Parents who wish no further treatment for their child.

BACKGROUND: In the ethical and clinical literature, cases of parents who want treatment for their child to be withdrawn against the views of the medical team have not received much attention. Yet resolution of such conflicts demands much effort of both the medical team and parents. OBJECTIVE: To discuss who can best protect a child's interests, which often becomes a central issue, putting considerable pressure on mutual trust and partnership. METHODS: We describe the case of a 3-year-old boy with acquired brain damage due to autoimmune-mediated encephalitis whose parents wanted to stop treatment. By comparing this case with relevant literature, we systematically explored the pros and cons of sharing end-of-life decisions with parents in cases where treatment is considered futile by parents and not (yet) by physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Sharing end-of-life decisions with parents is a more important duty for physicians than protecting parents from guilt or doubt. Moreover, a request from parents on behalf of their child to discontinue treatment is, and should be, hard to over-rule in cases with significant prognostic uncertainty and/or in cases with divergent opinions within the medical team.

Donor education campaigns since the introduction of the Dutch organ donation act: increased cohesion between campaigns has paid off.

Governments utilize special policy measures to increase and maintain positive attitudes among their citizens towards consent registration and organ donation. Little has been published on these national strategies. Some studies report on the impact of single policy measures shortly after their implementation, whereas the assessment of the impact of a national strategy on organ donation over a long period of time has been lacking. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of the Dutch donor education strategy (1998-2008) on the availability of donor organs, by trying to disentangle the impact of education from other factors. In this study, we have devised a research strategy to assess the impact of policy measures at national level, while providing information about Dutch initiatives to increase registration and procurement rates, and demonstrating and explaining these increases. The increased resources and improved strategies employed to educate the public in relation to organ donation have paid off, but the impact decreases over time. The question remains whether the effects of these policy measures will further level off over time and what levels of increase in donor registration rates and efficiency of donor procurement are realistic targets to achieve.

Imagining the impact of different consent systems on organ donation: the decisions of next of kin.

Next of kin play an important role in organ donation. The aim of this study was to assess the extent to which explicitness of consent to organ donation by the deceased impacts the likelihood that next of kin will agree to organ donation of the deceased by using hypothetical cases. Results indicate that that people say they are more willing to agree to donate organs of those who explicitly consented to donate than those whose permission to donate is presumed. The degree of explicitness for the consent to donate by the deceased appears to influence the next of kin's decision about whether to agree to donation. This variation might explain the absence of differences in efficiency between various types of consent systems.

The impact of donor policies in Europe: a steady increase, but not everywhere.

BACKGROUND: Transplantable organs are scarce everywhere. Therefore, countries have developed policies to support the efficient use of potential donors. Nevertheless, the shortage of organs remains. Were these policies in vain? The aim of this study is to assess the impact of donor policies on donor procurement in 10 Western European countries from 1995 to 2005. METHOD: To assess the impact of the donor policies we studied the conversion of potential donors into effectuated donors. 80% of the donors died from CVAs or a (traffic) accident. We considered these mortality rates to be a good proxy for potential donors. Here we call the conversion of potential donors into actual donors 'the donor efficiency rate by proxy'. RESULTS: The mortality rates for CVA and (traffic) accidents have decreased in the countries under study. At the same time, in most countries the donor efficiency rates have steadily increased. The variance in donor efficiency rates between countries has also increased from 1995 to 2005. Four countries introduced a new consent system or changed their existing system, without (visible) long-term effects. CONCLUSION: The overall increase in donor efficiency means that the efforts to improve donor policies have paid off. However, substantial differences between countries were found. The success of donor policies in terms of the number of absolute donors is blurred by the success of policies on traffic safety and CVA treatment. It remains unclear which specific policy measures are responsible for the increase in donor efficiency rates. This increase is not related to having a presumed consent system. Furthermore, an analysis of countries that introduced a new consent system or changed their system showed no effect on donor efficiency.

Poor agreement among expert witnesses in bile duct injury malpractice litigation: an expert panel survey.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the inter-rater agreement of expert witness testimonies in bile duct injury malpractice litigation. BACKGROUND DATA: Malpractice litigation is an increasing concern in modern surgical practice. As most of the lawyers are not educated in medicine, expert witnesses are asked to testify about negligence of care in most jurisdictions. Although expert witnesses greatly determine the outcome of a claim, the reliability of expert testimony may be arbitrary. METHODS: Surgical expert witnesses independently assessed whether negligence of care occurred by reviewing the complete medical history of closed litigation cases. All cases concerned iatrogenic bile duct injury, which occurred during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The level of agreement was measured and case characteristics associated with negligence were determined. RESULTS: Thirteen independent experts reviewed 10 closed litigation cases. In 1 of the 10 cases, full agreement was observed. In 7 of the 10 cases, the highest percentage of agreeing experts was 53% or less. Chance-corrected levels of agreement were in the slight to fair range (Kendall W coefficient of concordance = 0.16-0.25). Disease-related mortality was associated with judgments on negligence (P = 0.02). Judgments on negligence of care were not associated with delay in diagnosis or the severity of injury. Experts with more years of clinical experience agreed more about negligence. Experts working in an academic setting agreed less than experts working in a teaching hospital. Finally, 8 of the 13 experts plead for the assignment of more than 1 expert witness to review and comment in a surgical litigation case. CONCLUSIONS: The reliability of expert witness testimonies in bile duct injury litigation is frail. Defendants, plaintiffs, experts, and lawyers should be aware of the drawbacks of expert witness testimonies. Raising consensus concerning the standards of surgical care may be required to improve agreement in judgments on negligence.

Opting-out systems: no guarantee for higher donation rates.

There are considerable differences in the number of organ donations between countries. It is assumed that opting-out systems have a significantly positive impact on the national organ donation rate. The aim of our study was to establish whether different consent systems explain the difference in organ donation rates between countries when taking into account the difference in relevant mortality rates. For this study, we compared data on donation and relevant mortality rates for 10 different countries as well as information on the existing consent systems. This international comparative study shows that there is a strong correlation between mortality rates and donation rates (Spearman's rho = 0.81 (P < 0.01). International comparative legal research has shown that the differences between decision systems are marginal. When the national organ donation rates are corrected for mortality rates, these findings are confirmed: the donor efficiency rate shows that opting-out systems do not automatically guarantee higher donation rates than opting-in systems.