Resuscitation Council Scientific Symposium – my highlights part 2

Resuscitation Council Scientific Symposium – my  highlights part 2

In this second blog discussing my highlights from the Resuscitation Council Scientific Symposium I’m going to focus on decisions relating to resuscitation.  I wrote a blog a few weeks ago about End of Life decision making and this blog is a follow-up to that and includes some of the information presented at the Symposium.

The first presentation of the day was by Dr Fritz.  She discussed research that she has conducted into ‘Do not attempt Cardio-pulmonary Resuscitation’ (DNACPR) requests and what these mean to patients.  She highlighted that she found in her research that patients think they will receive a reduced level of care if they a DNACPR in place.  Unfortunately some research bears this out.  She therefore promoted that we focus on what treatment is to be given, rather than what treatment is to be withheld.  She advocated the use of ‘Universal Treatment Forms’ where decisions can be discussed and documented.

Following Dr Fritz’ presentation Alexander Ruck Keene presented information regarding the ‘Law at the end of life’.  The message that I took away from his presentation is that from the Human Rights Act 1998 we have a right to life but we don’t have a right to treatment that is almost certain not to work.  Also that the Mental Capacity Act 2005 guides us as to the questions to ask but doesn’t provide the answers and therefore clinical best interests is not the same as Mental Capacity best interests.  This means that whether a treatment is the right thing for you or not is not the same as what is the best way to make that decision.

The other very interesting point he made is that Advance Decisions to Refuse Treatment are very powerful but if the people likely to be caring for you are not aware of it then their use is limited.  Therefore if you have one carry details with you and ensure those friends/family who are likely to be contacted in an emergency are aware of its existence.

The remaining presentations on DNACPR had one primary message, COMMUNICATION is the key.  I discussed previously and I’d like to highlight again that we can help ourselves and our loved ones if we initiate these conversations.  Our health care professionals should be discussing these decisions with us but we can help by initiating the conversation.

The new Joint Statement is now available and is a public document which you can read here it is a hefty document so there is a summary of the key points here.

Please comment and share.