You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 155 No. 5, 13 MARCH 1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Original Investigations
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Deciding About Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation

The Contributions of Decision Analysis

Paul Clay Sorum, MD, PhD

Arch Intern Med. 1995;155(5):513-521.


Abstract

Background
Patients have the right to decide whether to authorize cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Physicians should provide adequate information and help clarify preferences.

Methods
The usefulness of decision analysis was investigated in two convenience samples: 20 healthy outpatient volunteers and 35 audience members at medical ethics grand rounds. Subjects quantified their relative preferences (utilities) for the outcomes of cardiac arrest. First, they rated them on a linear scale. Second, they participated in hypothetical gambles in which they indicated how much they would risk to avoid each outcome. The investigator then calculated the overall expected utilities of the CPR and no-CPR strategies.

Results
Subjects were able to complete both the gambles and the rating scale. Utilities derived by the two methods differed greatly. Subjects had strong aversions to an outcome of severe long-term brain damage and widely varying ratings of an outcome of a short period of intensive care followed by death (intensive care unit death). Because intensive care unit death is far more likely than long-term brain damage, its utility was the prime determinant of whether CPR or no-CPR had the higher calculated expected utility.

Conclusions
The methods of decision analysis showed promise as a means not only of informing patients about CPR but of helping them make rational choices. They also revealed the inadequacy of current data on the key outcome of intensive care unit death.

(Arch Intern Med. 1995;155:513-521)



Author Affiliations

From the Departments of Medicine and Pediatrics, Albany (NY) Medical College.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Measuring Patient Preferences by Willingness to Pay to Avoid: The Case of Acute Otitis Media
Sorum
Med Decis Making 1999;19:27-37.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1995 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.