Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2021
Attitude and knowledge of medical students toward donation after circulatory death.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Martino Rodrigo Bronze de, Guidotte Diogo Visconti, Waisberg Daniel Reis, Santos Alexandre Guerra Dos, Cassenote Alex Jones Flores, Arantes Rubens Macedo, Haddad Luciana Bertocco, Galvão Flavio Henrique, Carneiro-D'Albuquerque Luiz Augusto
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: A survey among medical students in a Brazilian public university was performed to investigate the acceptance of organ donation in Brazil, particularly donation after circulatory death (DCD).
METHODS: A questionnaire including 26 objectives and Likert scale questions was validated and sent to all medical students of our institution. The answers were analyzed considering the whole set of individuals as well as by dividing the medical students into two groups: less graduated students and more graduated students.
RESULTS: From 1050 students, 103 spontaneous answers (9.8%) were retrieved after 3 weeks. A total of 89.3% agreed totally with deceased donor organ donation and 8.7% agreed partially. However, only 50.5% of the students agreed totally and 31.1% agreed partially to living donation. Students revealed that 82.6% know the concept of brain death. On the other hand, 71.8% of them declared not knowing the concept of planned withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy, mainly cardiorespiratory support. A total of 85.4% of students agreed totally with donation after brain death and 11.7% agreed partially. However, when questioned about donation in awaiting circulatory death after a planned withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy, only 18.4% agreed totally and 32% agreed partially. Both groups of less and more graduated students showed similar results.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study found a clear lack of information and consequently in acceptance of DCD. Education in the field of end-of-life management may improve not only the acceptance of DCD donation but also the whole understanding of planned withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy.
METHODS: A questionnaire including 26 objectives and Likert scale questions was validated and sent to all medical students of our institution. The answers were analyzed considering the whole set of individuals as well as by dividing the medical students into two groups: less graduated students and more graduated students.
RESULTS: From 1050 students, 103 spontaneous answers (9.8%) were retrieved after 3 weeks. A total of 89.3% agreed totally with deceased donor organ donation and 8.7% agreed partially. However, only 50.5% of the students agreed totally and 31.1% agreed partially to living donation. Students revealed that 82.6% know the concept of brain death. On the other hand, 71.8% of them declared not knowing the concept of planned withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy, mainly cardiorespiratory support. A total of 85.4% of students agreed totally with donation after brain death and 11.7% agreed partially. However, when questioned about donation in awaiting circulatory death after a planned withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy, only 18.4% agreed totally and 32% agreed partially. Both groups of less and more graduated students showed similar results.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study found a clear lack of information and consequently in acceptance of DCD. Education in the field of end-of-life management may improve not only the acceptance of DCD donation but also the whole understanding of planned withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy.