of the increasing array of technologies to extend life, society has become more concerned about the individualÆs right to determine how that technology will be used. The uncertainty, confusion and general lack of knowledge about do not resuscitate (DNR) orders and advance directives has created a slippery slope for all, and especially difficult for those in oncology. The purpose of this presentation is to provide an overview of the history of DNR orders and advance directives, and examine the clinical implications for nursing practice. The theoretical framework guiding this paper are components from ethical and legal doctrines and from the conceptualization of self-determination. A synthesized review of relevant literature provided a historical overview of DNR orders and advance directives. A review of legal doctrines, pertinent guidelines, and professional position papers currently guiding clinical decision making regarding these sensitive issues will be presented. A review of papers in the rare documents section of a university- based library and literature related to DNR and advance directives was conducted. Examination of historical and current documents provided an evaluative measure of how these concepts developed, reflect current practice, and how they influence our clinical decision making and education efforts today. The development of new technologies has made it increasingly clear that medical choices involve moral choices. The need to balance competing values in our delivery of care often gives rise to conflict and uncertainty. This uncertainty is heightened by limited, and sometimes conflicting, information from legal and ethical scholars in a field where technological advances increase faster than legal precedents. Since the legal process is often not well-suited to respond to urgent clinical decisions about individual medical treatments, it is imperative that nurses and physicians develop a process whereby these decisions will be handled effectively and timely.
Repository Posting Date:
27-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
27-Oct-2011
Conference Date:
2007
Conference Name:
32nd Annual Oncology Nursing Society Congress
Conference Host:
Oncology Nursing Society
Conference Location:
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Note:
This is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.type.categoryAbstracten_US
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleHISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES ON DO NOT RESUSCITATE ORDERS AND ADVANCE DIRECTIVES IN PATIENT CAREen_GB
dc.contributor.authorPayne, Judithen_US
dc.author.detailsJudith Payne, PHD RN AOCN, Assistant Professor, Duke University School of Nursing, Durham, North Carolina, USA, email: payne031@mc.duke.eduen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/165092-
dc.description.abstractAdvances in medical technology have created a new relationship between medicine and society. Decisions about resuscitation and other life-sustaining treatments, once intensely private, have become matters of public debate and community concern. It is no longer clear whether all available technology must be used to preserve life. Rather, in light of the increasing array of technologies to extend life, society has become more concerned about the individualÆs right to determine how that technology will be used. The uncertainty, confusion and general lack of knowledge about do not resuscitate (DNR) orders and advance directives has created a slippery slope for all, and especially difficult for those in oncology. The purpose of this presentation is to provide an overview of the history of DNR orders and advance directives, and examine the clinical implications for nursing practice. The theoretical framework guiding this paper are components from ethical and legal doctrines and from the conceptualization of self-determination. A synthesized review of relevant literature provided a historical overview of DNR orders and advance directives. A review of legal doctrines, pertinent guidelines, and professional position papers currently guiding clinical decision making regarding these sensitive issues will be presented. A review of papers in the rare documents section of a university- based library and literature related to DNR and advance directives was conducted. Examination of historical and current documents provided an evaluative measure of how these concepts developed, reflect current practice, and how they influence our clinical decision making and education efforts today. The development of new technologies has made it increasingly clear that medical choices involve moral choices. The need to balance competing values in our delivery of care often gives rise to conflict and uncertainty. This uncertainty is heightened by limited, and sometimes conflicting, information from legal and ethical scholars in a field where technological advances increase faster than legal precedents. Since the legal process is often not well-suited to respond to urgent clinical decisions about individual medical treatments, it is imperative that nurses and physicians develop a process whereby these decisions will be handled effectively and timely.en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-27T12:12:23Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-27en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-27T12:12:23Z-
dc.conference.date2007en_US
dc.conference.name32nd Annual Oncology Nursing Society Congressen_US
dc.conference.hostOncology Nursing Societyen_US
dc.conference.locationLas Vegas, Nevada, USAen_US
dc.description.noteThis is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.-
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.