Life beyond life: Perceptions of post-mortem organ donation and consent to donate-A focus group study in Italy

OBJECTIVES

Many factors such as personal and cultural beliefs, misinformation, fear of death and inadequate will registering procedures can influence post-mortem organ donation. The present study aimed to explore the perceptions, beliefs and information around post-mortem donation and will expression in different groups of the Italian population, to orient future interventions and raise awareness.

DESIGN

Qualitative research with focus groups.

METHODS

A total of 38 focus groups involving 353 participants including the general population (young adults: 18-39, mature adults: 40-70), local and hospital health professionals, critical area health professionals (emergency room and intensive care), registry office employees and opinion leaders, were conducted in six regions from different parts of Italy between June and November 2021. Thematic analysis was conducted with the use of Atlas.ti9.

RESULTS

Five overarching themes were identified: dilemmas regarding donation, resistance to donation, facilitators of donation, difficulties in terms of will expression and proposals to encourage will expression. Possible facilitators were having personal and professional experiences with organ donation, feeling useful for society, having reliable information and trust in the health care system. Potential barriers to donation were doubts and fears about brain death, bodily integrity concerns, religious beliefs, misinformation and distrust in the health care system.

CONCLUSIONS

These results highlighted the significance of a bottom-up perspective with regard to identifying the personal perceptions and beliefs with regard to donation, underlining the urgency of creating tailored interventions to sensitize different groups of the population in terms of promoting an informed choice and a culture of donation.

Kidney transplantation and withdrawal rates among wait-listed first-generation immigrants in Italy

Background

Multiple barriers diminish access to kidney transplantation (KT) in immigrant compared to non-immigrant populations. It is unknown whether immigration status reduces the likelihood of KT after wait-listing despite universal healthcare coverage with uniform access to transplantation.

Methods

We retrospectively collected data of all adult waiting list (WL) registrants in Italy (2010–20) followed for 5 years until death, KT in a foreign center, deceased-donor kidney transplant (DDKT), living-donor kidney transplant (LDKT) or permanent withdrawal from the WL. We calculated adjusted relative probability of DDKT, LDKT and permanent WL withdrawal in different immigrant categories using competing-risks multiple regression models.

Results

Patients were European Union (EU)-born (n = 21 624), Eastern European-born (n = 606) and non-European-born (n = 1944). After controlling for age, sex, blood type, dialysis vintage, case-mix and sensitization status, non-European-born patients had lower LDKT rates compared to other immigrant categories: LDKT adjusted relative probability of non-European-born vs. Eastern European-born 0.51 (95% CI: 0.33–0.79; P = 0.002); of non-European-born vs. EU-Born: 0.65 (95% CI: 0.47–0.82; P = 0.001). Immigration status did not affect the rate of DDKT or permanent WL withdrawal.

Conclusions

Among EU WL registrants, non-European immigration background is associated with reduced likelihood of LDKT but similar likelihood of DDKT and permanent WL withdrawal. Wherever not available, new national policies should enable coverage of travel and medical fees for living-donor surgery and follow-up for non-resident donors to improve uptake of LDKT in immigrant patients, and provide KT education that is culturally competent, individually tailored and easily understandable for patients and their potential living donors.

Organ donor screening for carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria in Italian intensive care units: the DRIn study

The 759 cases of brain death declaration (BDD [Italian law, 6 hours of observation time]) that occurred in 190 Italian intensive care units (ICUs) between May and September 2012 were studied to quantify carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria (CR-GN) isolated in organ donors, to evaluate adherence to national screening guidelines, and to identify risk factors for CR-GN isolation. Mandatory blood, bronchoalveolar lavage, and urine cultures were performed on the BDD day in 99% of used donors. Because results were rarely made available before transplant, >20% of transplants were performed before obtaining any microbiological information, and organs from 15 of 22 CR-GN cases were used. Two (lung-liver) of the 37 recipients died, likely because of donor-derived early CR-GN sepsis. ICU stay >3 days (odds ratio [OR] = 7.49, P = .004), fever (OR = 3.11, P = .04), age <60 years (OR = 2.80, P = .06), and positive ICU epidemiology (OR = 8.77, P = .07) were associated with CR-GN isolation. An association between single ICU and risk of CR-GN was observed, as a result of differences across ICUs (ICC = 29%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.5%-72%) probably related to inadequate practices of infection control. Continuous education aimed at implementing priority actions, including stewardship programs for a rational use of antimicrobials, is a priority in healthcare systems and transplant networks. Improved awareness among ICU personnel regarding the importance of early CR-GN detection and timely alert systems might facilitate decisions regarding organ suitability and eventually save recipient lives.

The effect of differing kidney disease treatment modalities and organ donation and transplantation practices on health expenditure and patient outcomes

The Effect of Differing Kidney Disease Treatment Modalities and Organ Donation and Transplantation Practices on Health Expenditure and Patient Outcomes (EDITH) aims to obtain information on long-term kidney transplant outcomes, long-term health outcomes of living kidney donors and detailed outcomes and costs related to the different treatment modalities of end-stage kidney disease. Nine partners from seven European Union countries will participate in this project.

From the EU Legislation to the Application of the Single European Code: Support to the Implementation

The Italian National Transplant Centre (CNT) is coordinating with the Italian National Blood Centre (CNS) the Joint Action '!' (www.eurocet128.eu), already built the European Tissue Establishment and Tissue and Cell Product Compendia between 2011 and 2014 in order to provide European Member States with a tool which would grant traceability of tissues and cells at human transplant purpose across the European Union. The two compendia are available on an online platform hosted and managed by the European Commission.

The EUROCET Network: Support for Coding, Vigilance and Surveillance

BACKGROUND: In the last years, there have been increasing concerns about the safety and traceability of human tissues and cells in Europe. In order to regulate this part of medical practice, the European Commission issued 3 directives between 2004 and 2006 and endorsed EUROCET to support member states in fulfilling some of their obligations. MATHODS: EUROCET created a connection with the European Union (EU) Competent Authorities (CAs) and set up a website where lists of the CAs, the authorized Tissue Establishments (TEs) and the activity data are published and updated. Moreover, EUROCET is involved within the Vigilance and Surveillance of Substances of Human Origin (SOHO V&S) project, aiming to support the EU member states in the establishment of vigilance and surveillance systems for tissues and cells. EUROCET is also working with EU stakeholders to develop a common coding system concerning donation and products. RESULTS: There are 33 countries in EUROCET and 57 CAs. 3,974 TEs are recorded: 1,108 for tissues, 1,480 for haematopoietic progenitor cells and 1,386 for assisted reproduction. On the website, it is possible to find the 2010 activity data report. CONCLUSION: Based on its cooperation with the CAs, EUROCET represents them in the European network. Nowadays, the EU member states can rely on a web portal and database in order to put the tissue and cell directives into practice.