Evaluation of medical students knowledge on brain death - Critical Care Science (CCS)
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Because brain death (BD) is a new concept and little divulged, it’s not well accepted in general population, including doctors and Medical students. This study aims to evaluate the knowledge of a sample of Medical students on the Brazilian BD diagnosis protocol. METHODS: Descriptive cross-sectional survey that evaluated students from two medical schools in Salvador-BA. We used a questionnaire composed by questions about technical and ethical knowledge contained in the Federal Council of Medicine’s Resolution nº 1480/97 that establishes the criteria for BD diagnosis. RESULTS: We evaluated 115 Medical students. In 14 questions about the knowledge of BD criteria, the mean of right answers were 6.7 ± 1.8, which were higher among the students that had attended some presentation on BD. Most of the students (87.4%) knew how to identify the candidates to the BD diagnosis protocol. However, only 5.2% and 16.1% of the students answered right, respectively, the clinical and complementary tests that should be accomplished during the diagnosis protocol. Facing a no-donor patient with confirmed diagnosis of BD, 66.4% referred that artificial life support should be suspended. Only 15% of the interviewed students had already evaluated a patient with BD, being this percentage higher among those who had already frequented ICU (38.2% versus 5.1%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study showed a limited knowledge of the evaluated students on BD diagnosis criteria, mainly in relation to the practical approach of this condition.
Search
Search in:
Search
Search in:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Because brain death (BD) is a new concept and little divulged, it’s not well accepted in general population, including doctors and Medical students. This study aims to evaluate the knowledge of a sample of Medical students on the Brazilian BD diagnosis protocol. METHODS: Descriptive cross-sectional survey that evaluated students from two medical schools in Salvador-BA. We used a questionnaire composed by questions about technical and ethical knowledge contained in the Federal Council of Medicine’s Resolution nº 1480/97 that establishes the criteria for BD diagnosis. RESULTS: We evaluated 115 Medical students. In 14 questions about the knowledge of BD criteria, the mean of right answers were 6.7 ± 1.8, which were higher among the students that had attended some presentation on BD. Most of the students (87.4%) knew how to identify the candidates to the BD diagnosis protocol. However, only 5.2% and 16.1% of the students answered right, respectively, the clinical and complementary tests that should be accomplished during the diagnosis protocol. Facing a no-donor patient with confirmed diagnosis of BD, 66.4% referred that artificial life support should be suspended. Only 15% of the interviewed students had already evaluated a patient with BD, being this percentage higher among those who had already frequented ICU (38.2% versus 5.1%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study showed a limited knowledge of the evaluated students on BD diagnosis criteria, mainly in relation to the practical approach of this condition.
Comments