The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Emergency care and resuscitation plans
Open accessAbstract
When a person's heart or breathing stops and the cause is reversible, immediate cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) offers a chance of life.However, when a person is dying-for example, from organ failure, frailty, or advanced cancer-and his or her heart stops as a final part of a dying process, CPR will not prevent death and may do harm."Do not attempt CPR" (DNACPR) decisions were first documented in the 1970s, to try to protect people from receiving CPR that they did not want, that would not work, or would not give them overall benefit.This approach of making CPR decisions separately from decisions about other treatments has been challenging for clinicians and patients and has caused problems.[1][2][3][4] Despite national guidance in the UK (see "Further educational resources" box), misunderstandings, poor communication, and inconsistent DNACPR documentation persist.4 Exploring and achieving a shared understanding among patient, family, and healthcare team of realistic and individualised care preferences may sometimes be done badly or not even attempted.Here we draw on evidence (box 1), collated for a broader project, to outline how clinicians might plan with their patients.We offer suggestions on how clinicians and their patients might better think ahead, consider, discuss and record patient-centred recommendations, not only about CPR but also other elements of emergency care and treatment.In a linked article Fritz et al explain why a change in practice and culture, timing and context of these conversations is needed.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Advance care plans are detailed and often focus specifically on end of life care, whereas emergency plans are more concise and provide recommendations for use in any kind of medical emergency.
“advance care plans are detailed and often focus specifically on end of life care, whereas emergency plans are more concise and provide recommendations for use in any kind of medical emergency [16].”
From General practitioners’ experiences of emergency care and treatment planning in England: a focus group study (2021) · cites this paper as [16]
ReSPECT was originally designed as an emergency care plan providing concise recommendations for treatment for a future emergency situation.
“ReSPECT was originally designed as an emergency care plan providing concise recommendations for treatment for a future emergency situation [1, 16].”
From General practitioners’ experiences of emergency care and treatment planning in England: a focus group study (2021) · cites this paper as [16]
Citations
Cites
Detering, K. M., Hancock, A. D., Reade, M. C., & Silvester, W. (2010) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.c1345 · Cited by 2,332
Resuscitation policy should focus on the patient, not the decision
Fritz, Z., Slowther, A.-M., & Perkins, G. D. (2017) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.j813 · Cited by 162
Self-citationFritz, Z., Malyon, A., Frankau, J. M., Parker, R. A., Cohn, S., Laroche, C. M., Palmer, C. R., & Fuld, J. P. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0070977 · Cited by 67
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Resuscitation policy should focus on the patient, not the decision
Fritz, Z., Slowther, A.-M., & Perkins, G. D. (2017) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.j813 · Cited by 162
Self-citationHuxley, C. J., Eli, K., Hawkes, C. A., Perkins, G. D., George, R., Griffiths, F., & Slowther, A.-M. (2021) · BMC Family Practice · doi:10.1186/s12875-021-01486-w · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Pitcher, D., Fritz, Z., Wang, M., & Spiller, J. A.
- Affiliations
- Resuscitation Council (GB)
- Marie Curie (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Pitcher, David
- ORCID
- Spiller, Juliet A
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2017-02-28
- Volume
- 356
- Pages
- j876
- ISSN
- 1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- OpenAlex
- W2593305218
- Cited by
- 60
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4
- FWCI
- 5.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
- Keywords
- cardiopulmonary resuscitation, emergency care planning, end-of-life care, patient-centered care, advance care planning, shared decision-making, patient preferences, patient-family communication
- MeSH terms
- Emergencies, Emergency Medical Services, United Kingdom, Humans, Patient Care Planning, Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review