Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38750393›Full record

ArticleNeurocritical care2024

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

Kasra Sarhadi, Kristopher A Hendershot, Natalie Smith, Michael Souter, Claire Creutzfeldt, Abhijit Lele, Carolina Maciel, Katharina Busl, Julius Balogh, David Greer and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neurocritical care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

12 authors.

Kasra Sarhadi *University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. ksarhadi@uw.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-9278-6191
Kristopher A Hendershot *University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Natalie SmithUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Michael SouterUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Claire CreutzfeldtUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Abhijit LeleUniversity of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Carolina MacielUniversity of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Katharina BuslUniversity of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Julius BaloghUniversity of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA.
David GreerBoston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Ariane Lewis *NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Sarah Wahlster *University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe 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.

methodsAn 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.

resultsRepresentatives 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.

conclusionsAccurate 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.

Indexed as

Brain DeathTissue and Organ ProcurementDeathHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesBrain deathDeath by neurologic criteriaOrgan donationOrgan procurement organization

Identifiers

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.