Healthcare Professionals’ Understandings of the Definition and Determination of Death: A Scoping Review

An Update on Brain Death/Death by Neurologic Criteria since the World Brain Death Project

The World Brain Death Project (WBDP) is a 2020 international consensus statement that provides historical background and recommendations on brain death/death by neurologic criteria (BD/DNC) determination. It addresses 13 topics including: (1) worldwide variance in BD/DNC, (2) the science of BD/DNC, (3) the concept of BD/DNC, (4) minimum clinical criteria for BD/DNC determination, (5) beyond minimum clinical BD/DNC determination, (6) pediatric and neonatal BD/DNC determination, (7) BD/DNC determination in patients on ECMO, (8) BD/DNC determination after treatment with targeted temperature management, (9) BD/DNC documentation, (10) qualification for and education on BD/DNC determination, (11) somatic support after BD/DNC for organ donation and other special circumstances, (12) religion and BD/DNC: managing requests to forego a BD/DNC evaluation or continue somatic support after BD/DNC, and (13) BD/DNC and the law. This review summarizes the WBDP content on each of these topics and highlights relevant work published from 2020 to 2023, including both the 192 citing publications and other publications on BD/DNC. Finally, it reviews questions for future research related to BD/DNC and emphasizes the need for national efforts to ensure the minimum standards for BD/DNC determination described in the WBDP are included in national BD/DNC guidelines and due consideration is given to the recommendations about social and legal aspects of BD/DNC determination.

Advancing the Scientific Basis for Determining Death in Controlled Organ Donation After Circulatory Determination of Death

In controlled organ donation after circulatory determination of death (cDCDD), accurate and timely death determination is critical, yet knowledge gaps persist. Further research to improve the science of defining and determining death by circulatory criteria is therefore warranted. In a workshop sponsored by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, experts identified research opportunities pertaining to scientific, conceptual, and ethical understandings of DCDD and associated technologies. This article identifies a research strategy to inform the biomedical definition of death, the criteria for its determination, and circulatory death determination in cDCDD. Highlighting knowledge gaps, we propose that further research is needed to inform the observation period following cessation of circulation in pediatric and neonatal populations, the temporal relationship between the cessation of brain and circulatory function after the withdrawal of life-sustaining measures in all patient populations, and the minimal pulse pressures that sustain brain blood flow, perfusion, activity, and function. Additionally, accurate predictive tools to estimate time to asystole following the withdrawal of treatment and alternative monitoring modalities to establish the cessation of circulatory, brainstem, and brain function are needed. The physiologic and conceptual implications of postmortem interventions that resume circulation in cDCDD donors likewise demand attention to inform organ recovery practices. Finally, because jurisdictionally variable definitions of death and the criteria for its determination may impede collaborative research efforts, further work is required to achieve consensus on the physiologic and conceptual rationale for defining and determining death after circulatory arrest.

An Overview of Ethical Issues Raised by Medicolegal Challenges to Death by Neurologic Criteria in the United Kingdom and a Comparison to Management of These Challenges in the USA

Although medicolegal challenges to the use of neurologic criteria to declare death in the USA have been well-described, the management of court cases in the United Kingdom about objections to the use of neurologic criteria to declare death has not been explored in the bioethics or medical literature. This article (1) reviews conceptual, medical and legal differences between death by neurologic criteria (DNC) in the United Kingdom and the rest of the world to contextualize medicolegal challenges to DNC; (2) summarizes highly publicized legal cases related to DNC in the United Kingdom, including the nuanced 2022 case of Archie Battersbee, who was transiently considered dead by neurologic criteria, but ultimately determined to be in a vegetative state/unresponsive-wakeful state; and (3) provides an overview of ethical issues raised by medicolegal challenges to DNC in the United Kingdom and a comparison to the management of these challenges in the USA.

Standards and Ethics Issues in the Determination of Death: A Position Paper From the American College of Physicians

The determination of a patient's death is of considerable medical and ethical significance. Death is a biological concept with social implications. Acting with honesty, transparency, respect, and integrity is critical to trust in the patient-physician relationship, and the profession, in life and in death. Over time, cases about the determination of death have raised questions that need to be addressed. This American College of Physicians position paper addresses current controversies and supports a clarification to the Uniform Determination of Death Act; maintaining the 2 current independent standards of determining death, cardiorespiratory and neurologic; retaining the whole brain death standard; aligning medical testing with the standards; keeping issues about the determination of death separate from organ transplantation; reaffirming the importance and role of the dead donor rule; and engaging in educational efforts for health professionals, patients, and the public on these issues. Physicians should advocate for policies and practices on the determination of death that are consistent with the profession's fundamental and timeless commitment to individual patients and the public.

Death pluralism: a proposal

The debate over the determination of death has been raging for more than fifty years. Since then, objections against the diagnosis of brain death from family members of those diagnosed as dead-have been increasing and are causing some countries to take novel steps to accommodate people's beliefs and preferences in the determination of death. This, coupled with criticism by some academics of the brain death criterion, raises some questions about the issues surrounding the determination of death. In this paper, we discuss some of the main approaches to death determination that have been theoretically proposed or currently put into practice and propose a new approach to death determination called "weak pluralism" as a reasonable ethical and political alternative to respect diversity in death determination.

Opinion of surveyed nurses on transplantation and reasons for negative public attitudes toward organ donation

Organ transplantation saves thousands of lives every year. Despite growing awareness of transplantation, the issue of obtaining organs for transplantation has been controversial for years. Hundreds of people are waiting in lines all the time for transplantation, for whom it is the only hope for a cure. One extremely important factor contributing to the low number of transplants is the low number of organ donations from deceased donors. Nurses are considered key facilitators of the organ procurement and transplantation process. Their knowledge of and attitudes toward organ donation can influence public opinion, as well as the decisions of their families to donate the organs of the deceased. The purpose of our study was to determine the opinions of surveyed nurses about transplantation and the reasons for negative public attitudes toward organ donation. The survey included 793 nurses employed in surgical wards across Poland with varying levels of job seniority. The survey was conducted between September and October 2022. The research tool was a survey questionnaire, consisting of three parts: socio-demographic data, questions assessing the respondents' knowledge of behavior about transplantation, and a non-standardized tool to measure respondents' emotional and motivational attitudes toward transplantation. Participation in the survey was anonymous and voluntary. The statistical analysis for independence of variables used the χ 2 test. On the other hand, coefficients based on the Phi and Cramer's V test, as well as Kruskal Wallis non-parametric tests for assessing differences (for more than 2 samples) were used to determine the strength of the relationship. During these analyses, in addition to standard statistical significance, the corresponding "p" values were calculated using the Monte Carlo method. According to the nurses surveyed, transplantation is a life-saving procedure. A significant proportion of the nurses (85.6%) believe that there are too few donors in Poland. According to 41.8% of the respondents, this is due to the fear of misdiagnosis of death, for 23.4% it is incompatible with their worldview or religion and 31.8% believe it is due to the belief in the inviolability of the human body after death. The survey showed that, in the nurses' opinion, the reason for objections to organ transplantation is the deficit in public's knowledge of cell, tissue and organ donation from both living and dead donors. Therefore it is extremely important to conduct educational campaigns in this regard.

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.

Rationale for revisions to the definition of death and criteria for its determination in Canada

Clarity regarding the biomedical definition of death and the criteria for its determination is critical to inform practices in clinical care, medical research, law, and organ donation. While best practices for death determination by neurologic criteria and circulatory criteria were previously outlined in Canadian medical guidelines, several issues have arisen to force their reappraisal. Ongoing scientific discovery, corresponding changes in medical practice, and legal and ethical challenges compel a comprehensive update. Accordingly, the A Brain-Based Definition of Death and Criteria for its Determination After Arrest of Neurologic or Circulatory Function in Canada project was undertaken to a develop a unified brain-based definition of death, and to establish criteria for its determination after devastating brain injury and/or circulatory arrest. Specifically, the project had three objectives: (1) to clarify that death is defined in terms of brain functions; (2) to clarify how a brain-based definition of death is articulated; and (3) to clarify the criteria for determining if the brain-based definition is met. The updated death determination guideline therefore defines death as the permanent cessation of brain function and describes corresponding circulatory and neurologic criteria to ascertain the permanent cessation of brain function. This article explores the challenges that prompted revisions to the biomedical definition of death and the criteria for its determination and outlines the rationales underpinning the project's three objectives. By clarifying that all death is defined in terms of brain function, the project seeks to align guidelines with contemporary medicolegal understandings of the biological basis of death.

Attitudes of Polish Doctors towards Brain Death

Brain death has been one of the most controversial issues in the medical and bioethical debate globally for more than fifty years. There is no unanimous acceptance of the understanding of brain death, and a single set of neurological criteria for the determination of human death that is accepted worldwide has yet to be established. Physicians from different specialisations understand brain death differently. Therefore, research is needed to understand and typologically classify their points of views as regards brain death. In Poland, this research is particularly important, as the views of anaesthesiologists, neurologists and transplantologists, who fully accept and support brain death as being synonymous with biological human death, have dominated the scholarly debate on this issue. This study presents the opinions of Polish physicians with various medical specialisations in relation to brain death. Free-form interviews with 28 doctors were conducted. Participants expressed their personal views on brain death, while exhibiting at the same time various emotions. We discuss our findings in relation to the existing framework of knowledge and debate concerning brain death and the Polish legal regulation in force when the interviews were carried out. Although participants had different beliefs with regard to brain death, the research team managed to classify their statements and opinions into five attitudes, taking into account what for them were the most important, namely: the escapist-protective attitude, the scientistic-medical attitude, the accepting-critical attitude, the ignorant-agnostic attitude, and the ambiguous attitude.

Should the Revised Uniform Determination of Death Act Address Objections to the Use of Neurologic Criteria to Declare Death?

In response to concerns about the declaration of death by neurologic criteria, the Uniform Law Commission created a drafting committee to update the Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA) in the Fall of 2021. One of the key questions for the committee to address was the following: Should the revised UDDA address objections to the use of neurologic criteria to declare death? This article (1) provides historical background and survey results that demonstrate the need to address this question; (2) summarizes the ethical principles that support and oppose accommodation of objections to the use of neurologic criteria to declare death; (3) reviews accommodation in other areas of medicine and law; (4) discusses existing legal and hospital guidance on management of these objections; (5) examines perspectives of stakeholder medical societies and expert health care professionals, lawyers, ethicists, and philosophers on whether the revised UDDA should address these objections; (6) identifies some questions for the drafting committee to consider when deciding whether the revised UDDA should address objections to the use of neurologic criteria to declare death; and (7) summarizes the potential downstream effects of the drafting committee's decision.