ARE THERE SUFFICIENT PUBLISHED STUDIES TO DRAW CONCLUSIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS?
The literature on clinical testing and its pitfalls in brain death determination remains meager. Many studies have concentrated on the validity of new ancillary (confirmatory) tests. We found the literature on these tests unsupportive in many instances. Brain death remains a clinical assessment, and no laboratory test can refute or prove this condition. WHAT DID THE PANEL FIND ABOUT RECOVERY? The first question was whether patients who fulfill the clinical criteria of brain death ever recover neurologic function. In adults we found no reports in peer-reviewed medical journals of recovery of brain function after a determination of brain death using the 1995 AAN practice parameter as a yardstick. WHAT DID THE EVIDENCE SUGGEST ABOUT DECIPHERING ‘MIMICS’ FROM REAL BRAIN DEATH? With regard to conditions that might be mistaken for brain death, so-called brain death mimics, we identified and reviewed nine Class IV studies. These included fulminant Guillain-Barré syndrome, organophosphate into
Related Questions
- Can one draw significant and reliable conclusions about individual members of a given population on the basis of information about the population to which he or she belongs?
- What progress is being made with the child and adolescent mental health services(CAMHS) recommendations first published in the Emerging Findings?
- What is the timetable for the hearing officer to issue findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations?
