UNLABELLED: One reason for the loss of donors is the impossibility to contact family members for an interview. We sought to determine the effectiveness [(donors/total deaths) x 100] and efficiency [(donors/potential donors) x 100] of the telephone interview to obtain tissue for transplant purposes. METHODS: A prospective, comparative cross-sectional study was performed on the personal and telephone interviews with family members during the tissue donation application process from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2005. RESULTS: Of the 3625 deaths hospital registered, we obtained 770 potential donors (21%). On 65% of occasions (503/770), the interview was held personally; on 29% (222/770), it had to be held over the telephone; and on 6% (45/770), family members could not be located. The refusals by family members over the telephone represented 48% (106/222), and the refusals during personal interviews were 37% (188/503). A positive family answer was obtained over the telephone on 116/431 donations (27%), and in the physical presence of the coordinator for 315/431 donors (73%). The donations obtained over the telephone were only for corneas in 83% (96/116) of cases, and for multiple tissues in 17% (20/116). The donor-generation effectiveness reached 9% in personal interviews and 12% if the telephone interviews were included. The donor generation efficiency reached 43% for personal interviews and 59% when telephone interviews were included. The use of the telephone enabled a 16% increase in tissue generation with a year-on-year increase of 4%. CONCLUSIONS: The telephone has shown itself to be a useful tool for obtaining tissues postmortem.
UNLABELLED: One reason for the loss of donors is the impossibility to contact family members for an interview. We sought to determine the effectiveness [(donors/total deaths) x 100] and efficiency [(donors/potential donors) x 100] of the telephone interview to obtain tissue for transplant purposes. METHODS: A prospective, comparative cross-sectional study was performed on the personal and telephone interviews with family members during the tissue donation application process from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2005. RESULTS: Of the 3625 deaths hospital registered, we obtained 770 potential donors (21%). On 65% of occasions (503/770), the interview was held personally; on 29% (222/770), it had to be held over the telephone; and on 6% (45/770), family members could not be located. The refusals by family members over the telephone represented 48% (106/222), and the refusals during personal interviews were 37% (188/503). A positive family answer was obtained over the telephone on 116/431 donations (27%), and in the physical presence of the coordinator for 315/431 donors (73%). The donations obtained over the telephone were only for corneas in 83% (96/116) of cases, and for multiple tissues in 17% (20/116). The donor-generation effectiveness reached 9% in personal interviews and 12% if the telephone interviews were included. The donor generation efficiency reached 43% for personal interviews and 59% when telephone interviews were included. The use of the telephone enabled a 16% increase in tissue generation with a year-on-year increase of 4%. CONCLUSIONS: The telephone has shown itself to be a useful tool for obtaining tissues postmortem.
Authors: Maureen Wilson-Genderson; K Laura Barker; Heather M Gardiner; Maghboeba Mosavel; Jeffrey Thomas; Laura A Siminoff Journal: Hum Genet Date: 2017-12-04 Impact factor: 4.132