Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T03:19:30.615Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

‘Bones of Contention’. The donation of temporal bones for dissection after the organ-retention scandals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2006

D. P. Morris
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Oxford Road, Manchester, UK
E. W. Benbow
Affiliation:
Department of Histopathology, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Oxford Road, Manchester, UK
R. T. Ramsden
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Oxford Road, Manchester, UK

Abstract

It is essential for the Otologist in training to become familiar with the anatomy of the temporal bone. Generations of trainees have acquired this knowledge, together with basic surgical skills and techniques by dissection of cadaver temporal bones. In recent years, however, the supply of temporal bones for dissection has become a contentious issue in many British hospitals. Media and public attention has recently focused on issues surrounding the retention of human tissues following post-mortem examinations. In response, the Chief Medical Officer, the Royal College of Pathologists in the UK, the Faculty of Pathology of the Royal College of Physicians in Ireland, the British Medical Association, and other bodies have issued new guidelines that are of relevance to the Otolaryngologist. This paper gives details of some of the UK guidelines and where they can be accessed. A copy of the Royal College of Pathologists preferred post-mortem consent form is presented. The authors’ experience in Manchester is discussed and details of an information leaflet on the subject of temporal bone donation are given. It is concluded that, with knowledge of the existing guidelines and good communication with other hospital colleagues, as well as families of the deceased, it is still possible legally to obtain temporal bones for dissection.

Type
Review Article
Copyright
Royal Society of Medicine Press Limited 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)