Potential Donor Families' Experiences of Organ and Tissue Donation–related Communication, Processes and Outcomes

Trata-se de uma pesquisa documental, de abordagem qualitativa e quantitativa. Ela objetivou conhecer os motivos que levam o familiar a não autorizar a doação de órgãos. Esses registros foram feitos por uma equipe da Comissão Intra-Hospitalar de Doação de Órgãos e Tecidos para Transplantes de um hospital do sul de Santa Catarina. A coleta de dados foi realizada mediante um formulário com questões abertas e fechadas e registradas no próprio instrumento. Os sujeitos deste estudo foram os não doadores registrados nos formulários de notificação de potencial doador com coração parado e de morte encefálica, que fazem parte dos registros desta comissão. Os formulários analisados compreendem os anos de janeiro de 2011 até abril de 2013. De acordo com os registros da Comissão, a recusa familiar atingiu 135 casos, além de 21 casos específicos de que o paciente em vida não desejava ser doador. Portanto, a notificação incompleta impediu a classificação da recusa familiar neste estudo. Conhecer os fatores que dificultam a doação de órgãos poderá contribuir na dinâmica da equipe, uma vez que esta poderá atuar de maneira mais efetiva diante das negativas, elevando, desta forma, os índices de transplantes e melhorando a qua-lidade de vida dos indivíduos que estão à espera de um doador.Palavras-chave: Transplante de tecido. Transplante de órgãos. Triagem de doadores. Doadores não re-lacionados. ORGAN AND TISSUE DONATION FOR TRANSPLANTATION:reasons for non-authorizationAbstract: This is a documentary research, of a qualitative and quantitative approach. It aimed to identifythe reasons that lead family members not to allow organ donation. These records were made by an Intra-Hospital Commission on Organ and Tissue Donation for Transplantation team of a hospital in the south of Santa Catarina. The data collection was conducted using a form with open and closed questions and registered on the instrument itself. The subjects of this study were the non-donors registered in the notification forms of potential donor with cardiac arrest and brain death, which are part of the records of this committee. The forms analysed comprise the years from January 2011 to April 2013. According to the records of the Commission, refusal family reached 135 cases, and 21 specific cases that the patient in life didn’t want to be a donor. Therefore, underreporting prevented the classification of family refusal in this study. Knowing the factors that hinder organ donation can contribute to team dynamics, since it can act more effectively in the face of negatives, increasing, thus, the rates of transplantation and improving the quality of life of individuals who are waiting for a donor.Keywords: Tissue transplantation. Organ transplantation. Donor selection. Unrelated donors. DONACIÓN DE ÓRGANOS Y TEJIDOS PARA TRANSPLANTES:motivos de no autorizacionesResumen: Tratase de una investigación documental, de abordaje cualitativo y cuantitativo. Esta tiene como objetivo conocer los motivos que llevan al familiar a no autorizar la donación de órganos. Estos registrosfueron hechos por un equipo de la Comisión Intrahospitalaria de Donaciones de Órganos y Tejidos para Trasplantes de un hospital del sur de Santa Catarina. La colecta de datos fue realizada mediante preguntasabiertas, cerradas y registradas en el propio instrumento. Los sujetos de este estudio fueron los no donantes registrados en los formularios de notificación de donante potencial con corazón parado y de muerte encefálica, que hacen parte de los registros de esta comisión. Los formularios analizados comprendenlos años de enero de 2011 hasta abril de 2013. De acuerdo con los registros de la Comisión, la negativa familiar alcanzó el número de 135 casos, además de 21 casos específicos en los que el paciente en vida no deseaba ser donante. Por lo tanto, la notificación incompleta impidió la clasificación de la negativa familiar en este estudio. Conocer los factores que dificultan la donación de órganos podrá contribuir en la dinámica del equipo, una vez que esta podrá actuar de manera más efectiva delante de las negativas, elevando, de esta forma, los índices de trasplantes y mejorando la calidad de vida de los individuos que están a la espera de un donante.Palabras clave: Trasplante Transplante de tejidos. Trasplante Transplante de órganos. Selección de donante. Donante no emparentado93

Download Full-text

Resource barriers to the facilitation of organ and tissue donation reported by Australian emergency clinicians

Australian Health Review ◽

10.1071/ah11121 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 37 (1) ◽

pp. 60 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Claudia H. Marck ◽

George A. Jelinek ◽

Sandra L. Neate ◽

Bernadine M. Dwyer ◽

Bernadette B. Hickey ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Emergency Department ◽

Online Survey ◽

Tissue Donation ◽

Donor Pool ◽

Potential Donor ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Work Related ◽

Organ And Tissue Donation ◽

Ed Overcrowding ◽

Related Stress

Objective. To explore emergency department clinicians’ perceived resource barriers to facilitating organ and tissue donation (OTD). Methods. A cross-sectional national online survey of Australian emergency department (ED) clinicians. Results. ED clinicians reported a range of resource barriers that hinder the facilitation of OTD, most notably a lack of time to discuss OTD with a patient’s family (74.6%). Those reporting more resource barriers had been less involved in OTD-related tasks. For example, those reporting a lack of time to assess a patient’s suitability to be a potential donor had less experience with OTD-related tasks in the last calendar year than did those who reported that they often or always have enough time for this (P < 0.01). In addition, ED clinicians working in DonateLife network hospitals were more involved in OTD-related tasks (P < 0.01) and reported fewer resource shortages in the ED and the hospital overall. Conclusions. Resource shortages hinder the facilitation of OTD in the ED and are related to decreased involvement in OTD-related tasks. In addition, ED clinicians working in DonateLife hospitals are more involved in OTD-related tasks and report fewer resource shortages overall. Addressing resource shortages and extending the DonateLife network could benefit OTD rates initiated from the ED. What is known about the topic? Increasing the rate of organ and tissue donation (OTD) has become progressively more urgent as waiting lists for organs and tissues are growing globally. Recently a missed potential donor pool was recognised in emergency departments (EDs) and the Organ and Tissue Authority implemented a ‘clinical trigger’ tool to aid with the identification of potential donors in EDs. However, many Australian studies have reported worsening ED overcrowding and resource shortages in recent years with an adverse effect on patient care and satisfaction as well as on ED clinicians’ work-related stress and satisfaction. International literature has identified that certain resource barriers hinder the facilitation of organ and tissue in EDs. However, there is currently no literature available on how resource barriers in Australian EDs affect the facilitation of OTD. What does this paper add? Our study shows that Australian ED clinicians perceive a range of resource barriers that hinder the facilitation of OTD, most notably a lack of time to discuss OTD with a patient’s family or to identify potential donors. We also found that those reporting more resource barriers had been less involved in OTD-related tasks in the last calendar year. In addition, those that work in hospitals that are part of the DonateLife network, and thus have dedicated staff available for OTD-related tasks, were more involved in OTD-related tasks and reported fewer resource shortages in the ED and the hospital overall. What are the implications for practitioners? To maximize the number of potential donors recognised and referred from the ED, it may be important to decrease the resource barriers identified in this study. Notably, the presence of specialist OTD staff, a function of being part of a DonateLife network hospital, may result in a decreased perception of resource barriers in the ED and more engagement with OTD-related tasks by ED clinicians.

Download Full-text

THE REASONS GIVEN TO NSW AND ACT ORGAN DONOR COORDINATORS BY POTENTIAL DONOR FAMILIES FOR THEIR DECISION REGARDING ORGAN AND TISSUE DONATION

Transplantation Journal ◽

10.1097/01.tp.0000331014.76169.f8 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 86 (Supplement) ◽

pp. 604-605

Author(s):

J Treloggen ◽

G Ross ◽

E Phillips ◽

A Barnwell

Keyword(s):

Organ Donor ◽

Tissue Donation ◽

Potential Donor ◽

Organ And Tissue Donation

Download Full-text

Judgments of Moral Responsibility in Tissue Donation Cases

10.31234/osf.io/276ng ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

James R. Beebe

Keyword(s):

Moral Responsibility ◽

Significant Role ◽

Primary Factor ◽

Tissue Donation ◽

Potential Donor ◽

Sperm Donor ◽

Perceived Burden ◽

Related Individuals ◽

Unique Ability

If a person requires a tissue donation in order to survive, many philosophers argue that whatever moral responsibility a biological relative may have to donate to the person in need will be grounded at least partially, if not entirely, in the biological relations the potential donor bears to the recipient. Such views tend to ignore the role played by a potential donor’s unique ability to help the person in need and the perceived burden of the donation type in underwriting such judgments. If, for example, a sperm donor is judged to have a significant moral responsibility to donate tissue to a child conceived with his sperm, we argue that such judgments will largely be grounded in the presumed unique ability of the sperm donor to help the child due to the compatibility of his tissues with those of the recipient. In this paper, we report the results of two main studies and three supplementary studies designed to investigate the comparative roles that biological relatedness, unique ability to help, and donation burden play in generating judgments of moral responsibility in tissue donation cases. We found that the primary factor driving individuals’ judgments about the moral responsibility of a potential donor to donate tissue to someone in need was the degree to which a donor was in a unique ability to help. We observed no significant role for biological relatedness as such. Biologically related individuals were deemed to have a significant moral responsibility to donate tissue only when they are one of a small number of people who have a relatively unique capacity to help. We also found that people are less inclined to think individuals have a moral responsibility to donate tissue when the donation is more costly to make. We bring these results into dialogue with contemporary disputes concerning the ethics of tissue donation.

Download Full-text

Judgments of moral responsibility in tissue donation cases

10.31234/osf.io/rvsnc ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

James R. Beebe

Keyword(s):

Moral Responsibility ◽

Tissue Donation ◽

Potential Donor ◽

Sperm Donor ◽

Biological Relationship ◽

Related Individuals ◽

Unique Ability

If a person requires an organ or tissue donation to survive, many philosophers argue that whatever moral responsibility a biological relative may have to donate to the person in need will be grounded at least partially, if not entirely, in biological relations the potential donor bears to the recipient. We contend that such views ignore the role that a potential donor’s unique ability to help the person in need plays in underwriting such judgments. If, for example, a sperm donor is judged to have a significant moral responsibility to donate tissue to a child conceived with his sperm, we think this will not be due to the fact that the donor stands in a close biological relationship to the recipient. Rather, we think such judgments will largely be grounded in the presumed unique ability of the sperm donor to help the child due to the compatibility of his tissues and organs with those of the recipient. In this paper, we report the results of two studies designed to investigate the comparative roles that biological relatedness and unique ability play in generating judgments of moral responsibility in tissue donation cases. We found that biologically related individuals are deemed to have a significant moral responsibility to donate tissue only when they are one of a small number of people who have the capacity to help.

Download Full-text

Online Role-Play Tool Increases Donation Professionals’ Skill and Confidence Level in Leading Family Conversations for Organ and Tissue Donation Authorization

Transplantation Journal ◽

10.1097/01.tp.0000524995.23421.61 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 101 ◽

pp. S17

Author(s):

Theresa Daly ◽

Robert Norden ◽

Elizabeth K. Spencer ◽

Patricia A. Mulvania ◽

Judy Ferrarie ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Confidence Level ◽

Role Play ◽

Tissue Donation ◽

Organ And Tissue Donation

Download Full-text

Increasing Consent and Assent Rate for Organ and Tissue Donation: Communication About Donation–Telephone Advice by Psychologist

Transplantation Proceedings ◽

10.1016/j.transproceed.2018.06.048 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 50 (10) ◽

pp. 3017-3024 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

S.Y. Ismail ◽

E. Kums ◽

S.K. Mahmood ◽

A.J. Hoitsma ◽

N.E. Jansen

Keyword(s):

Tissue Donation ◽

Organ And Tissue Donation ◽

Telephone Advice

Download Full-text

Increasing Referrals and Donations Using the Transplant Center Development Model

Journal of Transplant Coordination ◽

10.1177/090591999600600109 ◽

1996 ◽

Vol 6 (1) ◽

pp. 32-36 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Mark T Gravel ◽

Penelope Szeman

Keyword(s):

Organ Donation ◽

Organ Procurement ◽

Medical Center ◽

Development Model ◽

Tissue Donation ◽

Staff Education ◽

Organ Procurement Organization ◽

Organ And Tissue Donation ◽

Transplant Center ◽

Donation Process

Although transplantation centers directly benefit from organ and tissue donation, they continue to yield low organ and tissue referral and donation rates. Our medical center and organ procurement organization developed a model to increase referral and donation rates. This model, called the Transplant Center Development Model, facilitates the donation process, specializes staff education, and promotes administrative involvement. After it was was implemented at our medical center in 1991, the referral and donation rates from 1988 to 1990 were compared with those from 1991 to 1993. The results showed that after implementation of the model, the organ referral mean increased 47%; the organ donation mean, 50%; and the tissue donation mean, 117%. These findings suggest that this model may be a valuable tool in transplant center development.

Download Full-text