The paper presents the findings of the first large-scale survey on post-mortem organ donation among the general Slovenian population. It focuses on the reported donation willingness, the barriers to ...joining the register of organ donors and the position towards consent to donate organs of deceased relatives.
A face-to-face survey was conducted on a probability sample of 1,076 Slovenian residents between October and December 2017. The performed analyses included estimations of means and proportions for target variables, an evaluation of between-group differences and a partial proportional odds model to study the relations between organ donation willingness and socio-demographic characteristics.
The mean reported willingness to donate one's own organs after death was 3.77 on a 5-point scale, with less than a third of respondents claiming to be certainly willing. Only 6% of those at least tentatively willing to donate organs were certain to join the register of organ donors in the future. The most frequently reported barriers to registration were unfamiliarity with the procedure and a lack of considering it beforehand. The reported willingness to donate organs of a deceased relative strongly depended on the knowledge of the relative's wishes, yet 80% of the respondents did not discuss their wishes with any family members.
The findings confirm the gap between the reported donation willingness and joining the register of donors. Future post-mortem organ donation strategies need to consider socio-demographic and attitudinal factors of donation willingness and help stimulate the communication about organ donation wishes between family members.
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.
The donation rate (DR) per million population is not ideal for an efficiency comparison of national deceased organ donation programs. The DR does not account for variabilities in the potential for ...deceased donation which mainly depends on fatalities from causes leading to brain death. In this study, the donation activity was put into relation to the mortality from selected causes. Based on that metric, this study assesses the efficiency of different donation programs.
This is a retrospective analysis of 2001 to 2015 deceased organ donation and mortality registry data. Included are 27 Council of Europe countries, as well as the United States. A donor conversion index (DCI) was calculated for assessing donation program efficiency over time and in international comparisons.
According to the DCI and of the countries included in the study, Spain, France, and the United States had the most efficient donation programs in 2015. Even though mortality from the selected causes decreased in most countries during the study period, differences in international comparisons persist. This indicates that the potential for deceased organ donation and its conversion into actual donation is far from being similar internationally.
Compared with the DR, the DCI takes into account the potential for deceased organ donation, and therefore is a more accurate metric of performance. National donation programs could optimize performance by identifying the areas where most potential is lost, and by implementing measures to tackle these issues.
The findings and recommendations of the 2019 consensus conference in organ donation, held in Kunming, China, are here reported. The main objective of the conference was to gather relevant information ...from experts involved in the field. The data and opinions provided allowed to propose a series of recommendations for “One Belt & One Road Countries” on how to achieve self‐sufficiency in organ donation. Leadership in organ donation should be results‐oriented and goal‐driven based on the principles of excellence, empowerment, and engagement, providing the means, resources, and strategies necessary to reach the goal in earnest. Management includes good governance and transparency of a national registry of patients in the waiting list, donors, transplants, transplant teams, quality, and safety programs with continuous educational training of health care professionals. Mandatory monitoring, auditing and evaluation of quality must be incorporated into donation practices as relevant points in innovation, as well as the adoption of already established and novel processes and technologies. Achievement of self‐sufficiency in organ donation is a crucial step to fight against transplant tourism and to prevent organ trafficking. Based on recommendations arising from the conference, each country could review and develop individualized action plans adjusted to its own circumstances and reality.
Summary
The access of non‐resident patients to the deceased donor waiting list (DDWL) poses different challenges. The European Committee on Organ Transplantation of the Council of Europe (CD‐P‐TO) ...has studied this phenomenon in the European setting. A questionnaire was circulated among the Council of Europe member states to inquire about the criteria applied for non‐residents to access their DDWL. Information was compiled from 28 countries. Less than 1% of recipients of deceased donor organs were non‐residents. Two countries never allow non‐residents to access the DDWL, four allow access without restrictions and 22 only under specific conditions. Of those, most give access to non‐resident patients already in their jurisdictions who are in a situation of vulnerability (urgent life‐threatening conditions). In addition, patients may be given access: (i) after assessment by a specific committee (four countries); (ii) within the framework of official cooperation agreements (15 countries); and (iii) after patients have officially lived in the country for a minimum length of time (eight countries). The ethical and legal implications of these policies are discussed. Countries should collect accurate information about residency status of waitlisted patients. Transparent criteria for the access of non‐residents to DDWL should be clearly defined at national level.
The access of non‐resident patients to the deceased donor waiting list (DDWL) poses different challenges. This study shows the different policies in place in the European setting and discuss its ethical and legal implications.
Organ donation and transplantation activity in the majority of Balkan countries (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Serbia, Romania and Bulgaria) are lagging ...far behind international averages. Inadequate financial resources, unclear regional data and lack of government infrastructure are some of the issues which should be recognized to draw attention and lead to problem-solving decisions. The Regional Health Development Centre (RHDC) Croatia, a technical body of the South-eastern Europe Health Network (SEEHN), was created in 2011 after Croatia's great success in the field over the last 10 years. The aim of the RHDC is to network the region and provide individualized country support to increase donation and transplantation activity in collaboration with professional societies (European Society of Organ Transplantation, European Transplant Coordinators Organization, The Transplantation Society and International Society of Organ Donation and Procurement). Such an improvement would in turn likely prevent transplant tourism. The regional data from 2010 show large discrepancies in donation and transplantation activities within geographically neighbouring countries. Thus, proposed actions to improve regional donation and transplantation rates include advancing living and deceased donation through regular public education, creating current and accurate waiting lists and increasing the number of educated transplant nephrologists and hospital coordinators. In addition to the effort from the professionals, government support with allocated funds per deceased donation, updated legislation and an established national coordinating body is ultimately recognized as essential for the successful donation and transplantation programmes. By continuous RHDC communication and support asked from the health authorities and motivated professionals from the SEEHN initiative, an increased number of deceased as well as living donor kidney transplantations in the future should be more realistic.
PDF
