It has been nearly ten
months since the UK Court of Appeals handed down its
judgment in Tracey v. Cambridge University
Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.
Some predicted that the decision would have "far-reaching implications for clinical practice." But a recent study shows that "national coverage . . . did not lead to any significant
difference in the documentation of DNACPR discussions." Indeed,
"very few clinicians . . . were even aware of the case."
The authors remarked on the "inertia of clinical
practice" and the need to demonstrate the relevance of the ruling in a
"targeted teaching session." In short, even a high profile
appellate ruling is not enough to change clinical practice. The appropriate
changes and improvements must be deliberately "disseminated to the
frontline individuals."
0 nhận xét:
Đăng nhận xét