Evidence Hub

Tissue and organ procurement in the emergency department setting

Lewis LM, Martin L, Hoffman T, Ruoff BE

The American journal of emergency medicine, 1993

Abstract

A retrospective chart review of all emergency department (ED) deaths in patients younger than 65 years in seven area hospitals was performed for the calendar year of 1990. The number and percentage of families approached and consenting to tissue donation among the various EDs was compared and reasons for not approaching families were evaluated for their validity. Procurement rates between the years 1990 and 1991 were compared for two area hospitals, which made a specified (nonmedical) service responsible for tissue requests in 1991. There were 368 deaths, 255 of which were potential donors by acceptable criteria. Only 109 (43%) families were approached regarding tissue donation. The overall procurement rate was 12%. Suburban EDs had a higher approach and procurement rate than did urban EDs (49% vs 36%; P < .05 and 19% vs 5%; P < .01, respectively). Procurement rates for two hospitals that designated a specific procurement service in 1991 more than doubled (5% vs 11%; P = NS). Tissue procurement rates in EDs with procurement systems in place are low despite consent rates of those approached of 36%. The major contributing factor is the failure to request tissue from the families of eligible candidates even when there are no exclusion criteria met. Suburban EDs had a higher success rate than urban EDs.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free