title: Potential impact of a verbal prehospital DNR policy.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Forgoing resuscitation in prehospital cardiac arrest has previously required a written prehospital do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order. Some emergency medical services (EMS) agencies, including Los Angeles County (LAC), have implemented policies allowing surrogate decision makers to verbally request to forgo resuscitation. The impact of a verbal DNR policy is unclear, given the absence of information about how often cardiac arrest occurs at home, or in the presence of a family member.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To determine the prevalence of written DNR forms, rate of resuscitation, location of cardiac arrest, and availability of a family member in nontraumatic cardiac arrest prior to implementation of the new policy in LAC.
  
  
  METHODS
  All prehospital run sheets for nontraumatic cardiac arrest in LAC were reviewed for the first seven days of each month (August 2006-January 2007) for DNR status, location of cardiac arrest, presence of family members, and whether resuscitation was attempted.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Of the 897 cardiac arrests, 492 occurred at home, 111 in a public place, and 93 in a nursing home (location was unknown for 201). Fifty-five patients (6%) had a written DNR order, although it was not always available. Of these 55 patients, ten were resuscitated, the majority of the time because the family could not produce the paperwork. A family member was listed as present 29% of the time (261 of 897 cases). A medical history was obtained in an additional 465 cases (52%), indicating that someone familiar with the patient's medical history was present more than half the time, even when a family member was not mentioned.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  A written DNR order is uncommonly used in the prehospital setting as a reason to forgo resuscitation in LAC. Even when family members state that the patient has a DNR order, patients are often resuscitated. A majority of cardiac arrests occurs at the patient's home, and in many cases in the presence of family members, some of whom may be able to express a patient's preferences regarding end-of-life care.
authors.affiliation: Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA. corita.grudzen@mssm.edu
authors.forename: Corita R
authors.initials: CR
authors.lastname: Grudzen
authors.forename: William J
authors.initials: WJ
authors.lastname: Koenig
authors.forename: Jerome R
authors.initials: JR
authors.lastname: Hoffman
authors.forename: W John
authors.initials: WJ
authors.lastname: Boscardin
authors.forename: Karl A
authors.initials: KA
authors.lastname: Lorenz
authors.forename: Steven M
authors.initials: SM
authors.lastname: Asch
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D002140:California; D016887:Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation; D003142:Communication; D003657:Decision Making; D004632:Emergency Medical Services / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D005260:Female; D006323:Heart Arrest; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D016134:Organizational Policy; D016414:Resuscitation Orders / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D016037:Single-Blind Method