Israel's 2008 Organ Transplant Law: continued ethical challenges to the priority points model

The Impact of the Donor Card Holder Prioritization Program on Kidney Allocation in Israel

BACKGROUND

Since 2014, as part of a priority program within the Israeli Transplant Law, additional points were given to waitlisted candidates with donor cards. We assessed the impact on deceased donor kidney allocation.

METHODS

This study enrolled all patients older than 18 y who underwent deceased donor kidney transplantation (January 2016-December 2019). Data were obtained from the National HLA Tissue Laboratory registry at the Sheba Medical Center. Patients were grouped by donor card status (ADI group) (not signed, 0 points; relative signed, 0.1 points; patient signed, 2 points; and relative donated, 9 points). The primary outcome was waiting time until kidney transplantation with and without the additional score.

RESULTS

Four hundred forty-four patients underwent kidney transplantation during the study period: 281 (63%) were donor card holders (DCH) and 163 (37%) were not DCH. DCH with extra points waited 68.0 (±47.0) mo on average, compared with 94.6 (±47.3) mo for not DCH ( P  < 0.001). Donor card signers had a shorter time until transplant in a multivariable model. Without extra points, 145 recipients (32.6%) would have missed organs allocated to higher-scored candidates. Allocation changes occurred in 1 patient because of an additional 0.1 points, in 103 candidates because of an additional 2 points, and in 41 candidates because of an additional 9 points.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional DCH scores improved allocation and reduced waiting time for donor card signers and those with donating relatives. To enhance fairness, consideration should be given to reducing the score weight of this social criterion and raising scores for other factors, especially dialysis duration.

How did organ donation in Israel become a club membership model? From civic to communal solidarity in organ sharing

Figuring out what pushes individuals to become organ donors has become the holy grail of social scientists interested in transplantations. In this paper I concentrate on solidarity as a determinant of organ donation and examine it through the history of organ donation in Israel. By following the history of transplantation policies since 1968 and examining them in relation to different types of solidarities, this paper leads to a nuanced understanding of the ties between solidarity and health policy. Attempts to foster an all-encompassing consensus on the definition of brain death yielded the Transplantation and the Brain-Respiratory Death Laws of 2008. It was hoped that a wide "civic solidarity" would render Israel self-sufficient in its organ economy. However, the failure of the law led to the breakdown of civic solidarity in organ donation. As a result, initiatives such as the priority policy and non-directed living organ donations, developed out of a narrower conception of solidarity. Juxtaposing these initiatives sheds light on macro level processes for policy makers and suggests solidarity as a key bioethical concept to understand organ donation policies.

Posthumous Organ Donation in Islam, Christianity, and Judaism: How Religious Beliefs Shape the Decision to Donate

Evidence indicates that the religious beliefs of patients, potential donors, family members, and healthcare professionals play an important role in deciding to donate an organ. We aim to summarize the religious views of Christians, Muslims, and Jews on organ donation contributing to the decision-making process. Different approaches to this topic worldwide are presented, providing helpful information for medical professionals. A literature review was conducted regarding the view of Israel's leadership of the three largest religions on organ transplantation. This review revealed that all Israeli central religious leaders have a positive view on organ donation. However, various aspects of the transplantation process (such as consent, brain death, and respect for the dead body) must be carried out as each religion prescribes. Thus, understanding the different religious views and regulations on organ donations may help reduce religious concerns about transplantation and narrow the gap between the need and the availability of organ donations.

Priority for Organ Donors in the Allocation of Organs: Priority Rules from the Perspective of Equality of Opportunity

Should priority in the allocation of organs be given to those who have previously donated or declared their willingness to do so? This article examines the Israeli priority rule in light of two prominent critiques of priority rules, pertaining to failure to reciprocate and unfairness. The scope and content of these critiques are interpreted from the perspective of equality of opportunity. Because the Israeli priority rule may be reasonably criticized for unfairness and failing to reward certain behaviors, the article develops an adjusted priority rule, which removes and adjust the elements in the Israeli priority rule deemed problematic. However, such a priority rule is complex to the extent that it may fail to increase donation rates and furthermore introduce new concerns of fairness, as the better off may be better able to navigate the complex adjusted priority rule.

Donor heart selection: Evidence-based guidelines for providers

The proposed donor heart selection guidelines provide evidence-based and expert-consensus recommendations for the selection of donor hearts following brain death. These recommendations were compiled by an international panel of experts based on an extensive literature review.

Religious and cultural aspects of organ donation: Narrowing the gap through understanding different religious beliefs

BACKGROUND

The supply of viable organ donations falls significantly below the demand. Discrepancies concerning the availability of transplants cannot be explained solely by the various consent models used in different countries. There is evidence that religious beliefs of patients, potential donors, and healthcare professionals also play an important role in the decision-making process. However, to date, very little research has been conducted on the consequences of specific religious beliefs on transplantation rates. The aim of this review was to outline the religious views of Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists on organ donation. Additionally, different approaches to address this topic throughout the world are presented and can function as a helpful background for medical professionals.

METHODS

The umbrella organizations of the five largest religious movements were asked for written statements concerning the subject of organ transplantation, and a literature review was performed.

RESULTS

All German religious umbrella organizations have a positive view on organ donation, if certain rules are respected. Particularly, deceased donations are supported as a sign of altruism, love, and respect for another human being. Different aspects of the transplant process (e.g., consent, brain death, and respect for the dead body) are particularly stressed in some religions.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, the religious groups addressed here are in favor of organ donations. Nevertheless, there are important particularities to be considered. Hopefully, understanding the different religious views on organ donations will help in reducing religious concerns about transplantation and narrowing the gap between the need and the availability of organ donations.

The Effect of Priority Given to Donor Card Holders on the Allocation of Livers for Transplant-Evidence From 7 Years of the Israeli Priority Program

BACKGROUND

The Israeli Transplant Law grants priority in organ allocation to patients signing a donor card. Liver transplant candidates get additional 2 points on their Model for End Stage Liver Disease score for signing a donor card, 0.1 points for a relative holding a card, and 5 points if a relative donated an organ. We studied the effect of the priority program on waiting list mortality and allocation changes due to priority.

METHODS

Using Israeli Transplant data of 531 adult liver transplant candidates with chronic liver disease listed between 2012 and 2018 we compared waitlist mortality and transplant rate of candidates with and without priority. Then we analyzed liver allocations resulting from additional priority points and followed outcome of patients who were skipped in line.

RESULTS

Of the 519 candidates, 294 did not sign a donor card, 82 signed, 140 had a relative sign, and for 3, a relative donated an organ. The rates of waitlist mortality in these 4 groups were 22.4%, 0%, 21.4%, and 0%, respectively, and the transplant rates were 50%, 59.8%, 49.3%, and 100%, respectively. Of the 30 patients who were skipped because of priority, 24 subsequently underwent transplant, 2 are on the waiting list, and 4 died within 0.75, 1.75, 7, and 17 mo.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2 points added to the Model for End Stage Liver Disease score were associated with lower waitlist mortality and higher transplant rate for candidates signing a donor card without significantly affecting access to transplant during allocation. Further research and consideration of optimal policy when granting priority for candidates signing a donor card should continue.

Join the Lone Kidney Club: incentivising live organ donation

Given the dramatic shortage of transplantable organs, demand cannot be met by established and envisioned organ procurement policies targeting postmortem donation. Live organ donation (LOD) is a medically attractive option, and ethically permissible if informed consent is given and donor beneficence balances recipient non-maleficence. Only a few legal and regulatory frameworks incentivise LOD, with the key exception of Israel's Organ Transplant Law, which has produced significant improvements in organ donation rates. Therefore, I propose an organ procurement system that incentivises LOD by allocating additional priority points to the living donor on any transplant waiting list. I outline benefits and challenges for potential recipients, donors and society at large, and suggest measures to ensure medical protection of marginalised patient groups.

Policy in pediatric nephrology: successes, failures, and the impact on disparities

Pediatric nephrology has a history rooted in pediatric advocacy and has made numerous contributions to child health policy affecting pediatric kidney diseases. Despite this progress, profound social disparities remain for marginalized and socially vulnerable children with kidney disease. Different risk factors, such as genetic predisposition, environmental factors, social risk factors, or health care access influence the emergence and progression of pediatric kidney disease, as well as access to life-saving interventions, leading to disparate outcomes. This review will summarize the breadth of literature on social determinants of health in children with kidney disease worldwide and highlight policy-based initiatives that mitigate the adverse social factors to generate greater equity in pediatric kidney disease.

Exploring the motives of Israeli Jews who were living kidney donors to strangers

Non-directed living donors are individuals who donate a kidney to a recipient with whom they have neither a genetic nor emotional relationship. Israel legalized this type of donation in 2008. After this law was implemented, living donations significantly expanded. The aim of this article was to determine the motivations, characteristics, and perioperative experiences of non-directed living donors in Israel. Three online questionnaires (own questionnaire, Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES), Rushton Self-Report Altruism Scale) were distributed to 180 Jewish kidney donors with the help of Matnat Chaim organization. One hundred and fifteen responses were received (69.3% response rate). The motivation for most donors (60%) was a strong willingness to help and a desire to do good. The majority of donors (78.3%) reported their health status as unchanged after donation; however, 16.5% experienced clinical problems (eg, wound infection, more pain than expected), and 5.2% experienced psychological complications. About 18% reported their health to improve after donation. Most (80%) inspired someone else to also become a kidney donor. This study breaks the myth that Jews do not support organ donation. In fact, their high level of altruism and their positive experience with donation has propelled the practice of non-directed donation in Israel.

Ten years of Israel's organ transplant law: is it on the right track?

The Israeli organ donor law was established in 2008. In the ensuing 10 years there have been some improvements in deceased donation and living donor rates and a reduction in the unethical practice of transplant tourism. There is, however, controversy regarding increased access to transplant for those who have been living donors, who are family members of deceased donors, or who have registered their intent to donate. The issue of routine retrieval versus obtaining consent for organ donation has also been raised. This commentary will address these issue, and propose some steps for improvement of the current Israeli organ donation system.