Slashdot Mirror


An Unconscious Patient With a 'DO NOT RESUSCITATE' Tattoo (nejm.org)

A real-life case study, published on New England Journal of Medicine, documents the ethical dilemma that a Florida hospital faced after a 70-year-old unresponsive patient arrived at the hospital. The medical staff, the journal notes, was taken aback when it discovered the words "DO NOT RESUSCITATE" tattooed onto the man's chest. Furthermore, the word "NOT" was underlined with his signature beneath it. The patient had a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, and atrial fibrillation. Confused and alarmed, the medical staff chose to ignore the apparent DNR request -- but not without alerting the hospital's ethics team, which had a different take on the matter. From the report: We initially decided not to honor the tattoo, invoking the principle of not choosing an irreversible path when faced with uncertainty. This decision left us conflicted owing to the patient's extraordinary effort to make his presumed advance directive known; therefore, an ethics consultation was requested. He was placed on empirical antibiotics, received intravenous fluid resuscitation and vasopressors, and was treated with bilevel positive airway pressure. After reviewing the patient's case, the ethics consultants advised us to honor the patient's do not resuscitate (DNR) tattoo. They suggested that it was most reasonable to infer that the tattoo expressed an authentic preference, that what might be seen as caution could also be seen as standing on ceremony, and that the law is sometimes not nimble enough to support patient-centered care and respect for patients' best interests. A DNR order was written. Subsequently, the social work department obtained a copy of his Florida Department of Health "out-of-hospital" DNR order, which was consistent with the tattoo. The patient's clinical status deteriorated throughout the night, and he died without undergoing cardiopulmonary respiration or advanced airway management.

32 of 454 comments (clear)

  1. Bad decision? by DrXym · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm starting to wonder if my Digital Noise Reduction tattoo was a bad idea in hindsight.

    1. Re:Bad decision? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Just make sure to underline Noise.

      As an ER doc, I would hate to run into this but my wife (an ER) nurse and I have talked about doing exactly this.

      Except we're not much into tats.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Bad decision? by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Back in the early 2000's, I started an organization called No-Code International to get rid of Morse Code tests for ham radio licenses, world wide. We succeeded.

      Startlingly, "no-code" has taken on another meaning since then. Apparently doctors and laymen wear necklaces with a token inscribed with the words "No Code", which means don't resuscitate me.

      I am sympathetic with the desire to avoid the almost uniform bad outcomes from CPR, etc. However, I just happen to know a man who went into v-fib while sleeping, for no known reason, in his 50's. His wife noticed him snorting in his sleep, he happened to be in a brand new hotel with a newly-trained staff who had received CPR training, and had brand new AEDs. He required 4 shocks in all and was unconscious and intubated in intensive care. He recovered fully, received a pacemaker which had some start-up issues, but has had a full decade of quality life since then with no complications. So, I don't know what to think about DNR.

    3. Re:Bad decision? by rahvin112 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Simple DNR orders are for people that are already sick and don't want to be put through hell and back to die. I think of my 80+ great-uncle that had severe emphysema that coded and was resuscitated and spent 6 months in a nursing home with 8 broken ribs and he could barely breathe before they broke all his ribs saving him. And this was the 3rd time it'd happened.

      For the rest there are some very good forms out there that can walk you through the majority of the invasive life saving measures and allow you to apply advance directives to them. But keep in mind, your spouse/family can override your directives if you are unconscious or impaired unless they are prefiled with the hospital you are taken to (good luck guessing that one).

      Just remember, saying nothing means they will do EVERYTHING, including a lot of things you may not even realize they could or would do.

  2. Did the right thing... by rwven · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For all they knew, the tattoo could have been an artifact of previous poor life choices, and nothing more than a joke. A tattoo is not a legal document. Imagine if it HAD been a joke, and the family sued the pants off the hospital for denying treatment to their family member without a formal DNR request?

    It sounds like they did pretty much everything right, and ultimately obtained the legal documentation that stated he definitely was a DNR.

    1. Re:Did the right thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So I should get a tattoo that says "DNR" then a QR code to scan, that links to the official DNR? Man this is getting more and more complicated by the day.

    2. Re:Did the right thing... by networkBoy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This actually was the case for another patient. They lost a poker bet and had to tattoo DNR on their chest. Discovered during intake for leg amputation, patient clarified "he indicated that he would want resuscitative efforts initiated in the event of a cardiac or respiratory arrest."

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    3. Re:Did the right thing... by barc0001 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The patient in this case is a moron. Tattoo removal or infill is something they should look into prior to them ending up in an ER unconscious and not able to clarify the "joke" status.

    4. Re:Did the right thing... by rwven · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think it just comes down to "If you get a joke DNR tattoo, you're a moron."

    5. Re:Did the right thing... by demonlapin · · Score: 4, Informative

      FWIW, you can't give anything other than O negative unless you have a valid type and crossmatch from your own blood lab. Blood type is thus basically useless as a tattoo. I'm an anesthesiologist; I give blood to people about once a week.

    6. Re:Did the right thing... by ljw1004 · · Score: 4, Informative

      A tattoo is not a legal document.

      That's incorrect. Depending on the legal instrument, some of them can be written on anything. "You can write contracts on a napkin, a ticket stub, a pizza box - just about anything ink will stick to." - http://www.lawyers-plus.com/ca...

      Different legal instruments have different requirements for what they need to be valid. DNRs across all states (I think) require a doctor's signature (so a tattoo that included a doctor's signature would presumably be valid). Some of them require a particular state-issued form to be used as well (so a tattoo in those states wouldn't be valid). Some of them require yellow paper. In my own state of Washington, property recording instruments even have a specified margin sizes in inches for them to be valid.

      In the act that introduced electronic signatures, nowhere did it say that "electronic signatures are valid". Instead it said "a legal instrument shall not be deemed invalid solely on the grounds of the signatures on it being electronic".

      TLDR: "legal document" isn't a well-defined concept. "Validly executed legal instrument" is a well-defined concept. The exact requirements for validity depend on the instrument in question and on jurisdiction.

    7. Re:Did the right thing... by Obfuscant · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If what you said is true, how can they even touch an unconscious person that comes into the hospital?

      Technically, what the OP said is true. Most (all?) legislatures have covered this by creating "implied consent" for patients who are unable to give consent in a life threatening situation. The assumption is they would consent, or the guardian would.

      This is something every first aid course I've ever had over the last 30 years has taught. If you come across a conscious accident victim, you ask if you can give aid. If they say yes, you're good. If they say no, you may not touch them. This applies to professionals like EMTs, too. If you tell a firefighter/paramedic you refuse treatment, that's what treatment you'll get.

      There is always one altruistic person in the group that is concerned about this. The answer to how you deal with an uncooperative conscious victim is, you wait until they pass out, implied consent kicks in, and you can help them. The fact they said "no" before was based on them being conscious. Going unconscious changes the situation.

    8. Re:Did the right thing... by lucasnate1 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I find it ironic to see people posting on Slashdot judging others for not being normal.

  3. Better safe than sorry... by EndlessNameless · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I would do exactly what they did. When you're in a gray area touching on malpractice, negligence, and homicide... well, you don't take chances.

    It's also possible for people to change their minds. Apparently, in Florida you file DNR orders with the state. It's good to have an official, documented process when you're making decisions about someone's life. In the article, they even referenced a case where the patient's DNR tattoo did not reflect his current wishes.

    If they are terminal and wish to pass, there will be plenty of opportunities to end their care. Case in point, this patient died later that night.

    --

    ---
    According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
    1. Re:Better safe than sorry... by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 3, Funny

      then what could the patient have a POSSIBLY done!?!?!?!

      Duh, that's easy: He should have had a second tattoo below the first one, from his lawyer, notarizing the whole thing.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    2. Re:Better safe than sorry... by EndlessNameless · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If THIS isn't good enough, then what could the patient have a POSSIBLY done!?!?!?!

      From the very comment you are replying to:

      In the article, they even referenced a case where the patient's DNR tattoo did not reflect his current wishes.

      --

      ---
      According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
  4. another data point by roc97007 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When I received ERT training in Oregon, we were told explicitly to *not* honor DNR tattoos, as a tattoo was not considered a legal DNR order in this state. As always your mileage may vary.

    I associate with relatively hardcore motorcycle crowds, and DNR tattoos are ...if not common, at least not unknown. But I wonder how many of them are misguided bravado? (I'm guessing, many.) According to my own training (admittedly a few years ago), the tattoo would not be honored in my state. But ride into a different state and then spill your bike, and EMTs might just let you pass. Wouldn't that be a stupid way to die.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    1. Re:another data point by DutchUncle · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wouldn't that be a stupid way to die.

      If someone goes to the trouble of actually tattooing the spelled-out Do Not Resuscitate instruction, then it's not stupid - it's what that person wanted. Why the hell would anyone tattoo themselves with something they don't want? Another poster refers to losing a bet; taking this as the stakes of a bet sounds pretty shortsighted.

  5. U.S. Living Will Registry by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can register an Advanced Directive with a Living Will and/or Health Care Proxy at the U.S. Living Will Registry. The forms for all 50 states can be downloaded from the site or obtained for your state at your local hospital (and perhaps doctor's office). There is a fee to register the forms yourself, but many hospitals will register them for you for free or at a reduced cost. You can create an account the site to manage your registered forms. They will send you a card to carry in your wallet (which can also be downloaded) Health care providers can access your documents when needed to confirm your wishes. Registration is permanent, subject to your management.

    I know this because... My wife Sue was diagnosed with a fatal brain tumor the day before Thanksgiving 2005 and died seven weeks later. We both completed Advanced Directives at that time, so I have one registered. She named me as her Health Care Proxy and specified no extraordinary measures -- I had to sign the local order DNR several weeks later when her brain stem was damaged and she fell into a coma. She wasn't expected to live through the night, but died a week later. I kept her feet warm (she always liked that) and I slept by her side in the space between her and the bed rail. I heard her last breath and felt her last heartbeat as she died in my arms.

    Remember Sue...

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:U.S. Living Will Registry by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 3

      I lost my sister in much the same way (but due to lupus, not cancer). At one point the doctor asked those of us gathered around - me, sis's husband, my mom, and my other sister - how we'd like to proceed. It got quiet. I asked, "doc, if she were to wake up right now, what would her prognosis be?"

      He thought for a moment, then replied: "she is gone. Her body is here, but the person you knew left before the ambulance arrived. She was a nurse, so I'm certain you had the 'oh God please don't leave me lingering as a vegetable' conversation at least once. This... today... is the situation she didn't want." That's when we made the final decision to end her suffering much as you and your wife had chosen.

      Bless you and your family, friend.

      Does it get better?

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  6. Solution by religionofpeas · · Score: 5, Funny

    Always resuscitate them, explain what happened, and then if they protest that they didn't want that, just kill them.

  7. An anecdote by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As told by Michael Crichton during his MD training in his book Travels:
    --
    Dr. Z was a seventy-eight-year-old physician who entered the hospital in a near coma, in end-stage cardiac and renal failure. His son was also a physician, but not on the staff of the hospital, so he could only visit like any other relative, and he had nothing to say about his father's care. He did, however, state that he wanted his father to die peacefully.

    The old man was on the critical list for nearly a week. He had a cardiac arrest one night, but he was resuscitated. His son came in the next day and asked, with a certain delicacy, why the staff had resuscitated the old man. Nobody answered him.

    Later that day, old Dr. Z suffered sudden massive congestive heart failure. The hospital staff was making rounds; they all rushed to his bedside. In a moment he was entirely surrounded by white-jacketed interns and residents, working on the old man, sticking needles and tubes into his body.

    In the midst of all this, he somehow emerged from his coma, sat bolt upright in bed, and shouted clearly and distinctly, "I refuse this therapy! I refuse this therapy!"

    The residents pushed him back down. He got the therapy anyway. I turned to the attending physician, and asked how such a thing was possible. This man was, after all, a physician, and he was unquestionably dying-if not today, then tomorrow or the next day. Why had the house staff contradicted his wishes, and those of his family? Why was he not being allowed to die?

    There was no good answer.

    Dr. Z finally died on the weekend, when hospital staffing was light.

    1. Re:An anecdote by blindseer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That simple. In the seven 'extra' days he 'lived' he was billed for doctors, specialist, anesthesiologist, nurses, tubes, IV bags, catheters, meds, rubber gloves, and many other things.

      Or, maybe it's because people don't like seeing other people die if they can help it. We can break this down to a profit motive but that's not likely on the minds of the people working on that shift or that patient. If you are going to put a profit motive on it then it's more like to them they get paid to not let people die.

      Perhaps put that in your profit motive perspective. These are people getting paid to keep other people alive and healthy. If they are shown to be "compassionate" and letting the sick die in peace then they could find themselves no longer employed. This can be seen as being incompetent, uncaring, or even malicious. This gets to my next possible answer.

      Maybe hospitals don't want to be seen as allowing people to die. This can affect their profits. Even if it's a charitable hospital that lives on donations a history of not attending to people can diminish donations. Taken too far and a hospital can be sued by a grieving family for malpractice, or even murder, for not attending to people's needs, or what they perceive as a need. The costs of the rubber gloves and meds used in any given case have to be tiny compared to the costs of defending a lawsuit and the investigation of the care provided.

      This is a complex issue and calling this just a tactic to gain more money in billable services is simplifying the issue into the absurd.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    2. Re:An anecdote by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Or, maybe it's because people don't like seeing other people die if they can help it.

      Once a patient has made their wishes true IT'S NO LONGER UP TO YOU. Your "feels" are entirely irrelevant. This is what we get from all of this statist nanny crap. A guy can't even have his own wishes in this matter honored and most of the peanut gallery is willing to make excuses to IGNORE the individual.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  8. It's about being edgy, I bet by H3lldr0p · · Score: 3, Interesting

    People have been known to do all sorts of things to impress others. This seems just like another in a long line of ill-advised attempts to make themselves part of an in-group or the like.

    Not exactly shortsighted as all sorts of people have different means of being validated, but certainly it is not taking into account a myriad of situations that are likely to come to pass during one's life.

  9. Whatever by sootman · · Score: 4, Funny

    Dead, alive, persistent vegetative state... whatever. THIS is the important one. https://i.pinimg.com/originals...

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  10. Re: Henna stencil. by oobayly · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What's wrong with being an organ donor. It's not like you're going to miss them.

  11. Consequence by denbesten · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It seems to that the consequence a hospital should face for failing to honor a DNR is that the hospital assumes financial responsibility for the patient's health care from the time the patient entered their facility until the patient's natural passing, including subsequent nursing home or hospice that may have become necessary as a result of their actions.

    Maybe more, but this seems like a decent starting point.

  12. Some more case studies by ilctoh · · Score: 5, Interesting
    A lot of cynical responses here, and glib references to assumptions that the hospital chose to treat the guy so they could bill his insurance. As a paramedic, let me assure you that 1) cases of ambiguous DNR orders are among the most difficult decisions we have to make in our career, 2) no health care provider involved at the point of delivering emergency care has any idea how or if the patient can pay for treatment 3) most health care providers, especially emergency health care providers, are in fact huge advocates for DNR, hospice, and patient's right to determine the extent of health care they receive at the end of their lives. We don't get a kick out of resuscitating people for fun. A resuscitation is ugly, painful, and fails far more often than it succeeds. We know, as well as anyone, that resuscitation is so often futile, and that even a successful resuscitation rarely results in a return to a real quality of life.

    Here's a few examples of real situations I've personally been in, to give you an idea of just how much of a gray area this can be, and how challenging it can be to do the moral and ethical thing.

    A 40 year old man is diagnosed with terminal pancreatic cancer. While currently in good health, he is expected to have less than 4 months of good health left, and 6 months at most to live. He gets stung by a bee, to which he is severely allergic, and develops an anaphylactic reaction. His airway is swelling shut, his blood pressure is dropping, he is losing consciousness and can't talk nor follow directions. He needs an administration of Epinephrine, along with multiple other drugs and interventions, to reverse the allergic reaction. He has a valid DNR bracelet on his wrist, which he has not removed. What's his intent? Did he intend for the DNR to prevent you from treating a life threatening allergic reaction?

    You are called for an 80 year old woman who is unconscious on the floor of her kitchen. She has a valid DNR order. Her husband tells you she choked on her soup, and needs the Heimlich. You don't see any food in her mouth or upper airway. Performing the Heimlich, chest compressions, or inserting an advanced airway would violate the DNR. What do you do?

    An elderly man arrives in the ER with fresh bruises. He is unconscious with critically unstable vital signs and inability to maintain an airway. A woman identifying herself as his daughter says that she can't find a DNR, but she is certain he had said that the doesn't want anything heroic measures done at the end of his life. You suspect foul play given his apparent injuries, but then again, old people bruise easily. You have no ID on the man, and haven't yet been able to ID the alleged daughter. Do you begin resuscitation, at least long enough to verify the pretense or absence of a DNR?

    You get called to do a welfare check on someone who hasn't been seen in several days. You force entry into his house, and find him unconscious on the floor, surrounded by blood. There's a scrap of paper next to him that says "Don't bring me back" with a signature. You can't tell whether this is the natural progression of some terminal illness, an accident, an attempted suicide, or an attempted murder. You also can't tell the extent of the patient's injuries and whether they're obviously incompatible with life. Do you begin resuscitating the patient?

    The case of my own grandfather, who had terminal lung cancer and a valid DNR. His dying words were "Please save me." He specifically asked to be saved. Do we start performing resuscitation?

    In each of these cases, you need to make an initial decision within seconds. You don't have time to do a lot of research, interview witnesses, search for evidence. And, if you guess wrong, the patient could die - which is kind of a lot for us to live with.

    I'm not trying to defend or blame any particular party here. I'm just asking for a little sensitivity to the fact that, most of us in emergency health care are decent people doing the best we can to serv

    --
    How many slashes would a slashdot dot, if a slashdot could dot slashes?
    1. Re:Some more case studies by slimjim8094 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      (BLS here, not ALS)

      Oh man, you put it much better than I could. And then there's the not-even-ethically-ambiguous situations. We went to an extremely elderly woman in a hospital bed at home once and asked the family, everyone around, whether the patient had a DNR and nobody knew what I was talking about and certainly didn't produce it. ALS showed up and said "does this patient have a DNR" and the family was like "oh, here you go" - meanwhile we'd been coding her for 5 minutes! We stopped and medics pronounced and we left, but we weren't doing anybody any good in the meantime.

      When resuscitation is required, there are literally seconds to act. Doing CPR sucks, it rarely works, and even if you "get a pulse back" the odds of them having any decent quality of life or even leaving the hospital is small. But the only thing worse than doing it is not doing it, and the only thing worse than doing it right away is doing it too late. If we delay CPR hunting for a DNR, we know that each second is making it less and less likely it'll work. Unless someone is literally blocking our way presenting some official form, we are we are more likely to begin CPR. We can't go on an easter egg hunt, we don't have the time or manpower to spare. Honestly if the patient is alone I'm not looking further than their chest/shirt (you can pin it to your clothing) or bedside table, unless it's posted prominently on the front door or similar. If family is around I'll ask them and if they don't have it immediately, it's CPR time. I just can't justify reducing someone's chances with each second of hunting around - what if they *do* want to be resuscitated and I've wasted what little chance they had?

      Honestly the "tattoo on the chest" being questionable surprises me. It's pretty much the simplest case I can imagine for a valid DNR. We've been taught that a valid DNR can be written on a napkin or - indeed - a tattoo, and a chest tattoo makes it impossible to miss when about to perform CPR. And its placement on the chest makes intention to signal unambiguous. I'd imagine I'd honor it without question, unless I have *any* reason to suspect that wasn't your current desire (e.g. family member). You can tattoo an "X" over your tattoo if your wishes change and you don't want to get it removed.

      I find the presumption of profit motive insulting. DNRs are largely an emergency medical concern, for the most part hospitals are for people in a position to make their wishes known more clearly. There's no profit for us - we're volunteers, we don't get paid, and we don't bill anybody. The residents of the town donate money for us to buy equipment. We're not in the business of resuscitating anybody who doesn't want it (did I mention it's miserable?), but just think about how you'd convince someone you've never met of your intentions within 15 seconds of seeing you when they're not looking around for paper - oh, and you're unconscious. It's really hard, and we always will err on the side of life since the alternative is not what we're here for.

      The easiest thing to do is set it up so that people around you don't call 911 if you end up requiring resuscitation. If you're to a point, hospice can help with end-of-life palliative (pain reduction, etc) care that's not lifesaving. When my grandfather died, he was at home in bed and we were all around, and when the time came nobody called 911 because there was no emergency. He had a DNR, but it was never used.

      Oh, and don't get a "DNR" tattoo because you lost a bet - I don't know the joke, and I might just honor it. (And it'd probably stand up in court, too.)

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
  13. Re:Henna stencil. by Darinbob · · Score: 5, Interesting

    First, a lot of people in the UK don't consider themselves a part of Europe. Second, there was no evidence that the US could have done anything for that baby and the doctors were of the opinion that the experimental treatment would prolong suffering. There was no murder involved.

    As related to the topic of this original story, being kept on life support unnaturally is often not in the well being of a patient. Many doctors have their own DNR orders because they know the torture that these actions can bring. The same doctors however are forced to rescuscitate patients in the US if there is no DNR order. This issue is not about dying with dignity, but dying without torture.

  14. Europe+Canada 3 Years ahead of US by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The UK did not have the ability to treat this child's condition, but people in the USA could. Or at least they claimed they could have.

    The important part of your statement is "they claimed they could have". The quack in the US claimed this without ever having examined the patient and the UK doctors were appalled at the irresponsible nature of the US doctor's claims. After the baby's condition became clear to him he was forced to admit that there was absolutely nothing he could have done for the child. All he did was act is a grossly unprofessional manner and made things a lot worse for everyone else.

    European health care "light years" ahead of the USA? I call bullshit.

    This is indeed, as you say, "bullshit" because a light year is a measure of distance. However, it is very accurate to say that European and Canadian healthcare is about 3 years ahead of healthcare in the US because the average life expectancy in Europe and Canada is about 82 years while it is only about 79 in the US (averaged over both genders).