RESUMEN

AIM: To identify the barriers and facilitators of deceased organ donation among the Muslim community living globally. METHOD: A systematic search was undertaken in databases such as CINAHL, Medline with full text, Global Health and PsycINFO via EBSCO; Scopus via Elsevier; Web of Science via Clarivate; and PubMed via US National Library of Medicine National Institute of Health were used to retrieve the studies on the 31st of December 2023. Apart from these databases two other journals, the Saudi Journal of Kidney Diseases and Transplantation, and the Journal of Experimental and Clinical Transplantation were also used to search for relevant studies. Quantitative and qualitative studies that addressed the aim of the present review published from the 30th of April 2008 were included. RESULTS: Of the 10,474 studies, 95 studies were included in the review. The following five themes were generated based on narrative synthesis: 1) knowledge of organ donation, 2) willingness to donate, 3) community influence, 4) bodily influence, and 5) religious influence. While individuals view organ donation as a noble act, societal influences significantly impact their decision to register. Concerns include religious permissibility, potential misuse for commercial purposes, and the dignity and respect given to the deceased donor's body. CONCLUSIONS: This review finds deceased organ donation decisions in this population are collective, influenced by religious views, and hindered by uncertainty. Interventional studies on strategies to address uncertainty could help us identify best practices for this population to improve deceased organ donation. Rather than an individual approach among this population, a whole-system approach, tailored-made evidence-guided community engagement could improve donation rates.

RESUMEN

Steatotic liver grafts are associated with increased post-transplant complications and graft failure. The field of transplantation faces a challenge in the absence of a reliable pre-donation protocol for quantitatively assessing steatosis in cadaveric liver grafts. Current pre-donation evaluation protocols often involve non-contrast computed tomography (CT) scans of the chest and/or abdomen as an initial step in organ donation assessment. These routine scans have the potential to identify and quantify hepatic fat content when more than 20% of the liver parenchyma is affected. By incorporating both abdominal and thoracic CT scans during the donor workup, an assessment of the quality of the liver and spleen can be achieved. Our study is based on the hypothesis that a precise pre-donation evaluation utilizing Hounsfield units (HU) derived from CT images of the liver and spleen can provide transplant programs with crucial data regarding the extent of steatosis. This approach is envisioned as a significant advancement that could potentially eliminate the need for preoperative liver biopsies by offering essential information to streamline the evaluation process.

RESUMEN

Intensive Care to facilitate Organ Donation (ICOD) consists of the initiation or continuation of intensive care measures in patients with a devastating brain injury (DBI) in whom curative treatment is deemed futile and death by neurological criteria (DNC) is foreseen, to incorporate organ donation into their end-of-life plans. In this study we evaluate the outcomes of patients subject to ICOD and identify radiological and clinical factors associated with progression to DNC. In this first prospective multicenter study we tested by multivariate regression the association of clinical and radiological severity features with progression to DNC. Of the 194 patients, 144 (74.2%) patients fulfilled DNC after a median of 25 h (95% IQR: 17-44) from ICOD onset. Two patients (1%) shifted from ICOD to curative treatment, both were alive at discharge. Factors associated with progression to DNC included: age below 70 years, clinical score consistent with severe brain injury, instability, intracranial hemorrhage, midline shift ≥5 mm and certain types of brain herniation. Overall 151 (77.8%) patients progressed to organ donation. Based on these results, we conclude that ICOD is a beneficial and efficient practice that can contribute to the pool of deceased donors.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: We sought to collate and summarize existing literature on donor audits (DA) and how they have been used to guide deceased organ donation and transplantation system performance and quality assurance. SOURCE: We searched MEDLINE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Web of Science supplemented by Google to identify grey literature on 6 May 2022, to locate studies in English, French, and Spanish. The data were screened, extracted, and analyzed independently by two reviewers. We grouped the results into five categories: 1) motivation for DA, 2) DA methodology, 3) potential and actual donors, 4) missed donation opportunities, and 5) quality improvement. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The search yielded 2,416 unique publications and 52 were included in this review. Most studies were from the UK (n = 13) and published between 2001 and 2006 (n = 15). The methodologies described for DA were diverse. Our findings showed that the primary motivation for conducting DA was to identify potential donors and the number of potential deceased organ donors is significantly higher than the number of actual donors. Among retrieved studies, the proportion of donation opportunities following neurologic determination of death was 95/222 (43%) compared with 25/181 (14%) for donation after cardiocirculatory death (DCD), suggesting that the missed donation rate is higher for DCD. CONCLUSION: Donor audits help identify missed donation opportunities along the deceased donation pathway and can help support the evaluation of quality improvement initiatives.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Nous avons cherché à colliger et résumer la documentation existante sur les vérifications des donneuses et donneurs (VD) et la façon dont elles ont été utilisées pour guider la performance et l'assurance de la qualité des systèmes de don et de transplantation d'organes de personnes décédées. SOURCES: Le 6 mai 2022, nous avons effectué des recherches dans MEDLINE, CINAHL et Web of Science, complétées par des recherches sur Google afin d'identifier la littérature grise et de localiser les études en anglais, en français et en espagnol. Les données ont été examinées, extraites et analysées de manière indépendants par deux personnes. Nous avons regroupé les résultats en cinq catégories : 1) motivation pour la VD, 2) méthodologie de la VD, 3) donneurs et donneuses potentiel·les et réel·les, 4) occasions de dons manquées, et 5) amélioration de la qualité. CONSTATATIONS PRINCIPALES: Notre recherche nous a permis de découvrir 2416 publications uniques et 52 ont été incluses dans cette revue. La plupart des études provenaient du Royaume-Uni (n = 13) et avaient été publiées entre 2001 et 2006 (n = 15). Les méthodologies décrites pour la vérification des donneuses et donneurs étaient diverses. Nos résultats ont montré que la principale motivation pour mener une VD était d'identifier des donneurs et donneuses potentiel·les et que le nombre potentiel de donneuses et donneurs d'organes après le décès était significativement plus élevé que le nombre réel. Parmi les études retenues, la proportion d'occasions de dons après un diagnostic de décès neurologique était de 95/222 (43 %), comparativement à 25/181 (14 %) pour le don après un décès cardiocirculatoire (DDC), ce qui suggère que le taux de dons manqués est plus élevé pour le DDC. CONCLUSION: Les vérifications des donneuses et donneurs aident à identifier les occasions de dons manquées le long du parcours de don après un décès et peuvent aider à soutenir l'évaluation des initiatives d'amélioration de la qualité.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Deceased donor audits (DAs) allow organ donation and transplantation systems to measure and analyze missed donation opportunities (MDOs). Missed donation opportunities can harm both patients/families denied the opportunity to donate and patients on transplant waitlists denied access to lifesaving organs. In Canada, there are no national standards for DAs, data analysis, nor accountability processes surrounding MDOs. Understanding DA current practice in each jurisdicton would facilitate developing a national strategy for DAs. METHOD: All provincial organ donation organizations (ODOs) were invited to participate in an environmental scan (ES) of current DA practices. The two ES phases were an electronic survey followed by semistructured interviews. We collected information about the objectives, frequency, scope, data collection methodology, resources required, definitions/metrics used, and process for reporting outcomes. RESULTS: All eleven ODOs participated in both phases of the ES (July and October 2019). The primary purposes for conducting DAs were to estimate the following: 1) donor potential (5/11, 45%); 2) system performance at the provincial level (3/11, 27%); and 3) system performance at the hospital level (3/11, 27%). Frequency of DAs varied from weekly to annually, depending on the availability of death reports, urban vs rural setting, and staffing. High variability was observed in DA methodology, donor definitions, and metrics across jurisdictions. CONCLUSION: There is significant variability across Canadian ODOs in the methodology, definitions, timeliness, data collection, and reporting of DAs. This underscores the need for a national donor audit strategy to reduce preventable harm from MDOs to patients/families at end of life and those on transplant waitlists.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les vérifications des donneurs et donneuses décédé·es permettent aux systèmes de dons et de transplantations d'organes de mesurer et d'analyser les occasions de dons manquées. Les occasions de don manquées peuvent nuire à la fois aux patient·es et aux familles qui se voient refuser la possibilité de faire un don et à la patientèle inscrite sur les listes d'attente pour une greffe qui se voit refuser l'accès à des organes vitaux. Au Canada, il n'existe pas de normes nationales pour les vérifications de donneurs et donneuses, ni pour l'analyse des données ou les processus de responsabilisation entourant les occasions de dons manquées. L'élaboration d'une stratégie nationale pour les vérifications des donneurs et donneuses serait facilitée par la compréhension des pratiques actuelles de vérification de chaque territoire. MéTHODE: Tous les organismes provinciaux de don d'organes (ODO) ont été invités à participer à une analyse environnementale des pratiques actuelles en matière de vérification des donneurs et donneuses. Les deux phases de l'analyse environnementale consistaient en un sondage électronique suivi d'entrevues semi-structurées. Nous avons recueilli des informations sur les objectifs, la fréquence, la portée, la méthodologie de collecte de données, les ressources requises, les définitions/paramètres utilisés et le processus de communication des résultats. RéSULTATS: Les onze ODO ont participé aux deux phases de l'analyse environnementale (juillet et octobre 2019). Les principaux objectifs des vérifications de donneurs et donneuses étaient d'estimer ce qui suit : 1) le potentiel de donneur ou donneuse (5/11, 45 %); 2) le rendement du système à l'échelle provinciale (3/11, 27 %); et 3) le rendement du système au niveau hospitalier (3/11, 27 %). La fréquence des vérifications variait d'une fois par semaine à une fois par année, selon la disponibilité des déclarations de décès, le milieu urbain vs rural, et la dotation en personnel. Une grande variabilité a été observée dans la méthodologie de vérification, les définitions de donneur/donneuse et les paramètres entre les territoires des ODO. CONCLUSION: Il existe une grande variabilité entre les ODO canadiens en ce qui concerne la méthodologie, les définitions, la rapidité, la collecte de données et la production de rapports sur les vérifications des donneurs et donneuses. Cela souligne la nécessité d'une stratégie nationale de vérification des donneurs et donneuses pour réduire les préjudices évitables causés par les occasions de dons manquées aux patient·es/familles en fin de vie et aux personnes sur les listes d'attente pour une transplantation.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The primary aim of this study was to describe regulations and practices concerning the family approach to discuss donation, specifically after the neurological determination of death, one of the most challenging steps in the donation pathway. A secondary objective was to assess the impact of legislation on consent rates for organ donation. The Council of Europe surveyed 39 member states about national regulations, practices, and consent rates; 34 replied. Opt-out legislation is present in 19, opt-in in 9 and a mixed system in six countries. An opt-out register is kept by 24 countries and an opt-in register by 18 countries, some keeping both. The mean consent rate was 81.2% of all family approaches. Most countries regulate how death using neurological criteria is confirmed (85.3%), while regulation of other aspects of the deceased donation pathway varies: the timing of informing the family about brain death (47.1%) and organ donation (58.8%), the profile of professional who discusses both topics with the family (52.9% and 64.7%, respectively) and the withdrawal of treatment after brain death (47.1%). We also noted a mismatch between what regulations state and what is done in practice in most countries. We suggest possible reasons for this disparity.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

This 2023 Clinical Practice Guideline provides the biomedical definition of death based on permanent cessation of brain function that applies to all persons, as well as recommendations for death determination by circulatory criteria for potential organ donors and death determination by neurologic criteria for all mechanically ventilated patients regardless of organ donation potential. This Guideline is endorsed by the Canadian Critical Care Society, the Canadian Medical Association, the Canadian Association of Critical Care Nurses, Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society, the Canadian Neurological Sciences Federation (representing the Canadian Neurological Society, Canadian Neurosurgical Society, Canadian Society of Clinical Neurophysiologists, Canadian Association of Child Neurology, Canadian Society of Neuroradiology, and Canadian Stroke Consortium), Canadian Blood Services, the Canadian Donation and Transplantation Research Program, the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians, the Nurse Practitioners Association of Canada, and the Canadian Cardiovascular Critical Care Society.

RéSUMé: Ces Lignes directrices de pratique clinique 2023 Lignes directrices de pratique clinique dicale du décès basée sur l'arrêt permanent de la fonction cérébrale qui s'applique à toute personne, ainsi que des recommandations pour la détermination du décès par des critères circulatoires pour des donneurs d'organes potentiels et des recommandations pour la détermination du décès par des critères neurologiques pour tous les patients sous ventilation mécanique, indépendamment de leur potentiel de donneur d'organes. Les présentes Lignes directrices sont approuvées par la Société canadienne de soins intensifs, l'Association médicale canadienne, l'Association canadienne des infirmiers/infirmières en soins intensifs, la Société canadienne des anesthésiologistes, la Fédération des sciences neurologiques du Canada (représentant la Société canadienne de neurologie, la Société canadienne de neurochirurgie, la Société canadienne de neurophysiologie clinique, l'Association canadienne de neurologie pédiatrique, la Société canadienne de neuroradiologie et le Consortium neurovasculaire canadien), la Société canadienne du sang, le Programme de recherche en don et transplantation du Canada, l'Association canadienne des médecins d'urgence, l'Association des infirmières et infirmiers praticiens du Canada, et la Société canadienne de soins intensifs cardiovasculaires (CANCARE) et la Société canadienne de pédiatrie.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Deceased organ donation is predicated on timely identification and referral (IDR) of potential organ donors. Many Canadian provinces have legislated mandatory referral of potential deceased donors. Untimely or missed IDRs are safety events where best or expected practice has not occurred causing preventable harm to patients and denying families the opportunity of donation at end of life (EOL) as well as denying transplant waitlist patients access to lifesaving organs. METHODS: We requested donor definitions and data to calculate IDR, consent, and approach rates from all Canadian organ donation organizations (ODOs) for 2016-2018. We then estimated the number of missed IDR patients who were eligible for approach (safety events) and the associated preventable harm to patients at EOL and on transplant waitlists. RESULTS: Annually, there were 63-76 missed IDR patients eligible for approach (3.6-4.5 per million population [PMP]) from four ODOs-three with mandatory referral legislation. Applying each ODO's approach and consent rates for the corresponding year, there were 37-41 missed donors (2.4 donor PMP) annually. Assuming three transplants per donor, the theoretical number of missed transplants would be 111-123 (6.4-7.3 transplants PMP) annually. CONCLUSIONS: Data from four Canadian ODOs show that missed IDR safety events resulted in important preventable harm measured by a lost opportunity for donation of 2.4 donors PMP annually and 354 potentially missed transplants between 2016 and 2018. Given that 223 patients died on Canada's waitlist in 2018, national donor audits and quality improvement initiatives to optimize IDR are essential to reduce preventable harm to these vulnerable populations.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Le don d'organes provenant de personnes décédées repose sur l'identification et l'aiguillage en temps opportun des donneurs d'organes potentiels. De nombreuses provinces canadiennes ont légiféré sur l'aiguillage obligatoire des donneurs potentiels décédés. Les identifications et aiguillages inopportuns ou manqués constituent des événements liés à la sécurité pour lesquels la meilleure pratique ou la pratique attendue n'a pas eu lieu, causant des préjudices évitables aux patients et privant les familles de la possibilité de faire un don en fin de vie, tout en refusant aux patients inscrits sur une liste d'attente de greffe un accès à des organes vitaux. MéTHODE: Nous avons demandé les définitions et les données sur les donneurs pour calculer les taux d'identification et d'aiguillage, de consentement et d'approche de tous les organismes canadiens de don d'organes (ODO) pour la période de 2016-2018. Nous avons ensuite estimé le nombre de patients n'ayant pas été identifiés et aiguillés mais qui étaient admis à être approchés (événements liés à la sécurité) et les préjudices évitables aux patients en fin de vie et sur les listes d'attente pour une greffe. RéSULTATS: Chaque année, l'identification et l'aiguillage a échoué pour 63 à 76 patients éligibles (3,6 à 4,5 par million d'habitants [PMH]) dans quatre ODO ­ dont trois possédant une législation rendant l'aiguillage obligatoire. En appliquant l'approche et les taux de consentement de chaque ODO pour l'année correspondante, on a constaté qu'il y avait de 37 à 41 donneurs manqués (2,4 donneurs PMH) chaque année. En supposant trois greffes par donneur, le nombre théorique de greffes manquées serait de 111 à 123 (6,4 à 7,3 greffes PMH) par an. CONCLUSION : Les données de quatre ODO canadiens montrent que les événements de sécurité liés à une identification et un aiguillage manqués ont entraîné d'importants préjudices évitables, mesurés par une occasion perdue de donner pour 2,4 donneurs PMH chaque année et 354 greffes potentiellement manquées entre 2016 et 2018. Étant donné que 223 patients sont décédés sur la liste d'attente du Canada en 2018, les vérifications nationales des donneurs et les initiatives d'amélioration de la qualité visant à optimiser l'identification et l'aiguillage sont essentielles pour réduire les préjudices évitables causés à ces populations vulnérables.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The 2022 Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients Consensus Conference "People Driven Transplant Metrics" offered an opportunity for a diverse group of stakeholders in the solid organ transplant community to exchange ideas about what information and metrics are important to different stakeholders. Participating patients and family members called on the transplant community to cease using the term "discards" to refer to donated organs that are not transplanted.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Donor acute kidney injury (AKI) activates innate immunity, enhances HLA expression in the kidney allograft, and provokes recipient alloimmune responses. We hypothesized that injury and inflammation that manifested in deceased-donor urine biomarkers would be associated with higher rates of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) and allograft failure after transplantation. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 862 deceased donors for 1,137 kidney recipients at 13 centers. EXPOSURES: We measured concentrations of interleukin 18 (IL-18), kidney injury molecule 1 (KIM-1), and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) in deceased donor urine. We also used the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) criteria to assess donor clinical AKI. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was a composite of BPAR and graft failure (not from death). A secondary outcome was the composite of BPAR, graft failure, and/or de novo donor-specific antibody (DSA). Outcomes were ascertained in the first posttransplant year. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Multivariable Fine-Gray models with death as a competing risk. RESULTS: Mean recipient age was 54 ± 13 (SD) years, and 82% received antithymocyte globulin. We found no significant associations between donor urinary IL-18, KIM-1, and NGAL and the primary outcome (subdistribution hazard ratio [HR] for highest vs lowest tertile of 0.76 [95% CI, 0.45-1.28], 1.20 [95% CI, 0.69-2.07], and 1.14 [95% CI, 0.71-1.84], respectively). In secondary analyses, we detected no significant associations between clinically defined AKI and the primary outcome or between donor biomarkers and the composite outcome of BPAR, graft failure, and/or de novo DSA. LIMITATIONS: BPAR was ascertained through for-cause biopsies, not surveillance biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of kidney recipients who almost all received induction with thymoglobulin, donor injury biomarkers were associated with neither graft failure and rejection nor a secondary outcome that included de novo DSA. These findings provide some reassurance that centers can successfully manage immunological complications using deceased-donor kidneys with AKI.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Urinalysis is a standard component of potential deceased kidney donor assessment in the UK. The value of albuminuria as a biomarker for organ quality is uncertain. We examined the relationship between deceased donor albuminuria and kidney utilization, survival and function. METHODS: We performed a national cohort study on adult deceased donors and kidney transplant recipients between 2016 and 2020, using data from the UK Transplant Registry. We examined the influence of donor albuminuria, defined as ≥2+ on dipstick testing, on kidney utilization, early graft function, graft failure and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). RESULTS: Eighteen percent (1681/9309) of consented donors had albuminuria. After adjustment for confounders, kidneys from donors with albuminuria were less likely to be accepted for transplantation (74% versus 82%; odds ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.81). Of 9834 kidney transplants included in our study, 1550 (16%) came from donors with albuminuria. After a median follow-up of 2 years, 8% (118/1550) and 9% (706/8284) of transplants from donors with and without albuminuria failed, respectively. There was no association between donor albuminuria and graft failure (hazard ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.74 to 1.11). There was also no association with delayed graft function, patient survival or eGFR at 1 or 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests reluctance in the UK to utilize kidneys from deceased donors with dipstick albuminuria but no evidence of an association with graft survival or function. This may represent a potential to expand organ utilization without negatively impacting transplant outcomes.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introduction: Death investigators (DIs) such as coroners, medical examiners, and forensic pathologists play important and evolving roles in deceased organ donation. DIs communicate with organ donation organizations (ODOs) to gather case-specific information and release or restrict organs depending on the medicolegal requirements. This scoping review aims to identify the breadth of roles and decision-making processes that may facilitate or hinder deceased donation in DI cases. Methods: This study was conducted using a scoping literature review and subsequent thematic analysis. Results: Thirty-one eligible papers described 8 common themes with region-specific nuances. These include: 1) shared (ODO and DI) protocols for early communication around each case; 2) shared standards and education for death investigation practices related to organ donation; 3) DI support staff or teams to facilitate organ donation; 4) DI authority to order additional testing and imaging before organ recovery; 5) donation-specific legislation to enhance DI and/or ODO operations; 6) legally trained DI authority to veto medical decisions to proceed with organ donation; 7) DI attendance at organ recovery; and 8) surgeons recording specific DI evidence during organ recovery. Conclusion: These findings have cultural and resource-allocation implications and expose gaps in the international literature describing practices at the intersection of deceased organ donation and death investigation. A better understanding of the rationale and execution of various systems for DI and ODO cooperation may serve to advance both organ donation and death investigation.

RESUMEN

Background: An emerging strategy to increase deceased organ donation is to use dedicated donation physicians to champion organ donation. We sought to conduct a systematic review of the effectiveness of donation physicians in improving organ donation outcomes. Objective: A systematic review was conducted following Cochrane principles. MEDLINE, Embase, and CINHAL databases were searched from inception to March 26, 2020. Methods: Quantitative studies examining the effects of donation physicians on all deceased organ donation outcomes were considered for inclusion. Review articles, editorials and opinion articles, and case studies were excluded. Study selection was completed independently by 2 team members; all discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Two team members independently extracted data from studies. Results: A total of 1017 studies were screened, and 12 met inclusion criteria. Included studies were published between 1994 and 2019. Half used an interrupted time series design (n = 6; 50%), 3 (25%) were cohort studies, and 3 (25%) used a before-and-after study design. Outcomes (reported in greater than 50% of included articles) included consent/refusal rate (n = 8; 67%), number of potential donors (n = 7; 58%), and number of actual donors (n = 7; 58%). Across studies and design types, there was an increase in potential organ donors ranging from 8% to 143% (Mdn = 33%), an increase in actual organ donors from 15% to 113% (Mdn = 27%), an increase in donor consent rate from -3% to 258% (Mdn = 12%), and an increase in deceased donor transplants from 13% to 24% (Mdn = 19%) following the introduction of donation physicians. Conclusions: Donation physicians have the potential to significantly improve deceased organ donation. Further implementation and evaluation of donation physician programs is warranted. However, implementation should be undertaken with a clear plan for a methodologically rigorous evaluation of outcomes.

Contexte: Le recours à des médecins responsables du don d'organes est une stratégie émergente qui vise à favoriser les dons d'organes après le décès. Nous avons voulu vérifier son efficacité par le biais d'une revue systématique. Sources: La revue systématique a été réalisée conformément aux principes de Cochrane. Les bases de données MEDLINE, Embase et CINHAL ont fait l'objet d'une recherche depuis leur création jusqu'au 26 mars 2020. Méthodologie: Ont été sélectionnées les études quantitatives mesurant l'effet des médecins responsables du don d'organes sur tous les résultats de dons d'organes provenant de personnes décédées. Les articles de revue, éditoriaux, articles d'opinion et études de cas ont été exclus. Deux membres de l'équipe ont procédé de façon indépendante à la sélection des études et à l'extraction des données; les divergences ont été résolues par consensus. Résultats: Des 1 017 études sélectionnées, 12 satisfaisaient aux critères d'inclusion. Les études incluses avaient été publiées entre 1994 et 2019. La moitié des études incluses avait utilisé un modèle de série chronologique interrompu (n = 6; 50 %), trois (25 %) étaient des études de cohorte et trois (25 %) avaient une conception d'étude « avant-après ¼. Les résultats (rapportés dans plus de 50 % des articles inclus) comprenaient le taux de consentement/refus (n = 8; 67 %), le nombre de donneurs potentiels (n = 7; 58 %) et le nombre de donneurs réels (n = 7; 58 %). Après l'introduction de médecins responsables du don d'organes, selon l'étude et le type de conception, on a observé une augmentation allant de 8 à 143 % (augmentation médiane [AM]: 33 %) du nombre de donneurs potentiels, de 15 à 113 % (AM: 27 %) du nombre réel de donneurs, de -3 à 258 % (AM: 12 %) du taux de consentement et de 13 à 24 % (AM: 19 %) du nombre de transplantations d'organes provenant de donneurs décédés. Conclusion: L'introduction de médecins responsables du don d'organes est susceptible d'améliorer significativement le don d'organes après le décès. Il est justifié de poursuivre la mise en œuvre et l'évaluation des programmes intégrant des médecins responsables du don d'organes. La mise en œuvre doit cependant être entreprise avec un plan clair visant une évaluation méthodique et rigoureuse des résultats.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) towards deceased organ donation (DOD) of the parents/ guardians of children with end stage kidney disease (ESKD). METHODS: This cross sectional survey was conducted between April and December 2020. A structured questionnaire was filled to assess the sociodemographic information, knowledge, attitude, and practice about DOD. RESULTS: A total of 130 participants with a mean age of 37±7 years were included in the study. Among all, 66 (50.8%) claimed that they had prior knowledge about DOD. However, on further questioning, no one knew who can be the deceased organ donor. Their responses about registration place and permission from religion were positive in 24(36.4%) and 31(47.0%) cases respectively. Regarding attitude, positive responses to willingness to get registered and discussing DOD in social circle were given by 37(56.1%) and 21 (31.8%) participants respectively. Only one participant was registered as donor. The remaining 64(49.2%) participants who had no prior knowledge were given relevant information and were interviewed after one week. Only 24(37.5%) showed willingness to get registered as donors and 06 (9.4%) participants discussed the topic of DOD in their social circle. CONCLUSIONS: The results showed that the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of people who are most desperate for transplantation of their children were poor and did not change significantly even after providing them relevant information.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Increasing deceased organ donation registration may increase the number of available organs for transplant to help save lives. This study aimed to identify which behaviour change techniques (BCTs; or 'active ingredients') are reported within randomized trials of interventions promoting deceased organ donation registration and of those, which are associated with a larger intervention effect. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of 45 trials included in a Cochrane systematic review of deceased organ donation registration interventions. Two researchers used the BCT Taxonomy v1 to independently code intervention content in all trial groups. Outcome data were pooled and we used meta-regression to explore associations between individual and combinations of recurring BCTs and effect on registration intention and/or registration behaviour. RESULTS: A total of 27 different BCTs (mean = 3.7, range = 1-9) were identified in intervention groups across the 45 trials. The five most common BCTs were: 'Information about health consequences' (71%); 'Instruction on how to perform the behaviour' (47%); 'Salience of consequences' (40%); 'Adding objects to the environment' (28%); and 'Credible source' (27%). Comparator groups in 20/45 trials also included identifiable BCTs (n = 12, mean = 3.1, range = 1-7). Meta-regression revealed that a combination of the three most common BCTs was associated with a larger intervention effect size for registration behaviour (k = 8, ß = .19, p = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Trials of deceased organ donation registration interventions focus predominantly on providing information, instruction, and a means to register. While potentially effective, a much wider set of possible BCTs could be leveraged to address known barriers to registration.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

This study aimed to compare the consent rate for deceased organ donation in Israel over two time periods, namely 2004-2009 (2004/9) and 2016-July 2020 (2016/20). Donor and family data were collected from the Israel National Transplantation Center Registry and included donor characteristics, reasons for family consent and refusal, and a subjective assessment of donor coordinator-family interactions. The consent rate increased from 41.6% over the period 2004/9 to 61.8% for the period 2016/20 (P < 0.0001). A significant increase in the proportion of Jewish donors was noted (49.8% in 2004/9 vs. 67.5% in 2016/20, P < 0.0001), while no increase in the consent rate for the Muslim population was noted. Religious objections as a reason for refusal decreased significantly (37.6% vs. 27.3%; P = 0.02), while the proportion of families citing donating as the "right thing to do" increased significantly (7% vs. 26.6%; P < 0.0001). Finally, a significant increase in the proportion of very positive DC-family interactions (59% to 78.3%, P < 0.0001) was noted. In conclusion, the increased consent rate in 2016/20 was associated with changes in expressed decision-making and donor coordinator-donor family interactions. Additional interventions tailored to all different populations groups need to be developed and further investigated.

Asunto(s)