Community-Based Interventions and Individuals' Willingness to be a Deceased Organ Donor: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Who follows through? Different factors predict initial commitment vs. Following through in a national survey of organ donor registration

OBJECTIVE

Little research has investigated factors that determine whether people falter in the face of an obstacle or successfully follow through on an initial commitment to act. We integrated multiple theories (the Reasoned Action Approach [RAA], Prototype Willingness Model, and anticipated regret theory) to test which factors predict initial commitment to register as an organ donor and to discover whether different factors predict initial commitment vs. following through with registration.

METHODS

Participants from a nationally representative UK sample (N = 1,008) reported their beliefs about organ donation and indicated their decision to register. An obstacle that participants could not foresee was that they had to complete registration in a second survey 3 days after making their initial commitment.

RESULTS

Findings showed that 14.8% of participants followed through, 19.7% demonstrated initial commitment, and 65.5% declined to register. Linear discriminant function analysis derived two functions that distinguished these registration patterns. The first function discriminated participants who declined to register from the other groups. The declined group had lower scores on RAA variables compared to their counterparts. The second function distinguished participants who made an initial commitment to register from those who followed through. Follow-through was associated with less anticipated negative affect, more favorable descriptive norms, and stronger identification with organ donors.

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings indicate that even modest friction leads to a large reduction in follow-through. Moreover, different factors influence initial commitment vs. following through. Whereas RAA variables predicted initial commitment, following through was a function of anticipated negative affect and social processes.

Relationship Between High Organ Donation Rates and COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage

Background

Besides attaining the goal of self-protection, the rollout of vaccination programs also encourages altruistic practices. Therefore, the progress in vaccination against coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in each country may be related to the prevalence of cooperative and altruistic practices in health care. I hypothesized that in countries where organ donation is popular, individuals would exhibit a greater tendency to become vaccinated.

Methods

I examined the correlation between the level of progress of COVID-19 vaccination and the status of organ donation just before the pandemic in Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. Publicly available statistical information on the progress of immunization and organ donation was used. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to examine common drivers of immunization and organ donation.

Results

In OECD countries, progress in vaccination was found to be significantly correlated with the status of organ donation in each country. This relationship was stable after the summer (September 1: Pearson's r = 0.442, October 1: 0.457, November 1: 0.366). The results of the univariate and multivariate analyses showed that high trust in medical professionals was significantly correlated with both the “progress of vaccinations” and “organ donations.”

Conclusions

Progress in COVID-19 vaccination and organ donation status for transplantation have similar trends, and both may involve people's trust in medical personnel and public health systems. Similar to the efforts to obtain organ donors, governments around the world need to take further steps to ensure that vaccination programs are supported by people's trust and sense of solidarity.

[Reasons and Influencing Factors for the Willingness to Document Preferences Regarding Organ Donation: Results of an Online Survey]

OBJECTIVE

Different options to regulate decisions about organ transplantation were subjected to discussions prior to parliamentary decision on 16.01.2020. The goal of this study was the description of citizens' attitudes towards organ donation and investigation of predictors of (documentation of) willingness to donate.

METHODS

Cross sectional online survey in Berlin and Saxony-Anhalt between 25.11.2019 till 16.01.2020. Descriptive, statistical analysis. We report absolute and relative frequencies. We conducted logistic regression analysis for the influence of age, income and gender on knowledge, willingness to donate and possession of an organ donor card.

RESULTS

Of 20 020 invited citizens, 676 (3.4%) participated in the online survey; 54.9% were in favour of an opt-out regulation, 49.4% supported an opt-in regulation, 63.3% of respondents were willing or rather willing to donate an organ and 43.2% possessed an organ donor card. Willingness to donate and possession of an organ donor card decreased with increasing age. A Higher educational level was associated with having an organ donor card. Gender, income, education and knowledge about organ donation were not associated with the willingness to donate an organ. Of those who were willing to donate but who had not a donor card, 45.7% had communicated their will to relatives. Reasons indicated for lack of documentation included practical reasons as also fears related to medical care in case of critical health state.

DISCUSSION

None of the discussed legislative regulations on organ donation has been supported by a clear majority of respondents. Distinct population-based surveys can serve as starting point for developing targeted initiatives to increase the documentation of citizens' will regarding organ donation following brain death.

Identifying behaviour change techniques within randomized trials of interventions promoting deceased organ donation registration

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, β = .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.

Interventions for increasing solid organ donor registration

BACKGROUND

A solution for increasing the number of available organs for transplantation is to encourage more individuals to register a commitment for deceased organ donation. However, the percentage of the population registered for organ donation remains low in many countries.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of various interventions used to increase deceased organ donor registration.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 11 August 2020 through contact with an Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs and quasi-RCTs of interventions to promote deceased organ donor registration. We included studies if they measured self-reported or verified donor registration, intention to donate, intention to register a decision or number of individuals signing donor cards as outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed retrieved studies and extracted data from included studies. We assessed studies for risk of bias. We obtained summary estimates of effect using a random-effects model and expressed results as risk ratios (RR) (95% confidence intervals; CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD; 95% CI) or standardised mean difference (SMD; 95% CI) for continuous outcomes. In multi-arm trials, data were pooled to create single pair-wise comparisons. Analyses were stratified by specific intervention setting where available.

MAIN RESULTS

Our search strategy identified 46 studies (47 primary articles, including one abstract) comprising 24 parallel RCTs, 19 cluster RCTs and 3 quasi-RCTs. Sample sizes ranged from 138 to 1,085,292 (median = 514). A total of 16 studies measured registration behaviour, 27 measured intention to register/donate and three studies measured both registration behaviour and intention to register. Interventions were delivered in a variety of different settings: schools (14 studies), driver's motor vehicle (DMV) centres (5), mail-outs (4), primary care centres (3), workplaces (1), community settings (7) and general public (12). Interventions were highly varied in terms of their content and included strategies such as educational sessions and videos, leveraging peer leaders, staff training, message framing, and priming. Most studies were rated as having high or unclear risk of bias for random sequence generation and allocation concealment and low risk for the remainder of the domains. Data from 34/46 studies (74%) were available for meta-analysis. Low certainty evidence showed organ donation registration interventions had a small overall effect on improving registration behaviour (16 studies, 1,294,065 participants: RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.43, I2 = 84%), intention to register/donate (dichotomous) (10 studies, 10,838 participants: RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.42, I2 = 91%) and intention to register/donate (continuous) (9 studies, 3572 participants: SMD 0.23, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.36, I2 = 67%). Classroom-based interventions delivered in a lecture format by individuals from the transplant community may be effective at increasing intention to register/donate (3 studies, 675 participants: RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.55, I² = 0%). Community interventions targeting specific ethnic groups were generally effective at increasing registration rates (k = 5, n = 4186; RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.35 to 3.40, I² = 85%), although heterogeneity was high. In particular, interventions delivered in the community by trained peer-leaders appear to be effective (3 studies, 3819 participant: RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.08 to 4.06, I² = 87%), although again, the data lacked robustness. There was some evidence that framing messages (e.g. anticipated regret) and priming individuals (e.g. reciprocity) in a certain way may increase intention to register/donate, however, few studies measured this effect on actual registration. Overall, the studies varied significantly in terms of design, setting, content and delivery. Selection bias was evident and a quarter of the studies could not be included in the meta-analysis due to incomplete outcome data reporting. No adverse events were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In our review, we identified a variety of approaches used to increase organ donor registration including school-based educational sessions and videos, leveraging peer leaders in the community, DMV staff training, targeted messaging and priming. The variability in outcome measures used and incompleteness in reporting meant that most data could not be combined for analysis. When data were combined, overall effect sizes were small in favour of intervention groups over controls, however, there was significant variability in the data. There was some evidence that leveraging peer-leaders in the community to deliver organ donation education may improve registration rates and classroom-based education from credible individuals (i.e. members of the transplant community) may improve intention to register/donate, however, there is no clear evidence favouring any particular approach. There was mixed evidence for simple, low-intensity interventions utilising message framing and priming. However, it is likely that interest in these strategies will persist due to their reach and scalability. Further research is therefore required to adequately address the question of the most effective interventions for increasing deceased organ donor registration.

Knowledge and Willingness for Organ Donation in the Middle Eastern Region: A Meta-analysis

Medical advancements over the past decades brought organ transplantation as a definitive therapy for different end-stage organ failure. However, non-availability of organs required for transplantation is a major challenge worldwide. We aimed to determine the knowledge and willingness to donate organs in various populations and settings in the Middle Eastern region. Literature searches were conducted on PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Google scholar electronic databases. Different combinations of search terms such as "organ donation"; "knowledge", "awareness"; "beliefs", "willingness"; and "attitude" along with the country names were used. Additional searches using reference lists of studies and review articles were conducted. Data were extracted using standardized excel form and pilot tested. Three authors independently abstracted the data using a data collection form. Results from different studies were pooled for the analysis when appropriate. The search yielded 1806 articles; 1000 duplicates and review articles were excluded, and a further 792 articles not relevant were excluded. Finally, 14 original studies met the inclusion criteria. Total pooled sample size for assessing knowledge was 6697 and for willingness was 8714. Pooled overall knowledge regarding organ donation was 69% with a 95% CI [64.5, 73.5]. Pooled overall willingness to donate organ was 49.8% with a 95% CI [41.3, 58.4]. Knowledge about organ donation and willingness to donate organs varies in different population and settings in the Middle East. These in fact are linked to multiple social factors ultimately leads to 'consent' for donating organs by a potential donor. Family's influence; religious, traditional and spiritual beliefs; and status of ethnic, minority, and immigrant populace are the important determinants of the decision for organ donation. Understandings on social determinants in organ donation remain crucial and should be addressed while developing policies and organizational developments.

Public, medical professionals' and patients' preferences for the allocation of donor organs for transplantation: study protocol for discrete choice experiments

INTRODUCTION

Organ transplantation is the treatment of choice for patients with severe organ failure. Nevertheless, donor organs are a scarce resource resulting in a large mismatch between supply and demand. Therefore, priority-setting leads to the dilemma of how these scarce organs should be allocated and who should be considered eligible to receive a suitable organ. In order to improve the supply-demand mismatch in transplantation medicine, this study explores preferences of different stakeholders (general public, medical professionals and patients) for the allocation of donor organs for transplantation in Germany. The aims are (1) to determine criteria and preferences, which are relevant for the allocation of scarce donor organs and (2) to compare the results between the three target groups to derive strategies for health policy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We outline the study protocol for discrete choice experiments, where respondents are presented with different choices including attributes with varied attribute levels. They were asked to choose between these choice sets. First, systematic reviews will be conducted to identify the state of art. Subsequently, focus group discussions with the public and patients as well as expert interviews with medical professionals will follow to establish the attributes that are going to be included in the experiments and to verify the results of the systematic reviews. Using this qualitative exploratory work, discrete choice studies will be designed to quantitatively assess preferences. We will use a D-efficient fractional factorial design to survey a total sample of 600 respondents according to the public, medical professionals and patients each. Multinomial conditional logit model and latent class model will be analysed to estimate the final results.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has received Ethics Approval from the Hannover Medical School Human Ethics Committee (Vote number: 7921_BO_K_2018). Findings will be disseminated through conference presentations, workshops with stakeholders and peer-reviewed journal articles.

Evaluation of a Hockey Deceased Organ Donation Awareness Campaign: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Background:

The Kidney Foundation of Canada developed a pilot campaign to educate persons attending junior hockey league games in London, Ontario, Canada, on deceased organ donation.

Objective:

To evaluate the impact of a hockey campaign on the number of new organ and tissue donor registrants.

Design:

Population-based retrospective cohort study.

Setting:

Residents of London, Ontario.

Patients:

We included 255 476 individuals eligible to register for organ donation with a London, Ontario postal code.

Measurements:

We compared the number of new deceased organ donor registrants in London, Ontario, during the campaign period (March 12 to April 16, 2015) with 3 different time periods (December 30, 2014 to February 3, 2015; February 4 to March 11, 2015; April 17 to May 22, 2015). We also compared registration rates in London with 2 Ontario cities (Kitchener-Waterloo and Hamilton) matching in a 1:1 ratio on age, sex, and income quintile.

Methods:

To compare registrations across time periods, we used binomial regression with an identity link function and generalized estimating equations with an independence correlation structure. We used modified Poisson regression to compare registration rates between cities.

Results:

During the campaign period, there were slightly more registrations (1218 registered of 252 832 unregistered individuals [0.48%]) compared with an earlier time period (risk difference: 0.09%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.05%-0.12%). However, there was no significant difference compared with 2 time periods immediately before and after the campaign. London had slightly more registrations during the campaign period compared with the matched city of Hamilton (1180 registered of 236 582 unregistered individuals [0.50%] vs 490 registered of 236 582 unregistered individuals [0.21%]; risk ratio: 2.41; 95% CI: 2.17-2.68). The registration rate in London did not significantly differ from Kitchener-Waterloo.

Limitations:

Unable to conclude whether the minor increase in deceased organ donor registration was the result of the campaign or other factors (e.g., simultaneous organ registration events, seasonality).

Conclusions:

Overall, a minor increase in deceased organ donor registration was observed during the hockey organ donation awareness campaign; however, the specific impact of the campaign on organ donor registration could not be determined.