PURPOSE: To evaluate the responses to requests for eye donation from relatives of postmortem cases in a tertiary care hospital in India. METHODS: In a prospective study, the cases brought for postmortem to the Forensic Medicine Department were screened as potential donors by our team. The next of kin of potential donors were approached and counseled in a systematic manner following a standard interview pattern. Responses were noted in a predesigned performa. The religion, level of literacy, socioeconomic status, relationship with the deceased, prior knowledge of eye donation, willingness for eye donation, and reasons for not donating eyes of the deceased were recorded. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-nine potential donors were identified from a total of 721 postmortem cases. There were 119 (74.8%) men and 40 (25.2%) women. None of the deceased had previously pledged their eyes for eye donation. Eighty-eight (55.4%) next of kin were already aware of the concept of eye donation, but 71 (44.7%) families had not heard of it before. Willingness for eye donation was seen in 66 (41.5%), whereas 93 (58.5%) families refused eye donation. Of those already aware of eye donation, 39 (44.3%) gave consent for donation. Prior knowledge of eye donation had no influence on willingness for eye donation (P = 0.424). Similarly, literacy (P = 0.338) and socioeconomic status as estimated by a composite socioeconomic scale based on literacy and family income did not have any influence on willingness for eye donation (P = 0.338). Major reasons for not donating eyes included refusal to discuss the issue and dissuasion by distant relatives, legal problems, and religious beliefs. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, literacy, socioeconomic status, and prior knowledge of eye donation of next kin had no correlation with donor corneal tissue procurement. Active counseling by a motivated team can be effective even in families with no prior knowledge and low socioeconomic status.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the responses to requests for eye donation from relatives of postmortem cases in a tertiary care hospital in India. METHODS: In a prospective study, the cases brought for postmortem to the Forensic Medicine Department were screened as potential donors by our team. The next of kin of potential donors were approached and counseled in a systematic manner following a standard interview pattern. Responses were noted in a predesigned performa. The religion, level of literacy, socioeconomic status, relationship with the deceased, prior knowledge of eye donation, willingness for eye donation, and reasons for not donating eyes of the deceased were recorded. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-nine potential donors were identified from a total of 721 postmortem cases. There were 119 (74.8%) men and 40 (25.2%) women. None of the deceased had previously pledged their eyes for eye donation. Eighty-eight (55.4%) next of kin were already aware of the concept of eye donation, but 71 (44.7%) families had not heard of it before. Willingness for eye donation was seen in 66 (41.5%), whereas 93 (58.5%) families refused eye donation. Of those already aware of eye donation, 39 (44.3%) gave consent for donation. Prior knowledge of eye donation had no influence on willingness for eye donation (P = 0.424). Similarly, literacy (P = 0.338) and socioeconomic status as estimated by a composite socioeconomic scale based on literacy and family income did not have any influence on willingness for eye donation (P = 0.338). Major reasons for not donating eyes included refusal to discuss the issue and dissuasion by distant relatives, legal problems, and religious beliefs. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, literacy, socioeconomic status, and prior knowledge of eye donation of next kin had no correlation with donor corneal tissue procurement. Active counseling by a motivated team can be effective even in families with no prior knowledge and low socioeconomic status.