Verification of Death by Neurologic Criteria: A Survey of 12 Organ Procurement Organizations Across the United States.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurocritical Care Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-15 DOI:10.1007/s12028-024-02001-6
Kasra Sarhadi, Kristopher A Hendershot, Natalie Smith, Michael Souter, Claire Creutzfeldt, Abhijit Lele, Carolina Maciel, Katharina Busl, Julius Balogh, David Greer, Ariane Lewis, Sarah Wahlster
{"title":"Verification of Death by Neurologic Criteria: A Survey of 12 Organ Procurement Organizations Across the United States.","authors":"Kasra Sarhadi, Kristopher A Hendershot, Natalie Smith, Michael Souter, Claire Creutzfeldt, Abhijit Lele, Carolina Maciel, Katharina Busl, Julius Balogh, David Greer, Ariane Lewis, Sarah Wahlster","doi":"10.1007/s12028-024-02001-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services requires Organ Procurement Organizations (OPOs) to verify and document that any potential organ donor has been pronounced dead per applicable legal requirements of local, state, and federal laws. However, OPO practices regarding death by neurologic criteria (DNC) verification are not standardized, and little is known about their DNC verification processes. This study aimed to explore OPO practices regarding DNC verification in the United States.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An electronic survey was sent to all 57 OPOs in the United States from June to September 2023 to assess verification of policies and practices versus guidelines, concerns about policies and practices, processes to address concerns about DNC determination, and communication practices.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Representatives from 12 OPOs across six US regions completed the entire survey; 8 of 12 reported serving > 50 referral hospitals. Most respondents (11 of 12) reported comparing their referral hospital's DNC policies with the 2010 American Academy of Neurology Practice Parameter and/or other (4 of 12) guidelines. Additionally, most (10 of 12) reported independently reviewing and verifying each DNC determination. Nearly half (5 of 12) reported concerns about guideline-discordant hospital policies, and only 3 of 12 thought all referral hospitals followed the 2010 American Academy of Neurology Practice Parameter in practice. Moreover, 9 of 12 reported concerns about clinician knowledge surrounding DNC determination, and most (10 of 12) reported having received referrals for patients whose DNC declaration was ultimately reversed. All reported experiences in which their OPO requested additional assessments (11 of 12 clinical evaluation, 10 of 12 ancillary testing, 9 of 12 apnea testing) because of concerns about DNC determination validity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Accurate DNC determination is important to maintain public trust. Nearly all OPO respondents reported a process to verify hospital DNC policies and practices with medical society guidelines. Many reported concerns about clinician knowledge surrounding DNC determination and guideline-discordant policies and practices. Educational and regulatory advocacy efforts are needed to facilitate systematic implementation of guideline-concordant practices across the country.</p>","PeriodicalId":19118,"journal":{"name":"Neurocritical Care","volume":" ","pages":"847-854"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurocritical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-024-02001-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services requires Organ Procurement Organizations (OPOs) to verify and document that any potential organ donor has been pronounced dead per applicable legal requirements of local, state, and federal laws. However, OPO practices regarding death by neurologic criteria (DNC) verification are not standardized, and little is known about their DNC verification processes. This study aimed to explore OPO practices regarding DNC verification in the United States.

Methods: An electronic survey was sent to all 57 OPOs in the United States from June to September 2023 to assess verification of policies and practices versus guidelines, concerns about policies and practices, processes to address concerns about DNC determination, and communication practices.

Results: Representatives from 12 OPOs across six US regions completed the entire survey; 8 of 12 reported serving > 50 referral hospitals. Most respondents (11 of 12) reported comparing their referral hospital's DNC policies with the 2010 American Academy of Neurology Practice Parameter and/or other (4 of 12) guidelines. Additionally, most (10 of 12) reported independently reviewing and verifying each DNC determination. Nearly half (5 of 12) reported concerns about guideline-discordant hospital policies, and only 3 of 12 thought all referral hospitals followed the 2010 American Academy of Neurology Practice Parameter in practice. Moreover, 9 of 12 reported concerns about clinician knowledge surrounding DNC determination, and most (10 of 12) reported having received referrals for patients whose DNC declaration was ultimately reversed. All reported experiences in which their OPO requested additional assessments (11 of 12 clinical evaluation, 10 of 12 ancillary testing, 9 of 12 apnea testing) because of concerns about DNC determination validity.

Conclusions: Accurate DNC determination is important to maintain public trust. Nearly all OPO respondents reported a process to verify hospital DNC policies and practices with medical society guidelines. Many reported concerns about clinician knowledge surrounding DNC determination and guideline-discordant policies and practices. Educational and regulatory advocacy efforts are needed to facilitate systematic implementation of guideline-concordant practices across the country.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过神经学标准验证死亡:对全美 12 家器官获取组织的调查。
背景:医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services)要求器官获取组织(OPO)根据当地、州和联邦法律的适用法律要求,核实并记录任何潜在器官捐献者已被宣布死亡。然而,OPO 在神经学标准死亡(DNC)验证方面的做法并不规范,而且人们对其 DNC 验证流程知之甚少。本研究旨在探讨美国 OPO 在核实 DNC 方面的做法:从 2023 年 6 月到 9 月,我们向美国所有 57 家 OPO 发送了一份电子调查问卷,以评估政策和实践与指南的验证情况、对政策和实践的担忧、解决 DNC 确定问题的流程以及沟通实践:来自美国六个地区 12 家 OPO 的代表完成了整个调查;12 家 OPO 中有 8 家报告服务的转诊医院超过 50 家。大多数受访者(12 位受访者中的 11 位)表示,他们将转诊医院的 DNC 政策与 2010 年美国神经病学会实践参数和/或其他指南(12 位受访者中的 4 位)进行了比较。此外,大多数受访者(12 位受访者中的 10 位)表示会独立审查和核实每项 DNC 决定。近一半的医院(12 家医院中的 5 家)报告了与指南不一致的医院政策,12 家医院中只有 3 家认为所有转诊医院在实践中都遵循了 2010 年美国神经病学会实践指南。此外,12 人中有 9 人表示担心临床医生对 DNC 决定的了解程度,大多数人(12 人中有 10 人)表示曾接受过 DNC 声明最终被推翻的患者的转诊。所有人都报告了他们的 OPO 因担心 DNC 判定的有效性而要求进行额外评估的经历(12 人中有 11 人要求进行临床评估,12 人中有 10 人要求进行辅助检查,12 人中有 9 人要求进行呼吸暂停检查):结论:准确确定 DNC 对维护公众信任非常重要。几乎所有 OPO 受访者都报告了根据医学会指南核实医院 DNC 政策和实践的流程。许多受访者对临床医生有关 DNC 判定的知识以及与指南不符的政策和实践表示担忧。需要开展教育和监管宣传工作,以促进在全国范围内系统地实施与指南一致的实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Neurocritical Care
Neurocritical Care 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
8.60%
发文量
221
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Neurocritical Care is a peer reviewed scientific publication whose major goal is to disseminate new knowledge on all aspects of acute neurological care. It is directed towards neurosurgeons, neuro-intensivists, neurologists, anesthesiologists, emergency physicians, and critical care nurses treating patients with urgent neurologic disorders. These are conditions that may potentially evolve rapidly and could need immediate medical or surgical intervention. Neurocritical Care provides a comprehensive overview of current developments in intensive care neurology, neurosurgery and neuroanesthesia and includes information about new therapeutic avenues and technological innovations. Neurocritical Care is the official journal of the Neurocritical Care Society.
期刊最新文献
Futurology: What Would Future Historians of Neurocritical Care Write About? Group-Based Trajectory Modeling Identifies Distinct Patterns of Sympathetic Hyperactivity Following Traumatic Brain Injury. Intrathecal Nicardipine After Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Scoping Review. Intrathecal Nicardipine-Time to Treat the Symptom? Guidelines for Seizure Prophylaxis in Patients Hospitalized with Nontraumatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Clinical Practice Guideline for Health Care Professionals from the Neurocritical Care Society.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1