ArticleEuropean geriatric medicine2025
Resuscitation discussion practices: a survey of European geriatricians.
Article in European geriatric medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Resuscitation and goals of care discussions in geriatrics: from perception to clinical practice.European geriatric medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a life-saving treatment, yet outcomes in frail older adults are poor. Despite this, decision-making around resuscitation remains complex, influenced by misperceptions among patients, families, and physicians. We aimed to describe current practices, identify difficulties and barriers regarding do-not-resuscitate (DNR) decisions, and to assess differences across Europe.
methodsA cross-sectional online survey was conducted between September and December 2023, targeting geriatricians across Europe. The survey, disseminated via professional networks, assessed frequency and confidence in discussing DNR orders, barriers to discussions, and inter-country differences. Sociodemographic data and responses were analysed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression to identify factors influencing resuscitation discussions.
resultsA total of 473 geriatricians participated across 22 countries (65% female, mean age 41.8 years, mean experience 10.5 years). Discussions of DNR orders occurred with ≥ 60% of hospitalised patients for 40% of respondents, with confidence discussing DNR orders reported by 80%. Reported barriers included time constraints (50%), cultural beliefs (25%), and lack of training (41%). Patients were kept 'for resuscitation' despite medical futility in an estimated 38% of cases at the request of patients or next of kin. Western European geriatricians discussed DNR orders more frequently and confidently than peers in other regions. Experience (> 20 years) was strongly associated with confidence (OR 7.53, 95% CI 1.93-32.35).
conclusionSignificant variability exists in resuscitation discussions among European geriatricians, influenced by region, gender, and experience. Enhanced physician training, societal awareness, and standardised protocols could improve resuscitation decision-making and reduce inappropriate resuscitation attempts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.