Cited by 6Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationPalliative and Oncologic Care

Knowledge, Attitude and Decision-making of Nurses in the Resuscitation Team towards Terminating Resuscitation and Donot- Resuscitate Order

Open access
Afshin Goodarzi, Efat Sadeghian, Keivan Babaei, Masoud Khodaveisi·2022·Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Making appropriate decisions for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is very challenging for healthcare providers. This study aimed to evaluate knowledge, attitude, and decision making about do-not-resuscitate (DNR) and termination of resuscitation (ToR) among nurses in the resuscitation team.METHODS: This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted in April–September 2020. Participants were 128 nurses from the CPR teams of two hospitals in Kermanshah and Hamedan, Iran. A valid and reliable researcher-made instrument was used for data collection. Data were analyzed using the Chi-square, Fisher’s exact, and Mann-Whitney U tests, the Spearman’s correlation analysis, and the logistic and rank regression analyses.RESULTS: Only 22.7% and 37.5% of participants had adequate knowledge about ToR and DNR. The significant predictor of DNR and ToR knowledge was educational level and the significant predictors of decision making for CPR were educational level, gender, and history of receiving CPR-related education (P<0.05). When facing a cardiac arrest and indication of DNR or ToR, 12.5% of participants reported that they would not start CPR, 21.5% of them reported that they would terminate CPR, and 14.8% of them reported that they would perform slow code. The DNR decision had significant relationship with educational level, DNR knowledge, and ToR knowledge (P< 0.05), while the ToR decision had significant relationship with educational level and ToR knowledge (P<0.05).CONCLUSION: Nurses’ limited DNR and ToR knowledge and physicians’ conflicting orders and documentation can cause ethical challenges for nurses. Clear guidelines for DNR orders or TOR is necessary for nurses, in order to prevent any potential confusion, legal or psychosocial issues and concerns surrounding CPR and improve their involvement in CPR decision making process.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4314/ejhs.v32i2.22

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Medical orders respecting DNACPR were not documented in 71.9% of patients' records.

    “However, medical orders respecting DNACPR were not documented in 71.9% of patients' records.53”

    From Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation decision-making process: scoping review (2025) · cites this paper as [53]

    The Results report the same 71.9% figure for DNR orders not documented in patients’ medical records. However, this was reported by participating nurses, not established by an examination of patients’ records; the claim presents it as a measured proportion of records. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • DNACPR knowledge had a significant relationship with age and educational level.

    “DNACPR knowledge had a significant relationship with age and educational level53”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [23]Sachedina A Islamic biomedical ethics: Principles and application 2009 Oxford University Press
  2. [25]Zahedi F Emami Razavi S Larijani B A two-decade Review of Medical Ethics in Iran Iran J Public Health 38 Supple 1 40 46 1
  3. [41]Eliasson AH Howard RS Torrington KG Dillard TA Phillips YY Do-notresuscitate decisions in the medical ICU: comparing physician and nurse opinions Chest 1997 111 4 1106 1111 9106594
  4. [51]Borimnejad L Nikbakht Nasrabadi A Mohammadi Mohammadi H The effect of cardiopulmonary resuscitation workshop on nurses' sustained learning Iranian Journal of Medical Education 2008 7 2 209 215

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goodarzi, A., Sadeghian, E., Babaei, K., & Khodaveisi, M.
Affiliations
Hamedan University of Medical Sciences (IR)
Corresponding author
Masoud Khodaveisi
Venue
Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences
Published
2022-03-01
Volume
32
Issue
2
Pages
413-422
ISSN
  • 1029-1857 (ISSN-L)
  • 2413-7170
OpenAlex
W4282914604
Cited by
6
References
57
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 3
FWCI
1.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › Palliative and Oncologic Care
Keywords
do-not-resuscitate orders, termination of resuscitation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, nurses, resuscitation team, nurses' knowledge and attitudes, cardiac arrest, educational attainment, end-of-life decisions
MeSH terms
Cross-Sectional Studies, Decision Making, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Physicians, Resuscitation Orders

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