Published online October 31, 2008
PEDIATRICS Vol. 122 No. 5 November 2008, pp. e967-e974 (doi:10.1542/peds.2008-1210)
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Joffe, A. R.
Right arrow Articles by deCaen, A. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Joffe, A. R.
Right arrow Articles by deCaen, A. R.
Related Collections
Right arrow Office Practice
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

ARTICLE

Survey of Pediatricians' Opinions on Donation After Cardiac Death: Are the Donors Dead?

Ari R. Joffe, MD, Natalie R. Anton, MD and Allan R. deCaen, MD

Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta and Stollery Children's Hospital, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

OBJECTIVE. There has been debate in the ethics literature as to whether the donation-after-cardiac-death donor is dead after 5 minutes of absent circulation. We set out to determine whether pediatricians consider the donation-after-cardiac-death donor as dead.

METHODS. A survey was mailed to all 147 pediatricians who are affiliated with the university teaching children's hospital. The survey had 4 pediatric patient scenarios in which a decision was made to donate organs after 5 minutes of absent circulation. Background information described the organ shortage, and the debate about the term "irreversibility" applied to death in donation after cardiac death. Descriptive statistics were used, with responses between groups compared by using the {chi}2 statistic.

RESULTS. The response rate was 54% (80 of 147). In each scenario, when given a patient described as dead with absent circulation for 5 minutes, ≤60% of respondents strongly agreed/agreed that the patient is definitely dead, ≤50% responded that the patient is in the state called "dead," and ≤56% strongly agreed/agreed that the physicians are being truthful when calling the patient dead. On at least 1 of the scenarios, 38 (48%) of 147 responded uncertain, disagree, or strongly disagree that the patient is definitely dead. Although the patients in the 4 scenarios were in the identical physiologic state, with absent circulation for 5 minutes, 12 (15%) of 80 respondents did not consistently consider the patients in the state called "dead" between scenarios. Fewer than 5% of respondents answered strongly agree/agree to allow donation after cardiac death while also answering disagree/strongly disagree that the patient is definitely dead, suggesting little support to abandon the dead-donor rule.

CONCLUSIONS. Most pediatrician respondents were not confident that a donation-after-cardiac-death donor was dead. This suggests that additional debate about the concept of irreversibility applied to donation after cardiac death is needed.

Key Words: death • donation after cardiac death • end of life • organ donation • pediatrics

Abbreviations: DCD—donation after cardiac death • CPR—cardiopulmonary resuscitation • SA/A—strongly agree or agree • D/SD—disagree or strongly disagree

Accepted Jul 29, 2008.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?