A checklist for streamlining organ donation after cardiac death

Quality improvement tools to manage deceased organ donation processes: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To collate and summarise the literature on the quality improvement tools that have been developed for deceased organ donation processes after circulatory determination of death and neurological determination of death.

DESIGN

Scoping review using the Joanna Briggs Institute framework.

DATA SOURCES

We searched for published (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science) and unpublished literature (organ donation organisation websites worldwide). The search was initially conducted on 17 July 2021 and updated on 1 June 2022. Included articles discussed the creation and/or use of quality improvement tools to manage deceased organ donation processes. Two independent reviewers screened the references, extracted and analysed the data.

RESULTS

40 references were included in this review, and most records were written in English (n=38), originated in Canada (n=21), published between 2016 and 2022 (n=22), and were specific for donation after neurological determination of death (n=20). The tools identified included checklists, algorithms, flow charts, charts, pathways, decision tree maps and mobile apps. These tools were applied in the following phases of the organ donation process: (1) potential donor identification, (2) donor referral, (3) donor assessment and risk, (4) donor management, (5) withdrawal of life-sustaining measures, (6) death determination, (7) organ retrieval and (8) overall organ donation process.

CONCLUSIONS

We conducted a thorough investigation of the available quality improvement tools for deceased organ donation processes. The existing evidence lacks details in the report of methods used for development, testing and impact of these tools, and we could not locate tools specific for some phases of the organ donation process. Lastly, by mapping existing tools, we aim to facilitate both clinician choices among available tools, as well as research work building on existing knowledge.

Criteria to Identify a Potential Deceased Organ Donor: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the global published literature defining a potential deceased organ donor and identifying clinical triggers for deceased organ donation identification and referral.

DATA SOURCES

Medline and Embase databases from January 2006 to September 2017.

STUDY SELECTION

All published studies containing a definition of a potential deceased organ donor and/or clinical triggers for referring a potential deceased organ donor were eligible for inclusion. Dual, independent screening was conducted of 3,857 citations.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data extraction was completed by one team member and verified by a second team member. Thematic content analysis was used to identify clinical criteria for potential deceased organ donation identification from the published definitions and clinical triggers.

DATA SYNTHESIS

One hundred twenty-four articles were included in the review. Criteria fell into four categories: Neurological, Medical Decision, Cardiorespiratory, and Administrative. Distinct and globally consistent sets of clinical criteria by type of deceased organ donation (neurologic death determination, controlled donation after circulatory determination of death, and uncontrolled donation after circulatory determination of death) are reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of the clinical criteria sets reported will reduce ambiguity associated with the deceased organ donor identification and the subsequent referral process, potentially reducing the number of missed donors and saving lives globally through increased transplantation.

Organ donation after circulatory death in a university teaching hospital

Although organ transplantation is well established for end-stage organ failure, many patients die on waiting lists due to insufficient donor numbers. Recently, there has been renewed interest in donation after circulatory death (DCD). In a retrospective observational study we reviewed the screening of patients considered for DCD between March 2007 and December 2012 in our hospital. Overall, 148 patients were screened, 17 of whom were transferred from other hospitals. Ninety-three patients were excluded (53 immediately and 40 after review by donation staff). The 55 DCD patients were younger than those excluded (P=0.007) and they died from hypoxic brain injury (43.6%), intraparenchymal haemorrhage (21.8%) and subarachnoid haemorrhage (14.5%). Antemortem heparin administration and bronchoscopy occurred in 50/53 (94.3%) and 22/55 (40%) of cases, respectively. Forty-eight patients died within 90 minutes and proceeded to donation surgery. Associations with not dying in 90 minutes included spontaneous ventilation mode (P=0.022), absence of noradrenaline infusion (P=0.051) and higher PaO2:FiO2 ratio (P=0.052). The number of brain dead donors did not decrease over the study period. The time interval between admission and death was longer for DCD than for the 45 brain dead donors (5 [3-11] versus 2 [2-3] days; P<0.001), and 95 additional patients received organ transplants due to DCD. Introducing a DCD program can increase potential organ donors without reducing brain dead donors. Antemortem investigations appear to be acceptable to relatives when included in the consent process.

Management strategies to effect change in intensive care units: lessons from the world of business. Part II. Quality-improvement strategies

The success of quality-improvement projects relies heavily on both project design and the metrics chosen to assess change. In Part II of this three-part American Thoracic Society Seminars series, we begin by describing methods for determining which data to collect, tools for data presentation, and strategies for data dissemination. As Avedis Donabedian detailed a half century ago, defining metrics in healthcare can be challenging; algorithmic determination of the best type of metric (outcome, process, or structure) can help intensive care unit (ICU) managers begin this process. Choosing appropriate graphical data displays (e.g., run charts) can prompt discussions about and promote quality improvement. Similarly, dashboards/scorecards are useful in presenting performance improvement data either publicly or privately in a visually appealing manner. To have compelling data to show, ICU managers must plan quality-improvement projects well. The second portion of this review details four quality-improvement tools-checklists, Six Sigma methodology, lean thinking, and Kaizen. Checklists have become commonplace in many ICUs to improve care quality; thinking about how to maximize their effectiveness is now of prime importance. Six Sigma methodology, lean thinking, and Kaizen are techniques that use multidisciplinary teams to organize thinking about process improvement, formalize change strategies, actualize initiatives, and measure progress. None originated within healthcare, but each has been used in the hospital environment with success. To conclude this part of the series, we demonstrate how to use these tools through an example of improving the timely administration of antibiotics to patients with sepsis.

Normothermic extracorporeal human liver perfusion following donation after cardiac death

Liver transplantation is a major life-saving procedure and donation after cardiac death (DCD) has increased the pool of potential liver donors. However, livers procured after DCD are at increased risk of primary graft dysfunction and biliary tract ischaemia. Normothermic extracorporeal liver perfusion (NELP) may increase the ability to protect, evaluate and, in future, transplant DCD livers. We conducted a proof-of-concept experiment using a human liver procured by DCD (deemed not suitable for liver donation) to assess the short-term (3 hours) feasibility, histological effects and functional efficacy of NELP. We used an extracorporeal membrane oxygenation circuit with separate hepatic artery and portal vein perfusion to achieve physiological perfusion pressures, and coupled this with parenteral nutrition and an insulin infusion. We achieved NELP with evidence of liver function (bile production, paracetamol removal and control of ammonia, bilirubin and lactate levels) for 3 hours. There was essentially normal liver and biliary tract histology after 8 hours of perfusion. Our experiment justifies further investigation of the feasibility and efficacy of human DCD liver preservation by NELP.