The greatest impediment to organ donation is refusal of family consent. This study examined the impact of 3 modifiable elements of the donation request on family consent rates: (1) decoupling (ie, the family understands and accepts brain death before discussion of organ donation is begun); (2) the procurement coordinator participates in the request for consent; and (3) donation is requested in a quiet, private place. Data on the request process were collected prospectively for 707 medically suitable potential donors who had been referred to 3 organ procurement organizations. The average rate of consent for donation was 62.2%. Higher consent rates were independently associated with the 3 characteristics studied. These components were summarized in the Request Process Scale. Multivariate regression analyses indicated that consent rates can be as high as 74% when all 3 process elements are present. Hospitals and organ procurement organizations should incorporate these elements into their standard of practice when requesting organ donation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
United Network for Organ Sharing.Number of patients on the national transplant waiting list 10/31/96. UNOS Bull. November 1996;1(7):4.
2.
1995 Annual Report of the US Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network-Transplant Data: 1988–1994.UNOS, Richmond, Va and the Division of Transplantation, Bureau of Health Resources Development, Health Resources and Services Administration, US Department of Health and Human Services; Bethesda, Md.
3.
The Gallup Organization, Inc.The American Public's Attitudes Towards Organ Donation and Transplantation. Conducted for the Partnership for Organ Donation, Boston Mass; February, 1993.
4.
EvansRW. The actual and potential supply of organ donors in the United States. In: TerasakiPI, ed. Clinical Transplants, 1990.Los Angeles, Calif: UCLA Tissue Typing Laboratory; 1990: Chap 34.
5.
EvansRWOriansCEAscherNL. The potential supply of organ donors: An assessment of the efficiency of organ procurement efforts in the United States. JAMA.1992;267:239–246.
6.
GarrisonRNBentleyFRRaqueGH. There is an answer to the shortage of organ donors. Surg Gynecol Obstet.1991;173:391–396.
7.
NathanHMJarrellBEBroznikB. Estimation and characterization of the potential renal organ donor pool in Pennsylvania: Report of the Pennsylvania Statewide Donor Study. Transplantation.1991;51:142–149.
8.
GortmakerSLBeasleyCLGrenvikA. Organ donor potential and performance: Size and nature of the organ donor shortfall. Crit Care Med.1996;24(3):432–439.
9.
BattenHLProttasJM. Kind strangers: The families of organ donors. Health Aff. Summer 1987:35–47.
10.
MortonJBLeonardDRA. Cadaver nephrectomy: An operation on the donor's family. BMJ.1979;1:239–241.
11.
BartucciMR. Organ Donation: A study of the donor family perspective. J Neurosci Nurs.1987;119:305–309.
12.
DouglassGEDalyM. Donor families' experience of organ donation. Anaesth Intensive Care.1995;23:96–98.
13.
SiminoffLAArnoldRMCaplanALVirnigBASeltzerDL. Public policy governing organ and tissue procurement in the United States. Ann Intern Med.1995;123:10–17.
14.
NorrisMKG. Required request: Why it has not significantly improved the donor shortage. Heart Lung.1990;19:685–686.
15.
ProttasJ. Shifting responsibilities in organ procurement: A plan for routine referral. JAMA.1988;260:832–833.
16.
Amendments to the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act.Harrisburg, Pa: The General Assembly of Pennsylvania. November 22, 1994. State Senate Bill No. 1662, Section 8, Chapter 86.
17.
BeasleyCBCaposselaCLBrighamLEGundersonS.WeberPGortmakerSL. The impact of a comprehensive, hospital-focused intervention to increase organ donation. J Transplant Coordination.1997;7(1):6–13.
18.
OsterweisMSolomonFGreenM. Bereavement: Reactions, Consequences and Care.Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1984:224.
19.
LindemannE. Beyond Grief: Studies in Crisis Intervention.New York, NY; J Aronson; 1979.
20.
BrownJTStroudemireGA. Normal and pathological grief. JAMA.1983;250:378–382.
21.
RappaportNJellinekMS. The grieving parent. In: HerzogDBJellinekMS, eds. Massachusetts General Hospital: Psychiatric Aspects of General Hospital Pediatrics.Chicago, Ill: Year Book Medical Publishers; 1990: Chap 39:277–285.
22.
MilesMSPerryK. Parental responses to sudden accidental death of a child. Critical Care Q.1985;8(1):74.
23.
HickeyM. What are the needs of families of critically ill patients? A review of the literature since 1979. Heart Lung.1990;19:401–415.
24.
TodresD. Communication between physician, patient, and family in the pediatric intensive care unit. Crit Care Med.1993;21(suppl):S383–S385.
25.
KingSLGregorFM. Stress and coping in families of critically ill. Crit Care Nurs.1981;5:48–51.
26.
PrichardJGBaleRMAbou-SamraMDialLKHortonLS. Severe cerebral injury and brain death: Management of the patient's family. J Fam Pract.1985;5:341–348.
27.
YoungnerSJLandefeldSCoultonCJJuknialisBWLearyM. ‘Brain death’ and organ retrieval: A cross sectional survey of knowledge and concepts among health professionals. JAMA.1989;261:2205–2210.
28.
SavariaDRovelliMASchweizerRT. Donor family surveys provide useful information for organ procurement. Transplant Proc.1990;22:316–317.
29.
PinkusRL. Families, brain death and traditional medical excellence. J Neurosurg.1984;60:1192–1194.
30.
ShanteauJHarrisRJVandenBosGR. Psychological and behavioral factors in organ donation. Hosp Community Psychiatry.1992;43:211–212, 219.
31.
GideonMDTaylorPB. Kidney donation: Care of the cadaver donor's family. J Neurosurg Nurs.1981;13:248–251.
32.
PelletierML. The needs of family members of organ and tissue donors. Heart Lung.1993;22:151–157.
33.
LoughnanM. Immediate and ongoing needs of donor families. Transplant Proc.1992;24:2085–2086.
34.
The Partnership for Organ Donation and the Annenberg Washington Program in Communications Policy Studies of Northwestern University. Solving the Organ Donor Shortage By Meeting Family Needs: A Communications Model: Consensus Report. October 30–31, 1990.
35.
PtacekJEberhardtTL. Breaking bad news: A review of the literature. JAMA.1996;276:496–502.
36.
JanisILMannL. Decision Making: A Psychological Analysis of Conflict, Choice and Commitment.New York, NY: Free Press; 1977.
37.
JanisIL. Decision making under stress. In: GoldbergerLBerznitzS. Handbook of Stress: Theoretical and Clinical Aspects.2nd ed.New York, NY: Free Press; 1993.
38.
CutlerJADavidSDKressCJ. Increasing the availability of cadaveric organs for transplantation maximizing the consent rates. Transplantation.1993;56(1):225–228.
39.
KliegerJNelsonKDavisR. Analysis of factors influencing organ donation consent rates. J Transplant Coordination.1994;4:132–134.
40.
Association of Organ Procurement Organizations. Voluntary Fax Survey.1990.
41.
1993 Annual Report of the US Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients and the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network—Transplant Data: 1988–1991UNOS, Richmond, Va: Division of Transplantation, Bureau of Health Resources Development, Health Resources and Services Administration, US Department of Health and Human Services; Bethesda, Md.
42.
FleissJL. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions.2nd ed.New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons; 1981.
43.
SAS Institute Inc.SAS/STAT Guide for Personal Computers.6th ed.Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc; 1987.
44.
GoldbergerArthur. Econometric Theory.New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons; 1964.
45.
ClearyPDAngelR. The analysis of relationships involving dichotomous dependent variables. J Health Soc Behav.1984;25:334–338.
46.
WacholderSBenichouJHeninemanEFHartgePHooverRN. Attributable risk: Advantages of a broad definition of exposure. Am J Epidemiol.1994;140:303–309.
47.
US Bureau of the Census.Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1994.114th ed.Washington, DC; 1994:20–21.
48.
1997 Annual Report of the US Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network-Transplant Data: 1988–1994.UNOS, Richmond, Va and the Division of Transplantation, Bureau of Health Resources Development, Health Resources and Services Administration, US Department of Health and Human Services; Bethesda, Md.
49.
MatesanzR. Organ procurement in Spain: The importance of a transplant coordinating network. Transplant Proc.1993;25:3132–3135.
50.
MatesanzRNavidadLopez A. The transplant coordinator in Spain. In: MatesanzRMirandaB, eds. Organ Donation for Transplantation: The Spanish Model.Madrid, Spain: Grupo Aula Medica; 1996: Chap 5.
51.
DeJongWDrachmanJGortmakerSLBeasleyCEvaniskoMJ. Options for increasing organ donation: The potential role of financial incentives, standardized hospital procedures, and public education to promote family discussion. Milbank Q.1995;73:463–479.
