Literature DB >> 11168314

The process of organ donation and its effect on consent.

L A Siminoff1, R M Arnold, J Hewlett.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To identify those factors that enhance or inhibit organ donation in order to provide data to help policy makers, hospital administrators and transplantation professionals make informed choices about how to modify the donor system and to structure 'best practice' interventions. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Legislative efforts to increase donation rates have not been successful. An emphasis on process is needed to help explain this.
METHODS: The study was conducted using a stratified random sample of 23 hospitals in the Pittsburgh and Minneapolis/St Paul standard statistical metropolitan areas. Each week, the medical charts of all in-patient and emergency room patient deaths at each hospital were reviewed using a standardized review protocol to determine eligibility for organ, tissue, and cornea donation. A total of 10,681 patient charts were reviewed over a 4-yr period. Eight hundred and twenty-eight cases out of 1,723 eligible cases were selected for inclusion in the study. Data were collected on 827 of these cases. All health care providers (HCPs) who spoke with the family after the patient's death or discussed donation with the family were interviewed.
RESULTS: Of the 10,681 patient charts reviewed, 16.5% were eligible to donate either organs, tissues, or corneas, and 87.0% of donor-eligible patients' families were approached and asked to donate. Consent rates were 23.5% for corneas, 34.5% for tissues, and 46.5% for organ donation. Multiple logistic regression demonstrated that the best and strongest predictor of donation decisions was the family's initial response to the donation request, as reported by the HCP. Three initial response groups are examined and compared. Those families who expressed an initially favorable reaction were most likely to agree to donation. Furthermore, discussion patterns differed by initial reaction group, with families who expressed initial indecision about donation sharing more characteristics with families who were not favorable than those who were favorable. More detailed information was provided to the favorable families, as compared to the other two groups, concerning the effect of donation on funeral arrangements and costs. Families who were favorable were also more likely to meet with an organ procurement organization representative than were other families. The strongest predictor of a family's unfavorable response to a donation request was the belief that the patient would have been against donation. A number of other variables, including HCP attitudes, also had an impact on the family's decision to donate.
CONCLUSIONS: A number of discussion and HCP characteristics are associated with a family's willingness to consent to organ donation. Further study is needed to determine if interventions based on the characteristics identified in this study will increase consent to donation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11168314     DOI: 10.1034/j.1399-0012.2001.150107.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Transplant        ISSN: 0902-0063            Impact factor:   2.863


  19 in total

1.  An exploratory study of relational, persuasive, and nonverbal communication in requests for tissue donation.

Authors:  Laura A Siminoff; Heather M Traino; Nahida H Gordon
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2011-05-24

2.  [Evaluation of the need for communication training of ophthalmologists for gaining telephone consent for cornea donation].

Authors:  S Stiel; S Salla; A Steinfeld; L Radbruch; P Walter; M Hermel
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 1.059

3.  Understanding selective refusal of eye donation. Identity, beauty, and interpersonal relationships.

Authors:  Mitchell Lawlor; Ian Kerridge
Journal:  J Bioeth Inq       Date:  2013-12-21       Impact factor: 1.352

4.  A Comparison of the Request Process and Outcomes in Adult and Pediatric Organ Donation.

Authors:  Laura A Siminoff; Anthony J Molisani; Heather M Traino
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2015-06-01       Impact factor: 7.124

5.  Request for organ donation without donor registration: a qualitative study of the perspectives of bereaved relatives.

Authors:  Jack de Groot; Maria van Hoek; Cornelia Hoedemaekers; Andries Hoitsma; Hans Schilderman; Wim Smeets; Myrra Vernooij-Dassen; Evert van Leeuwen
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2016-07-11       Impact factor: 2.652

6.  Consent for corneal donation: the effect of age of the deceased, registered intent and which family member is asked about donation.

Authors:  M Lawlor; T Dobbins; K-A Thomas; F Billson
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-08-09       Impact factor: 4.638

7.  Attitudes toward postmortem cornea donation in Germany: a multicenter survey.

Authors:  C E Uhlig; R Koch; J Promesberger; G Hirschfeld; H Schmidt; B Seitz; T Reinhard; D Böhringer
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-09-20       Impact factor: 3.117

8.  Consent to a Postmortem Tissue Procurement Study: Distinguishing Family Decision Makers' Knowledge of the Genotype-Tissue Expression Project.

Authors:  Laura A Siminoff; Maureen Wilson-Genderson; Heather M Gardiner; Maghboeba Mosavel; Kathryn Laura Barker
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2018-05-10       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 9.  A narrative review of family members' experience of organ donation request after brain death in the critical care setting.

Authors:  Nancy Kentish-Barnes; L A Siminoff; W Walker; M Urbanski; J Charpentier; M Thuong; A Sarti; S D Shemie; E Azoulay
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2019-03-06       Impact factor: 17.440

10.  A Comparison of Request Process and Outcomes in Donation After Cardiac Death and Donation After Brain Death: Results From a National Study.

Authors:  L A Siminoff; G P Alolod; M Wilson-Genderson; E Y N Yuen; H M Traino
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2016-11-21       Impact factor: 8.086

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.