Search

Background Brain cancer is a devastating and incurable disease that places a high burden of care on next of kin (NOK). NOK can play a core role in supporting end-of-life planning, including the decision to donate one's brain after death. Postmortem brain donation is crucial to research. As postmortem programs develop it is important to understand the experiences of NOK as they support a loved one in the donation decision. Methods Thirteen qualitative interviews were completed with NOK of people who had consented to donate their brains to the Mark Hughes Foundation (MHF) Biobank. A thematic analysis was carried out on the transcribed interviews. Results Four central themes were identified: (i) The carer role has additional responsibilities and psychological benefits when brain donation is being considered; (ii) Supporting a loved one to donate requires mutual trust, understanding, and a commitment to honor agency; (iii) Increasing awareness of brain donation is a priority for NOK, and (iv) Brain donation is seen as a natural continuation of the donor's altruistic values. Conclusions When a person with brain cancer decides to donate their brain to research, their NOK can experience additional burdens and benefits as the NOK–patient relationship evolves. Understanding this evolution and recognizing the importance of trust, advocacy, and altruism provides a guide for the integration of brain donation programs into clinical pathways and a basis for normalizing brain donation as an extension of organ donation frameworks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Glioblastoma, a high-grade primary brain cancer, has a median survival of approximately 14 months. Post-mortem brain donation provides insight to pathogenesis along with spatial and temporal heterogeneity. Post-mortem brain biobanking programs are increasing in number and the need to understand and improve the associated human experience is pressing. This study aims to qualitatively explore the experiences of next of kin (NOK) following the death and brain donation of a loved one and to understand the impact such programs have on NOK carers. Method: We interviewed 29 NOK following the death of their loved one and subsequent brain donation. Thematic analysis was conducted on the transcribed, qualitative interviews. Results: Four themes were identified; (1) Brain donation is a straightforward decision grounded in altruism and pragmatism; (2) Supporting donors is a source of comfort, pride and empowerment; (3) Brain donation can provide meaning for suffering and tragedy and (4) Perceptions of procedures and processes when supporting a loved one to donate. Insights into areas for improvement, for example transporting donors following a home death and the role of the body bag were also noted. Conclusion: Supporting a loved one to donate their brain can be a positive experience providing a source of hope, empowerment and purpose for NOK. Data indicating areas for consideration are broadly relevant for improving the delivery of brain donation programs for future donors and their loved ones. Plain language summary: Understanding how loved ones feel about someone close to them donating their brain to research after their death from brain cancer The act of donating brain tissue after death from brain cancer is a huge gift to medical research and may have an impact on the ability of the scientific community to improve outcomes for people diagnosed with brain cancers. While we understand how valuable these donations are for research, we need more work to understand how these donations impact the people who donate and those who love and support them. This paper explores the experiences of people who have lost someone to brain cancer who then went on to donate their brain tissue after their death. Through the use of interviews, it explores the impact that the donation has on a loved one or next of kin from providing a source of comfort, empowerment, pride or an alternative to 'senseless' suffering and tragedy. It also provides areas that should be considered by people who are facilitating brain donations to ensure that any potential, harm or upset can be minimized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Post-mortem brain donation affords the opportunity to characterise disease by exploring global neuropathological changes. Such opportunities are essential to progress knowledge of CNS tumours such as Glioblastoma. A comprehensive understanding of the experience of consenting to brain donation is crucial to maximising consent rates while providing patient-centred care. This review aimed to synthesise the reported facilitators and barriers according to potential donors, next-of-kin (NOK) and clinician respondents. Design: Database searches included Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, Psychology and Behavioural Science and Scopus. Search terms focused on motivations, attitudes and psychosocial experiences of brain donation. Exclusions included organ transplantation and brain death. All studies were assessed for quality and validity using tools from the Joanna Briggs Institute. To determine perceptions of benefit and harm, a method guided by the thematic analysis of Braun and Clarke was employed to reflexively assess and identify common themes and experiences. Results: 40 studies (15 qualitative, 25 quantitative) were included involving participants with paediatric cancer, neurodegenerative and psychological diseases. Perceptions of benefit included benefit to future generations, aiding scientific research, avoidance of waste, improved treatments and the belief that donation will bring consolation or aid in the grieving process. Perceptions of harm included a perceived conflict with religious beliefs, disfigurement to the donor, emotional distress at the time of autopsy and discord or objections within the family. Conclusion: Brain donation can afford a sense of purpose, meaning and empowerment for donors and their loved ones. Careful strategies are required to mitigate or reduce potential harms during the consent process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]