Sherri A Braksick1, Christopher P Robinson2, Gary S Gronseth2, Sara Hocker2, Eelco F M Wijdicks2, Alejandro A Rabinstein2. 1. From the Department of Neurology (S.A.B., G.S.G.), University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City; Department of Neurology (C.P.R.), University of Florida, Gainesville; and Department of Neurology (S.H., E.F.M.W., A.A.R.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. sbraksick@kumc.edu. 2. From the Department of Neurology (S.A.B., G.S.G.), University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City; Department of Neurology (C.P.R.), University of Florida, Gainesville; and Department of Neurology (S.H., E.F.M.W., A.A.R.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The degree of training and variability in the clinical brain death examination performed by physicians is not known. METHODS: Surveys were distributed to physicians (including physicians-in-training) practicing at 3 separate academic medical centers. Data, including level of practice, training received in completion of a brain death examination, examination components performed, and use of confirmatory tests were collected. Data were evaluated for accuracy in the brain death examination, self-perceived competence in the examination, and indications for confirmatory tests. RESULTS: Of 225 total respondents, 68 reported completing brain death examinations in practice. Most physicians who complete a brain death examination reported they had received training in how to complete the examination (76.1%). Seventeen respondents (25%) reported doing a brain death examination that is consistent with the current practice guideline. As a part of their brain death assessment, 10.3% of physicians did not report completing an apnea test. Of clinicians who obtain confirmatory tests on an as-needed basis, 28.3% do so if a patient breathes during an apnea test, a clinical finding that is not consistent with brain death. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variability in how physicians approach the adult brain death examination, but our survey also identified lack of training in nearly 1 in 4 academic physicians. A formal training course in the principles and proper technique of the brain death examination by physicians with expert knowledge of this clinical assessment is recommended.
OBJECTIVES: The degree of training and variability in the clinical brain death examination performed by physicians is not known. METHODS: Surveys were distributed to physicians (including physicians-in-training) practicing at 3 separate academic medical centers. Data, including level of practice, training received in completion of a brain death examination, examination components performed, and use of confirmatory tests were collected. Data were evaluated for accuracy in the brain death examination, self-perceived competence in the examination, and indications for confirmatory tests. RESULTS: Of 225 total respondents, 68 reported completing brain death examinations in practice. Most physicians who complete a brain death examination reported they had received training in how to complete the examination (76.1%). Seventeen respondents (25%) reported doing a brain death examination that is consistent with the current practice guideline. As a part of their brain death assessment, 10.3% of physicians did not report completing an apnea test. Of clinicians who obtain confirmatory tests on an as-needed basis, 28.3% do so if a patient breathes during an apnea test, a clinical finding that is not consistent with brain death. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variability in how physicians approach the adult brain death examination, but our survey also identified lack of training in nearly 1 in 4 academic physicians. A formal training course in the principles and proper technique of the brain death examination by physicians with expert knowledge of this clinical assessment is recommended.
Authors: Benjamin J MacDougall; Jennifer D Robinson; Liana Kappus; Stephanie N Sudikoff; David M Greer Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Sarah Wahlster; Eelco F M Wijdicks; Pratik V Patel; David M Greer; J Claude Hemphill; Marco Carone; Farrah J Mateen Journal: Neurology Date: 2015-04-08 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: David M Greer; Hilary H Wang; Jennifer D Robinson; Panayiotis N Varelas; Galen V Henderson; Eelco F M Wijdicks Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 18.302