{"title":"新冠肺炎期间不要恢复秩序:探索媒体的表现和对公众和专业理解的影响","authors":"J. Bird, F. Wilson","doi":"10.1080/09699260.2022.2052505","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the UK press featured headlines that heightened concerns around Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) orders, particularly the use of ‘blanket’ DNACPR orders applied to older people in care settings. The portrayal of DNACPR may impact professional and public understandings with implications for end-of-life care. Objectives: To explore the portrayal of DNACPR orders in the general and academic press and consider implications for public and professional understandings and practice. Method: Academic papers and articles published in the general press during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK were retrieved. Those pertaining to the use of DNACPR orders were analysed thematically. Results: Analysis of 179 media articles and 11 professional commentaries identified mixed understandings of DNACPR as indicated within three themes: rationing of acute services, championing autonomy in DNACPR decisions, and communication and trust. The call to ‘protect the NHS’ marginalised palliative and social care services with DNACPR constructed as a rationing tool. This led to ethical challenges around autonomy, DNACPR decisions, communication and trust. Conclusions: Media coverage of DNACPR orders was contentious and raised questions around the value of life and quality of dying, particularly for vulnerable individuals. DNACPR orders were conflated with frailty, futility and rationing of acute services and the marginalisation of palliative care. Nevertheless, media outputs stimulated advocacy and support for human rights and autonomy. However, it is unclear what the legacy will be for public and professional understandings of advance care planning and the quality of dying.","PeriodicalId":45106,"journal":{"name":"PROGRESS IN PALLIATIVE CARE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do not resuscitate orders in the time of COVID-19: Exploring media representations and implications for public and professional understandings\",\"authors\":\"J. Bird, F. Wilson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09699260.2022.2052505\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Context: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the UK press featured headlines that heightened concerns around Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) orders, particularly the use of ‘blanket’ DNACPR orders applied to older people in care settings. The portrayal of DNACPR may impact professional and public understandings with implications for end-of-life care. Objectives: To explore the portrayal of DNACPR orders in the general and academic press and consider implications for public and professional understandings and practice. Method: Academic papers and articles published in the general press during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK were retrieved. Those pertaining to the use of DNACPR orders were analysed thematically. Results: Analysis of 179 media articles and 11 professional commentaries identified mixed understandings of DNACPR as indicated within three themes: rationing of acute services, championing autonomy in DNACPR decisions, and communication and trust. The call to ‘protect the NHS’ marginalised palliative and social care services with DNACPR constructed as a rationing tool. This led to ethical challenges around autonomy, DNACPR decisions, communication and trust. Conclusions: Media coverage of DNACPR orders was contentious and raised questions around the value of life and quality of dying, particularly for vulnerable individuals. DNACPR orders were conflated with frailty, futility and rationing of acute services and the marginalisation of palliative care. Nevertheless, media outputs stimulated advocacy and support for human rights and autonomy. However, it is unclear what the legacy will be for public and professional understandings of advance care planning and the quality of dying.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45106,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PROGRESS IN PALLIATIVE CARE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PROGRESS IN PALLIATIVE CARE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09699260.2022.2052505\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PROGRESS IN PALLIATIVE CARE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09699260.2022.2052505","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Do not resuscitate orders in the time of COVID-19: Exploring media representations and implications for public and professional understandings
Context: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the UK press featured headlines that heightened concerns around Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) orders, particularly the use of ‘blanket’ DNACPR orders applied to older people in care settings. The portrayal of DNACPR may impact professional and public understandings with implications for end-of-life care. Objectives: To explore the portrayal of DNACPR orders in the general and academic press and consider implications for public and professional understandings and practice. Method: Academic papers and articles published in the general press during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK were retrieved. Those pertaining to the use of DNACPR orders were analysed thematically. Results: Analysis of 179 media articles and 11 professional commentaries identified mixed understandings of DNACPR as indicated within three themes: rationing of acute services, championing autonomy in DNACPR decisions, and communication and trust. The call to ‘protect the NHS’ marginalised palliative and social care services with DNACPR constructed as a rationing tool. This led to ethical challenges around autonomy, DNACPR decisions, communication and trust. Conclusions: Media coverage of DNACPR orders was contentious and raised questions around the value of life and quality of dying, particularly for vulnerable individuals. DNACPR orders were conflated with frailty, futility and rationing of acute services and the marginalisation of palliative care. Nevertheless, media outputs stimulated advocacy and support for human rights and autonomy. However, it is unclear what the legacy will be for public and professional understandings of advance care planning and the quality of dying.
期刊介绍:
Progress in Palliative Care is a peer reviewed, multidisciplinary journal with an international perspective. It provides a central point of reference for all members of the palliative care community: medical consultants, nurses, hospital support teams, home care teams, hospice directors and administrators, pain centre staff, social workers, chaplains, counsellors, information staff, paramedical staff and self-help groups. The emphasis of the journal is on the rapid exchange of information amongst those working in palliative care. Progress in Palliative Care embraces all aspects of the management of the problems of end-stage disease.