Aims: To assess patient receipt of written information. To ensure pati
ents understand the written information about a resuscitation policy a
nd to determine whether they disapproved of or had concerns about the
policy. Methods: All admissions to four ward of the hospital were appr
oached for an interview. A set questionnaire was asked by one of 2 int
erviewers. Results: 72% of 572 admissions were interviewed Refusal acc
ounted for only 2 of the people not interviewed 11% were unable to adv
ocate for themselves by reason of mental incompetence, inability to co
mmunicate or impairment secondary to their illness. Of the 401 intervi
ewed only 49% recalled receiving the patient information booklet. Few
patients (17%) recalled reading the information in the patient informa
tion booklet. They were all then given the paragraph about the hospita
l's resuscitation policy. 352 were asked their understanding and only
61% demonstrated that they understood the paragraph. 91% of all 401 pa
tients approved of the hospital having the option of DNR orders. 31% o
f people however had concerns related to DNR orders. These are discuss
ed. Conclusions: Many acutely unwell patients are unable to advocate f
or themselves. Written information is a poor method of communicating w
ith patients, There was limited receipt of the information and many mi
sunderstood the paragraph about the hospitals resuscitation policy. Th
ere was a wide range of patient thoughts and concerns expressed.