Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36531837›Full record

ReviewThe Neurohospitalist2023

End-Of-Life Care in the Potential Donor after Circulatory Death: A Systematic Review.

Stefanie P Cappucci, Wade S Smith, Richard Schwartzstein, Douglas B White, Susan L Mitchell, Corey R Fehnel

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Neurohospitalist, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Stefanie P CappucciDepartment of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0061-8495
Wade S SmithDepartment of Neurology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Richard SchwartzsteinDepartment of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Douglas B WhiteDepartment of Critical Care, University of PittsburghSchool of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Susan L MitchellHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Corey R FehnelDepartment of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1726-5809
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USHarvard University · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

Intensive Palliative Care: Improving the Process of Palliative Ventilator Withdrawal Among Critically Ill Older AdultsK23AG066929 · NIA · HEBREW REHABILITATION CENTER FOR AGED · PI FEHNEL, COREY R · 2020 to 2024
$972k
NIA NIH HHS K23 AG066929
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Donation after circulatory death (DCD) is becoming increasingly common, yet little is known about the way potential donors receive end-of-life care. Purpose: The aims of this systematic review are to describe the current practice in end-of-life care for potential donors and identify metrics that are being used to assess discomfort among these patients. Research design and Study Sample: This review encompasses published literature between June 1, 2000 and June 31, 2020 of end-of-life care received by potential DCD patients. The population of interest was defined as patients eligible for Maastracht classification III donation after circulatory death for a solid organ transplantation. Outcomes examined included: analgesic or palliative protocols, and surrogates of discomfort (eg dyspnea, agitation). Results: Among 141 unique articles, 27 studies were included for full review. The primary reason for exclusion was lack of protocol description, or lack of reporting on analgesic medications. No primary research studies specifically examined distress in the DCD eligible population. Numerous professional guidelines were identified. Surveys of critical care practitioners identified concerns regarding the impact of symptom management on hastening the dying process in the DCD population as a potential barrier to end-of-life palliative treatment. Conclusions: There is a paucity of empirical evidence for end-of-life symptom assessment and management for DCD patients. Key evidence gaps identified for DCD include the need for: i) a multidisciplinary structure of treatment teams and preferred environment for DCD, ii) objective tools for monitoring of distress in this patient population, and iii) evidence guiding the administration of analgesic medications following withdrawal of life sustaining therapy.

Indexed as

donation after circulatory deathneurocritical careorgan donationpalliative care

Identifiers

PMID36531837
PMCPMC9755608
OpenAlexW4303983009

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.