Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

Why full code should not be the default status for patients

Anonymous
Physician
March 30, 2012
Share
Tweet
Share

Full code is the universal default status for patients who haven’t chosen otherwise, but I suspect most physicians believe this policy is wrong. We know in our hearts we’re doing harm when we perform CPR on poor souls at the natural end of their lives, whose bodies can do nothing more than suffer.

Appropriately timed end-of-life discussions are the supposed answer, but for doctors, they are emotionally draining, interpersonally complex, and when done properly, overly time-consuming. For a busy and stressed physician caring for an acutely ill patient, it’s easiest to either avoid the discussion entirely or stick to concrete verbal formulations, putting the patient or the family on the spot with ridiculous questions like “Do you want us to do everything?” … “If your heart stops, should we restart it?” … “If he stops breathing, should we put him on a breathing machine?”

One major source of the complexity is the irreducible uncertainty in the prognosticating of survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest. As an example, a majority of patients suffering ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation in the medical ward may survive to discharge with good neurologic outcomes, while <2% of those with PEA arrests while on pressors in the ICU do. Hospitals’ response to this ambiguity has been to play it safe by maintaining the universal “full code” default, and the courts have avoided making any guiding rulings in the area, preferring to leave it to health professionals. The result is an excessive burden on physicians that demands we climb this difficult mountain with every new patient, family, and time. But the real burden falls on thousands of patients each year, who are “successfully resuscitated” but with brain injuries, they never would have wanted to survive.

So thank goodness that Craig Blinderman, Eric Krakauer, and Mildred Solomon of Harvard are talking sense about CPR in JAMA, arguing we should stop offering CPR as the default option for hospitalized patients — and should simply inform families we are withholding it in dying patients, without asking for their permission. (It astounds me that it’s taken this long for an editorial like this to make it to a major journal, but better late than never.)

They propose three scenarios:

  1. For the average chronically or acute-on-chronically ill patient (like someone with a heart failure exacerbation), doctors should discuss CPR as a possible (“plausible”) option — spending ample time on the low chance of survival to hospital discharge and the risk for brain injury.
  2. For patients with incurable advanced cancer, end-stage liver disease, or advanced dementia, doctors should recommend against CPR.
  3. We should withhold CPR as a futile, harmful therapy for imminently dying patients and simply inform the families of this. Authors advise, “Not offering CPR for imminently dying patients should be explicitly permitted by hospital policy.”

There’s a problem with option 3, though: Today, almost exclusively, it’s not hospital policy. Full code is. Hospitals sell out and undercut us physicians by not trusting us enough to let us make these judgment calls and promise to support us afterward — presumably because they fear lawsuits or being labeled as a “death panel hospital” — and the problem is perpetuated.

Kudos to these authors for calling for what’s simply right. Don’t expect a change in hospital or national policy, though. The inescapable reality that makes this issue so politically combustible is that though this approach is reasonable and caring, implementing it would nonetheless result in some people dying prematurely or unnecessarily. A handful of people with terminal diseases would have “V-fib” arrests that were quickly reversible with an electric shock or respiratory arrests from curable pneumonias. CPR or intubation with a ventilator would buy them a few more months or even years of life, but under this policy, those relatively uncommon patients would be allowed to die.

Of course, that would spare many times more people from undesired prolonged, uncomfortable, vegetative ends to their lives. But try putting all that into a sound bite and selling it on the Senate floor or on cable news.

The author is an anonymous physician.

Prev

Small opportunities to use mobile technology in medicine

March 30, 2012 Kevin 2
…
Next

Doubting the cost savings of health information technology

March 31, 2012 Kevin 11
…

Tagged as: Hospital-Based Medicine, Palliative Care

Post navigation

< Previous Post
Small opportunities to use mobile technology in medicine
Next Post >
Doubting the cost savings of health information technology

ADVERTISEMENT

More by Anonymous

  • When the white coats become gatekeepers: How a quiet cartel strangles America’s health

    Anonymous
  • Graduating from medical school without family: a story of strength and survival

    Anonymous
  • Why young doctors in South Korea feel broken before they even begin

    Anonymous

Related Posts

  • Are patients using social media to attack physicians?

    David R. Stukus, MD
  • Hospital administrators thinking about no-cost treatment which really helps patients

    John Corsino, DPT
  • You are abandoning your patients if you are not active on social media

    Pat Rich
  • Don’t judge when trainees use dating apps in the hospital

    Austin Perlmutter, MD
  • Physician Suicide Awareness Day: Where are the patients? 

    Jennifer M. Sweeney
  • A physician’s addiction to social media

    Amanda Xi, MD

More in Physician

  • How to handle chronically late patients in your medical practice

    Neil Baum, MD
  • How early meetings and after-hours events penalize physician-mothers

    Samira Jeimy, MD, PhD and Menaka Pai, MD
  • Why medicine must evolve to support modern physicians

    Ryan Nadelson, MD
  • Why listening to parents’ intuition can save lives in pediatric care

    Tokunbo Akande, MD, MPH
  • Finding balance and meaning in medical practice: a holistic approach to professional fulfillment

    Dr. Saad S. Alshohaib
  • How regulatory overreach is destroying innovation in U.S. health care

    Kayvan Haddadan, MD
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Forced voicemail and diagnosis codes are endangering patient access to medications

      Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA | Meds
    • How President Biden’s cognitive health shapes political and legal trust

      Muhamad Aly Rifai, MD | Conditions
    • The One Big Beautiful Bill and the fragile heart of rural health care

      Holland Haynie, MD | Policy
    • Why timing, not surgery, determines patient survival

      Michael Karch, MD | Conditions
    • Why health care leaders fail at execution—and how to fix it

      Dave Cummings, RN | Policy
    • How digital tools are reshaping the doctor-patient relationship

      Vineet Vishwanath | Tech
  • Past 6 Months

    • Forced voicemail and diagnosis codes are endangering patient access to medications

      Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA | Meds
    • Why are medical students turning away from primary care? [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • How President Biden’s cognitive health shapes political and legal trust

      Muhamad Aly Rifai, MD | Conditions
    • Why “do no harm” might be harming modern medicine

      Sabooh S. Mubbashar, MD | Physician
    • The One Big Beautiful Bill and the fragile heart of rural health care

      Holland Haynie, MD | Policy
    • The hidden health risks in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act

      Trevor Lyford, MPH | Policy
  • Recent Posts

    • Why point-of-care ultrasound belongs in every emergency department triage [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Why PSA levels alone shouldn’t define your prostate cancer risk

      Martina Ambardjieva, MD, PhD | Conditions
    • How to handle chronically late patients in your medical practice

      Neil Baum, MD | Physician
    • Reframing chronic pain and dignity: What a pain clinic teaches us about MAiD and chronic suffering

      Olumuyiwa Bamgbade, MD | Conditions
    • How early meetings and after-hours events penalize physician-mothers

      Samira Jeimy, MD, PhD and Menaka Pai, MD | Physician
    • Why medicine must evolve to support modern physicians

      Ryan Nadelson, MD | Physician

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 11 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Forced voicemail and diagnosis codes are endangering patient access to medications

      Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA | Meds
    • How President Biden’s cognitive health shapes political and legal trust

      Muhamad Aly Rifai, MD | Conditions
    • The One Big Beautiful Bill and the fragile heart of rural health care

      Holland Haynie, MD | Policy
    • Why timing, not surgery, determines patient survival

      Michael Karch, MD | Conditions
    • Why health care leaders fail at execution—and how to fix it

      Dave Cummings, RN | Policy
    • How digital tools are reshaping the doctor-patient relationship

      Vineet Vishwanath | Tech
  • Past 6 Months

    • Forced voicemail and diagnosis codes are endangering patient access to medications

      Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA | Meds
    • Why are medical students turning away from primary care? [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • How President Biden’s cognitive health shapes political and legal trust

      Muhamad Aly Rifai, MD | Conditions
    • Why “do no harm” might be harming modern medicine

      Sabooh S. Mubbashar, MD | Physician
    • The One Big Beautiful Bill and the fragile heart of rural health care

      Holland Haynie, MD | Policy
    • The hidden health risks in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act

      Trevor Lyford, MPH | Policy
  • Recent Posts

    • Why point-of-care ultrasound belongs in every emergency department triage [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Why PSA levels alone shouldn’t define your prostate cancer risk

      Martina Ambardjieva, MD, PhD | Conditions
    • How to handle chronically late patients in your medical practice

      Neil Baum, MD | Physician
    • Reframing chronic pain and dignity: What a pain clinic teaches us about MAiD and chronic suffering

      Olumuyiwa Bamgbade, MD | Conditions
    • How early meetings and after-hours events penalize physician-mothers

      Samira Jeimy, MD, PhD and Menaka Pai, MD | Physician
    • Why medicine must evolve to support modern physicians

      Ryan Nadelson, MD | Physician

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

Why full code should not be the default status for patients
11 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...