Evaluation of liver transplantation services in Kazakhstan from 2012 to 2023

There is a scarcity of publications evaluating the performance of the national liver transplantation (LTx) program in Kazakhstan. Spanning from 2012 to 2023, it delves into historical trends in LTx surgeries, liver transplant centers, and the national cohort of patients awaiting LTx. Survival analysis for those awaiting LTx, using life tables and Kaplan-Meier, is complemented by time series analysis projecting developments until 2030. The overall per million population (pmp) LTx rate varied from 0.35 to 3.77, predominantly favoring living donor LTx. Liver transplant center rates ranged from 0.06 to 0.40. Of 474 LTx patients, 364 on the waiting list did not receive transplantation. The 30-day and 1-year survival rates on the waiting list were 87.0% and 68.0%, respectively. Viral hepatitis and cirrhosis prevalence steadily rose from 2015 to 2023, with projections indicating a persistent trend until 2030. Absent targeted interventions, stable pmp rates of LTx and liver transplant centers may exacerbate the backlog of unoperated patients. This study sheds light on critical aspects of the LTx landscape in Kazakhstan, emphasizing the urgency of strategic interventions to alleviate the burden on patients awaiting transplantation.

Willingness to Donate Organs After Death

Abstract. Background: Despite the growing number of organ transplants, there is still a significant difference between the number of donated organs and the number of people waiting for them. Knowing the reason people decide to donate is the first step to increasing organ donation rates. Aims: The main aim of the present study was to develop and validate a new scale for organ donation. Method: In three studies, 3,585 participants ranging in age between 14 and 89 years were selected through systematic random sampling. In the first study, we created a scale following the organ donation model theoretical framework and submitted the scale to exploratory factor analysis. In the second study, we performed a confirmatory factor analysis to cross-validate the hypothesized factor structure. In the third study, the scale was related to some important variables involved in organ donation. Results: Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis with a good fit index and acceptable levels of validity and reliability guarantee the quality of the scale and stable factor solution. Limitations: The main limitations are connected to social desirability, the presence of systematic bias of the population that refused to take part in the study, and the use of the Caucasian population. Conclusion: The resulting scale consists of 21 items in a seven-factor model (bodily integrity, fear of death, familial beliefs, altruism, medical mistrust, trust in the health institution, and emotional support). We also observed the relationship between scale factors, religiosity, and knowledge of organ donation with the willingness to donate organs.

[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.

Reactions to organ donation appeals in public service announcements aimed at African Americans

This study examines different types of organ donation public service announcement appeal messages (narrative, counter argument, and statistical) in relation to their effectiveness on the African American community. Previous studies on public service announcements aimed at African Americans and how effective the different message appeals are examined along with issues effecting the likelihood of African Americans consenting to be organ donors. African American participants were recruited using the Qualtrics survey company. Analysis of survey data suggest that narrative appeals are more effective than statistical and counter argument appeals but statistical and counter argument did not differ from each other. Implications of this finding along with directions for future research is included.

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.

Neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation, racial segregation, and organ donation across 5 states

One in 10 people die awaiting transplantation from donor shortage. Only half of Americans register as organ donors. In this cross-sectional study, we evaluated population-level associations of neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation and racial segregation on organ donor registration rates. We analyzed state identification card demographic and organ donor registration data from 5 states to estimate the association between a neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation index (range [0, 1]; higher values indicate more deprivation) and a racial index of concentration at the extreme (ICE) (range [-1, 1]; lower values indicate predominantly black neighborhoods, higher values indicate predominantly white neighborhoods) on organ donor registration rates within a specified geography (census tract or ZIP code tabulation area [ZCTA]). Among 26 720 738 registrants, 32% of the sample were registered organ donors. At the census tract level, with each 0.1 decrease in the deprivation index, the organ donor registration rate increased by 6.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.6%, 7.0%). With each 0.1 increase in the racial ICE, the rate increased by 1.5% (95% CI: 1.5%, 1.6%). These associations held true at the ZCTA level. Areas with less socioeconomic deprivation and a higher concentration of white residents have higher organ donor registration rates. Public health initiatives should consider neighborhood context and novel data sources in designing optimal intervention strategies.

Organ Transplantation and Donation From the Point of View of College Students

BACKGROUND

The organ transplantation saves the life of individuals whose life is in danger due to organ/tissue failure. The presence of negative and positive attitudes toward tissue and organ donation is a determinant factor in the donation of tissue and organ donation.

PURPOSE

This study has aimed to explore the opinion of senior students studying at the undergraduate level toward organ transplantation and donation.

BASIC PROCEDURE

The study employed a descriptive and cross-sectional research design using a reliable questionnaire, which was distributed among 317 undergraduate students at the Faculty of Health Sciences (Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Nutrition, Nursing, Sports Sciences, Health Management Department) during the fall semester of the 2016-2017 academic year. A total of 240 responses were analyzed using χ² test with SPSS software.

MAIN FINDINGS

The results of the study showed that 57.4% of the students were willing to donate their organs after their death, 62.7% of the students' relatives wanted to donate their organs, 57.3% were willing to donate it to their deceased relatives, whereas 96.7% did not have any relative waiting for a transplantation. Families' negative opinions on tissue and organ transplantation and donation, status of getting information about tissue and organ transplantation and donation, and presence of a person waiting for tissue and organ transplantation in the family or in the environment were not effective in students' opinions about tissue and organ transplantation and donation (P > .05).

PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study contribute to determination of multicultural features of health sciences students that are likely to affect organ donation.

Increasing Organ Donor Designation Rates in Adolescents: A Cluster Randomized Trial

Objectives. To evaluate the effectiveness of video messaging on adolescent organ donor designation rates.Methods. We randomized adolescent driver education classes in Massachusetts, between July 2015 and February 2018, to receive 1 of 3 organ donation video messaging interventions (informational, testimonial, or blended). Adolescents completed questionnaires before and after the intervention and at 1-week follow-up; we compared their registration status at time of obtaining driver's license with that of a regionally matched historical comparison group.Results. Donor designation rates were higher for those exposed to video messaging than for the historical comparison group (60% vs 50%; P < .001). Testimonial (64%) and blended messaging (65%) yielded higher donor designation rates than informational messaging (51%; P = .013). There was a statistically significant messaging × time interaction effect for donation knowledge (P = .03), with blended and informational messaging showing more gains in knowledge from before to after the intervention (P < .001; d = 0.69 and P < .001; d = 0.45, respectively), compared with testimonial messaging (d = 0.09; P = .22).Conclusions. Testimonial messaging is most effective in producing a verifiable and demonstrable impact on donor designation rates among adolescents, and driver education classes are an efficient venue for disseminating organ donation messaging to youths.Trial Registration. ClinicalTrials.gov; identifier: NCT03013816.

A Multidisciplinary Survey to Assess Facilitators and Barriers to Successful Organ Donation in the Intensive Care Unit

INTRODUCTION

Rates of successful organ donation vary between otherwise comparable intensive care units (ICUs). The ICU staff have a unique perspective into the facilitators and barriers underlying this variation in successful deceased organ donation.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What do ICU staff perceive to be the most meaningful facilitators and barriers to deceased organ donation?

DESIGN

We designed and conducted a survey of all disciplines working in the ICU to ascertain the perceived facilitators and barriers to donation in an academic tertiary care hospital. Survey reliability was assessed using Cronbach α. Factor analysis was used to assess construct validity and identify potentially redundant survey items.

RESULTS

We had responses from 108 ICU staff, including nurses (n = 75), respiratory therapists (n = 14), physicians (n = 12), chaplains (n = 2), as well as social work, pharmacy, physiotherapy, and occupational therapy (n = 1 each). Perceived facilitators included availability of organ donation organization coordinators, explicit institutional support for donation, ICU staff culture toward donation, standardized order sets for donation, presence of ICU staff with donation experience, and bedside nurse presence at discussions about donation. Perceived barriers included ICU staff ruling out potentially suitable donors before consulting a donor coordinator, physician communication skills, low priority for organ donation among operating room staff, limited family understanding of patient prognosis and organ donation, and limited emotional readiness of families to discuss donation.

DISCUSSION

Several staff-perceived facilitators and barriers to deceased organ donation were identified in the ICU. Future research could identify strategies to promote these facilitators and overcome barriers.