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.

Life beyond life: Perceptions of post-mortem organ donation and consent to donate-A focus group study in Italy

OBJECTIVES

Many factors such as personal and cultural beliefs, misinformation, fear of death and inadequate will registering procedures can influence post-mortem organ donation. The present study aimed to explore the perceptions, beliefs and information around post-mortem donation and will expression in different groups of the Italian population, to orient future interventions and raise awareness.

DESIGN

Qualitative research with focus groups.

METHODS

A total of 38 focus groups involving 353 participants including the general population (young adults: 18-39, mature adults: 40-70), local and hospital health professionals, critical area health professionals (emergency room and intensive care), registry office employees and opinion leaders, were conducted in six regions from different parts of Italy between June and November 2021. Thematic analysis was conducted with the use of Atlas.ti9.

RESULTS

Five overarching themes were identified: dilemmas regarding donation, resistance to donation, facilitators of donation, difficulties in terms of will expression and proposals to encourage will expression. Possible facilitators were having personal and professional experiences with organ donation, feeling useful for society, having reliable information and trust in the health care system. Potential barriers to donation were doubts and fears about brain death, bodily integrity concerns, religious beliefs, misinformation and distrust in the health care system.

CONCLUSIONS

These results highlighted the significance of a bottom-up perspective with regard to identifying the personal perceptions and beliefs with regard to donation, underlining the urgency of creating tailored interventions to sensitize different groups of the population in terms of promoting an informed choice and a culture of donation.

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.

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.

Brain death debates: from bioethics to philosophy of science

50 years after its introduction, brain death remains controversial among scholars. The debates focus on one question: is brain death a good criterion for determining death? This question has been answered from various perspectives: medical, metaphysical, ethical, and legal or political. Most authors either defend the criterion as it is, propose some minor or major revisions, or advocate abandoning it and finding better solutions to the problems that brain death was intended to solve when it was introduced. Here I plead for a different approach that has been overlooked in the literature: the philosophy of science approach. Some scholars claim that human death is a matter of fact, a biological phenomenon whose occurrence can be determined empirically, based on science. We should take this claim seriously, whether we agree with it or not. The question is: how do we know that human death is a scientific matter of fact? Taking the philosophy of science approach means, among other things, examining how the determination of human death became an object of scientific inquiry, exploring the nature of the brain death criterion itself, and analysing the meaning of its core concepts such as “irreversibility” and “functions”.

Death determination, organ donation and the importance of the Dead Donor Rule following withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment: A survey of community opinions

Organ donation (OD) following circulatory determination of death (DCDD) is an increasing source of transplant organs but little is known about community opinions on treatment withdrawal, death determination death and acceptance of OD in DCDD. To determine attitudes on death determination, the importance of patient choice in treatment withdrawal and OD agreement, and the importance of the 'Dead Donor Rule', we undertook a scenario-based online survey of 1017 members of the Australian general public. Mean levels of agreement across respondent's responses to statements were compared by repeated measures ANOVA. 54% (548) of respondents agreed that a DCDD scenario patient could be declared dead 2 minutes after circulatory standstill, however over 80% nonetheless agreed OD would be appropriate, including 77% (136/176) of those disagreeing with 2-minute death declaration. 48% (484) supported OD even if it caused the patient's death. 75% (766) accepted relatively benign ante-mortem treatments administered to improve transplant outcomes. Over 70% supported a high quadriplegic patient's request to be allowed to die, with 61% (622) agreeing that he should be allowed to donate his organs under anaesthesia, but 60% (610) also agreed that he should first be declared dead. In conclusion, we found high levels of support for treatment withdrawal in severe brain injury and when requested by a quadriplegic patient. While there was variable agreement with the timing of death determination and with OD under anaesthesia, support for OD was high in both scenarios. For many people death determination prior to OD may not be of paramount importance. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.