"As good as dead" and is that good enough? Public attitudes toward brain death

"Death as the One Great Certainty": ethical implications of children with irreversible cardiorespiratory failure and dependence on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Introduction

Advances in medical technology have led to both clinical and philosophical challenges in defining death. Highly publicized cases have occurred when families or communities challenge a determination of death by the irreversible cessation of neurologic function (brain death). Parallels can be drawn in cases where an irreversible cessation of cardiopulmonary function exists, in which cases patients are supported by extracorporeal cardiopulmonary support, such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).

Analysis

Two cases and an ethical analysis are presented which compare and contrast contested neurologic determinations of death and refusal to accept the irreversibility of an imminent death by cardiopulmonary standards. Ambiguities in the Uniform Determination of Death Act are highlighted, as it can be clear, when supported by ECMO, that a patient could have suffered the irreversible cessation of cardiopulmonary function yet still be alive (e.g., responsive and interactive). Parallel challenges with communication with families around the limits of medical technology are discussed.

Discussion

Cases that lead to conflict around the removal of technology considered not clinically beneficial are likely to increase. Reframing our goals when death is inevitable is important for both families and the medical team. Building relationships and trust between all parties will help families and teams navigate these situations. All parties may require support for moral distress. Suggested approaches are discussed.

When is a person dead? The Canadian public's understanding of death and death determination: a nationwide survey

PURPOSE

We aimed to describe the Canadian public's understanding and perception of how death is determined in Canada, their level of interest in learning about death and death determination, and their preferred strategies for informing the public.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide cross-sectional survey of a representative sample of the Canadian public. The survey presented two scenarios of a man who met current criteria for neurologic death determination (scenario 1) and a man who met current criteria for circulatory death determination (scenario 2). Survey questions evaluated understanding of how death is determined, acceptance of death determination by neurologic and circulatory criteria, and interest and preferred strategies in learning more about the topic.

RESULTS

Among 2,000 respondents (50.8% women; n = 1,015), nearly 67.2% believed that the man in scenario 1 was dead (n = 1,344) and 81.2% (n = 1,623) believed that the man in scenario 2 was dead. Respondents who believed that the man was not dead or were unsure endorsed several factors that may increase their agreement with the determination of death, including requiring more information about how death was determined, seeing the results of brain imaging/tests, and a third doctor's opinion. Predictors of disbelief that the man in scenario 1 is dead were younger age, being uncomfortable with the topic of death, and subscribing to a religion. Predictors of disbelief that the man in scenario 2 is dead were younger age, residing in Quebec (compared with Ontario), having a high school education, and subscribing to a religion. Most respondents (63.3%) indicated interest in learning more about death and death determination. Most respondents preferred to receive information about death and death determination from their health care professional (50.9%) and written information provided by their health care professional (42.7%).

CONCLUSION

Among the Canadian public, the understanding of neurologic and circulatory death determination is variable. More uncertainty exists with death determination by neurologic criteria than with circulatory criteria. Nevertheless, there is a high level of general interest in learning more about how death is determined in Canada. These findings provide important opportunities for further public engagement.

Public Understandings of the Definition and Determination of Death: A Scoping Review

Background.

Advances in medicine and technology that have made it possible to support, repair, or replace failing organs challenge commonly held notions of life and death. The objective of this review is to develop a comprehensive description of the current understandings of the public regarding the meaning/definition and determination of death.

Methods.

This scoping review was conducted in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. Online databases were used to identify articles published from 2003 to 2021. Two reviewers (S.S. and K.Z.) screened the articles using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data for specific content variables, and performed descriptive examination. Complementary searches of reference lists complemented the final study selection. A search strategy using vocabulary of the respective databases was created, and criteria for the inclusion and exclusion of the articles were established.

Results.

Seven thousand four hundred twenty-eight references were identified. Sixty were retained for analysis, with 4 additional references added from complementary searches. A data extraction instrument was developed to iteratively chart the results. A qualitative approach was conducted to thematically analyze the data. Themes included public understanding/attitudes toward death and determination of death (neurological determination and cardiocirculatory determination of death), death and organ donation, public trust and legal variability, and media impacts.

Conclusions.

This review provides a current and comprehensive overview of the literature related to the general public’s understanding and attitudes toward death and death determination and serves to highlight the gaps in this topic.

Requests for somatic support after neurologic death determination: Canadian physician experiences

PURPOSE

Neurologic determination of death (NDD) is legally accepted as death in Canada but remains susceptible to misunderstandings. In some cases, families request continued organ support after NDD. Conflicts can escalate to formal legal challenges, causing emotional, financial, and moral distress for all involved. We describe prevalence, characteristics, and common experiences with requests for continued organ support following NDD in Canada.

METHODS

Mixed-methods design combining anonymous online survey with semi-structured interviews of Canadian critical care physicians (448 practitioners, adult and pediatric).

RESULTS

One hundred and six physicians responded to the survey and 12 participated in an interview. Fifty-two percent (55/106) of respondents had encountered a request for continued organ support after NDD within two years, 47% (26/55) of which involved threat of legal action. Requests for continued support following NDD ranged from appeals for time for family to gather before ventilator removal to disagreement with the concept of NDD. Common responses to requests included: consultation with an additional physician (54%), consultation with spiritual services (41%), and delay of one to three days for NDD acceptance (49%). Respondents with prior experience were less likely to recommend ancillary tests (P = 0.004) or consultation with bioethics services (P = 0.004). Qualitative analysis revealed perceptions that requests for continued organ support were driven by mistrust, tensions surrounding decision-making, and cultural differences rather than a lack of specific information about NDD.

CONCLUSIONS

Family requests for continued somatic support following NDD were encountered by half our sample of Canadian critical care physicians. Mitigation strategies require attention to the multifaceted social contexts surrounding these complex scenarios.

Refinements in the Organism as a Whole Rationale for Brain Death

Death can be defined as the permanent cessation of the organism as a whole. Although the organism as a whole is a century-old concept, it remains better intuited than analyzed. Recent concepts in theoretical biology including hierarchies of organization, emergent functions, and mereology have informed the idea that the organism as a whole is the organism's critical emergent functions. Because the brain conducts the critical emergent functions including conscious awareness and control of respiration and circulation, the cessation of brain functions is death of the organism. A newer concept, the brain as a whole, may offer a superior criterion of death to the whole-brain criterion, because it more closely matches accepted clinical brain death tests and confirms the cessation of the organism's emergent functions. Although the concepts of organism as a whole and brain as a whole remain vague and in need of rigorous biophilosophical analysis, their future precision will be restricted by the categorical limitations intrinsic to theoretical biological models.

What do people agree to when stating willingness to donate? On the medical interventions enabling organ donation after death

Purpose of the study

The purpose of this study is to explore donor relatives’ experiences of the medical interventions enabling organ donation, as well as to examine the donor relatives’ attitudes towards donating their own organs, and whether or not their experiences have influenced their own inclination to donate.

Methods

The experiences of donor relatives were explored via in-depth interviews. The interviews covered every step from the deceased family member being struck by a severe bleeding in the brain till after the organ recovery, including the medical interventions enabling organ donation. The interviews were analysed through qualitative and quantitative content analysis.

Results

Brain death and organ donation proved to be hard to understand for many donor relatives. The prolonged interventions provided after death in order to enable organ donation misled some relatives to believe that their family member still was alive. In general, the understanding for what treatment aimed at saving the family member and what interventions aimed at maintaining organ viability was low. However, most donor relatives were either inspired to, or reinforced in their willingness to, donate their own organs after having experienced the loss of a family member who donated organs.

Conclusions

There is a need for greater transparency regarding the whole chain of events during the donation process. Yet, having experienced the donation process closely did not discourage the donor relatives from donating their own organs–but rather inspired a willingness to donate. This indicates an acceptance of the medical procedures necessary in order to enable organ donation after death.

Ethical and Legal Concerns With Nevada's Brain Death Amendments

In early 2017, Nevada amended its Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA), in order to clarify the neurologic criteria for the determination of death. The amendments stipulate that a determination of death is a clinical decision that does not require familial consent and that the appropriate standard for determining neurologic death is the American Academy of Neurology's (AAN) guidelines. Once a physician makes such a determination of death, the Nevada amendments require the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment within twenty-four hours with limited exceptions. Neurologists have generally supported Nevada's amendments for clarifying the diagnostic standard and limiting the ability of family members to challenge it. However, it is more appropriate to view the Nevada amendments with concern. Even though the primary purpose of the UDDA is to ensure that all functions of a person's entire brain have ceased, the AAN guidelines do not accurately assess this. In addition, by characterizing the determination of death as solely a clinical decision, the Nevada legislature has improperly ignored the doctrine of informed consent, as well as the beliefs of particular faiths and cultures that reject brain death. Rather than resolving controversies regarding brain death determinations, the Nevada amendments may instead instigate numerous constitutional challenges.

Investigation of Public Perception of Brain Death Using the Internet

BACKGROUND

Brain death is a difficult concept for the public to comprehend, resulting in a reliance on alternative resources for clarity. This study aims to understand the public's perception of brain death via analysis of information on the Internet, determine the accuracy of that information, and understand how its perception affects the physician-patient relationship.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cross-sectional study to evaluate information available to the public about brain death. The top 10 Google websites were analyzed for language complexity and accuracy in describing brain death. The top 10 YouTube videos were examined for content and the comments qualitatively analyzed for themes.

RESULTS

Inaccuracies describing brain death inconsistent with national guidelines were prevalent amongst 4 of 10 Google websites, 6 of 10 YouTube videos, and 80% of YouTube comments. On average, Google websites were written at a 12th grade level and 90% mentioned organ donation. Videos were frequently emotional (78%); 33% included negative comments toward physicians, of which 50% mentioned organ donation. All videos included clarification comments questioning the differences between brain death, death, coma, and persistent vegetative states.

CONCLUSIONS

The study revealed a significant amount of inaccurate information about brain death, affecting the public's understanding of the concept of brain death and resulting in negative emotions specifically toward physicians, and the link between brain death and organ donation. The medical community can improve understanding through consistent, simplified language, dissociating brain death from organ donation, and recognizing the emotions tied to discussions of brain death.