
94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Med.
Sec. Healthcare Professions Education
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1532724
This article is part of the Research Topic Advancements and Challenges in Resuscitation and Cardiac Emergency Medicine View all 6 articles
The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) use with no considerations given to patient selection or therapeutic aim resulted in extension of the agony, pain and dying process for terminally ill patients. Four Resuscitation-limiting Codes other than Full Code exist. In a conservative country like Lebanon, several factors can influence such decisions, namely the ethical, legal, religious perspectives, pediatric population, and more importantly the lack of protocol, healthcare workers (HCWs) knowledge, understanding and readiness to discuss terminal care with the parents. The objectives of the study are to evaluate the knowledge, behavior and comfort level of Lebanese pediatric HCWs in code status discussions, and to determine major obstacles encountered.Methods: This is a cross-sectional observational study. An anonymous questionnaire has been sent electronically for 400 pediatric HCWs from different hospitals across Lebanon, over a period of three months.Results: Of the 400 pediatric HCWs recruited, 235 completed the survey. 39.9% of medical doctors (MDs), and 62% of registered nurses (RNs) didn't know about code status subtypes. Most of the MDs are using the paternalistic approach. There were significant differences between MDs and RNs regarding their point of view toward code status, but both thought that it was not defined in the Lebanese law (86.7% of MDs vs 87% of RNs), and are not comfortable in such discussions (79% for MDs vs 84.8% for RNs). The decisions taken by MDs regarding lifesustaining treatments (LSTs) in different resuscitation-limiting codes showed clearly the knowledge gap. Moreover, attendings and trainees differed significantly in their decisions, where the latter seemed more conservative. Pediatric HCWs in Lebanon are facing major obstacles when it comes to code status decisions.Code status in Lebanon is an immature concept, and pediatric HCWs are challenged with conflicting decisions and obligations when it comes to code status discussions and LSTs. A multidisciplinary approach, with good communication between different members of the medical team would be the best. Addressing the obstacles encountered, and set a clear protocol will not only unify and solidify the HCWs decisions, but will have positive impact and repercussions on the patient care as well.
Keywords: Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, end-of-life, Resuscitation Orders, Healthcare worker, Pediatrics, Palliative Care
Received: 22 Nov 2024; Accepted: 10 Mar 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Chahrour, Bannout, Majdalani, Yamout, Ismail, Raffoul and Moukhaiber. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Jihane Georges Moukhaiber, Department of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Research integrity at Frontiers
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.