ReviewAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2016
Major abdominal surgery in Jehovah's Witnesses.
Review in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perforated jejunal diverticulitis in a Jehovah's Witness complicated by postoperative haemorrhage: a case report of successful bloodless management.Journal of surgical case reports · 2026Article
- A medico-legal approach to developing a structured decision-making process for patients refusing blood transfusions.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Lung resection surgery in Jehovah's Witness patients: a 20-year single-center experience.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2022Article
- Transoral incisionless fundoplication for Jehovah's Witnesses: A case report discussing safety and durability.SAGE open medical case reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Patients who are Jehovah's Witnesses pose difficult ethical and moral dilemmas for surgeons because of their refusal to receive blood and blood products. This article outlines the personal experiences of six Jehovah's Witnesses who underwent major abdominal surgery at a single institution and also summarises the literature on the perioperative care of these patients. Methods The patients recorded their thoughts and the dilemmas they faced during their surgical journey. We also reviewed the recent literature on the ethical principles involved in treating such patients and strategies recommended to make surgery safer. Results All patients were supported in their decision making by the clinical team and the Hospital Liaison Committee for Jehovah's Witnesses. The patients recognised the ethical and moral difficulties experienced by clinicians in this setting. However, they described taking strength from their belief in Jehovah. A multitude of techniques are available to minimise the risk associated with major surgery in Jehovah's Witness patients, many of which have been adopted to minimise unnecessary use of blood products in general. Nevertheless, the risks of catastrophic haemorrhage and consequent mortality remain an unresolved issue for the treating team. Conclusions Respect for a patient's autonomy in this setting is the overriding ethical principle, with detailed discussion forming an important part of the preparation of a Jehovah's Witness for major abdominal surgery. Clinicians must be diligent in the documentation of the patient's wishes to ensure all members of the team can abide by these.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.