CONTEXT: Although recent studies have demonstrated that tissue requesters' behavior during conversations about tissue donation affects consent rates, the link between requesters' behavior and consent rates remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether positive/collaborative requester behaviors elicit complementary behaviors from next of kin who were initially undecided about their willingness to donate their deceased family member's tissues. DESIGN: -Audio recordings of requests were coded to assess for interpersonal behavior of each interactant. SETTING: Audio recordings were gathered from a national sample of tissue banks. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and two requester-next-of-kin dyads, consisting of 102 relatives and 53 requesters. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Tissue requester and next-of-kin affiliation and interpersonal control were assessed. Tissue requesters' persuasion, confirmation (eg, approval, empathy, reassurance) and disapproval, as well as next-of-kin approval and disapproval, were examined. RESULTS: Tissue requesters and next of kin tended to match one another on affiliation and complement one another on interpersonal control. "Key topics," which may affect the next of kin's decision, are discussed in only about one-third of requests. Next of kin were less affiliative and more disapproving when requesters were also more disapproving. Interpersonal behavior of the tissue requester, such as affiliation, statements of disapproval, and persuasion, as well as discussion of key topics, was a significant predictor of the interpersonal behavior of the next of kin. CONCLUSIONS: Positive requester behaviors elicited a positive response from undecided next of kin. Because many next of kin have limited knowledge about tissue donation before the request, the communication process may affect the next of kin's perceptions of donation and thus affect the likelihood of consent. Findings could potentially inform communication skills training for tissue requesters; future research could examine effects of such training on consent rates.
CONTEXT: Although recent studies have demonstrated that tissue requesters' behavior during conversations about tissue donation affects consent rates, the link between requesters' behavior and consent rates remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether positive/collaborative requester behaviors elicit complementary behaviors from next of kin who were initially undecided about their willingness to donate their deceased family member's tissues. DESIGN: -Audio recordings of requests were coded to assess for interpersonal behavior of each interactant. SETTING: Audio recordings were gathered from a national sample of tissue banks. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and two requester-next-of-kin dyads, consisting of 102 relatives and 53 requesters. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Tissue requester and next-of-kin affiliation and interpersonal control were assessed. Tissue requesters' persuasion, confirmation (eg, approval, empathy, reassurance) and disapproval, as well as next-of-kin approval and disapproval, were examined. RESULTS: Tissue requesters and next of kin tended to match one another on affiliation and complement one another on interpersonal control. "Key topics," which may affect the next of kin's decision, are discussed in only about one-third of requests. Next of kin were less affiliative and more disapproving when requesters were also more disapproving. Interpersonal behavior of the tissue requester, such as affiliation, statements of disapproval, and persuasion, as well as discussion of key topics, was a significant predictor of the interpersonal behavior of the next of kin. CONCLUSIONS: Positive requester behaviors elicited a positive response from undecided next of kin. Because many next of kin have limited knowledge about tissue donation before the request, the communication process may affect the next of kin's perceptions of donation and thus affect the likelihood of consent. Findings could potentially inform communication skills training for tissue requesters; future research could examine effects of such training on consent rates.
Authors: Laura A Siminoff; Heather M Marshall; Levent Dumenci; Gordon Bowen; Aruna Swaminathan; Nahida Gordon Journal: Prog Transplant Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 1.065