History of organ donation by patients with cardiac death

When successful solid organ transplantation was initiated almost 40 years ago, its current success rate was not anticipated. But continuous efforts were undertaken to overcome the two major obstacles to success: injury caused by interrupting nutrient supply to the organ and rejection of the implanted organ by normal host defense mechanisms. Solutions have resulted from technologic medical advances, but also from using organs from different sources. Each potential solution has raised ethical concerns and has variably resulted in societal acclaim, censure, and apathy. Transplant surgery is now well accepted, and the list of transplant candidates has grown far quicker than the availability of organs. More than 30,000 patients were awaiting organs for transplantation at the end of March 1993. While most organs came from donors declared dead by brain criteria, the increasing shortage of donated organs has prompted a reexamination of prior restrictions of donor groups. Recently, organ procurement from donors with cardiac death has been reintroduced in the United States. This practice has been mostly abandoned by the U.S. and some, though not all, other countries. Transplantation has been more successful using organs procured from heart-beating, "brain dead" cadavers than organs from non-heart-beating cadavers. However, recent advances have led to success rates with organs from non-heart-beating donors that may portend large increases in organ donation and procurement from this source.     

Procuring organs from a non-heart-beating cadaver: a case report

Organ transplantation is an accepted therapy for major organ failure, but it depends on the availability of viable organs. Most organs transplanted in the U.S. come from either "brain-dead" or living related donors. Recently organ procurement from patients pronounced dead using cardiopulmonary criteria, so-called "non-heart-beating cadaver donors" (NHBCDs), has been reconsidered. In May 1992, the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) enacted a new, complicated policy for procuring organs from NHBCDs after the elective removal of life support. Seventeen months later only one patient has become a NHBCD. This article describes her case and the results of interviews with the health care team and the patient's family. The case and interviews are discussed in relation to several of the ethical concerns previously raised about the policy, including potential conflicts of interest, the definition of cardiopulmonary death, and a possible net decrease in organ donation. The conclusion is reached that organ procurement from non-heart-beating cadavers is feasible and may be desirable both for the patient's family and the health care providers.     

Non-heart-beating organ donation: a reply to Campbell and Weber.

In the preceding commentary, Campbell and Weber raise two valid and important issues concerning non-heart-beating organ donation (NHBOD). First, because the procedure links withdrawal of life support and the potential for subsequent organ donation, the desire for organs may create a situation in which care of the dying individual has relatively less importance and the dying may receive suboptimal care. Second, even if concerns about care of the dying were dealt with adequately, there will not be enough non-heart-beating donors to significantly decrease the organ shortage that exists, making the procedure not worth the risk. We agree that attention to the important details of caring for the dying are, and must be, the primary concern of all health care workers caring for those individuals. Ensuring the patients' comfort, dignity, and autonomy, and providing for family and social support are the mainstays of this care. All policies for NHBOD should clearly support and mandate these concepts. Regarding the second concern, we agree that NHBOD is currently rare; however, evidence is increasing that this type of donation has great potential. Continued growth of the practice in this country will depend largely on public acceptance, which we believe will be directly influenced by whether the public perceives that care of the dying is not compromised by this procedure.     

Perish and publish: non-heart-beating organ donation and unduly iterative ethical review

In the expanding repertoire of practices designed to increase the supply of organs for transplantation, non-heart-beating cadaver organ donation has generated an ongoing debate in the literature. The continuing stream of articles is disquieting in part because it documents a troubling "trial-and-error ethics" approach to the formulation of organ procurement policy, and because it raises serious questions about the reasons that the development of this policy is being mediated by published communication. In the light of concerns about the implicit support and credibility that professional publications give to organ procurement policies, restraint in publishing articles about non-heart-beating organ donation as well as in devising such policies is strongly advocated.     

Development of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center policy for the care of terminally ill patients who may become organ donors after death following the removal of life support

In the mid 1980s it was apparent that the need for organ donors exceeded those willing to donate. Some University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) physicians initiated discussion of possible new organ donor categories including individuals pronounced dead by traditional cardiac criteria. However, they reached no conclusion and dropped the discussion. In the late 1980s and the early 1990s, four cases arose in which dying patients or their families requested organ donation following the elective removal of mechanical ventilation. Controversy surrounding these cases precipitated open discussion of the use of organ donors pronounced dead on the basis of cardiac criteria. Prolonged deliberations by many committees in the absence of precedent ultimately resulted in what is, to our knowledge, the country's first policy for organ donation following elective removal of life support. The policy is intricate and conservative. Care was taken to include as many interested parties as possible in an effort to achieve representative and broad based support. This paper describes the development of the UPMC policy on non-heart-beating organ donation.     

Dying but not killing: donation after cardiac death donors and the recovery of vital organs

Michael Potts, Paul A. Byrne, and David W. Evans are critical of donation after cardiac death (DCD). Contrary to the authors' assertion that the removal of vital organs is the proximate cause of death, the eventual fulfillment of the neurological criteria of death is solely dependant on the rate of brain cell death in the absence of circulation. Consistent with the "dead donor rule," DCD is not the cause of death.There are also procedural mechanisms to address the potential conflicts of interest that concern the authors. Rather than being prohibited, DCD may be an ethically justifiable exception to the rule that organ donors must be dead prior to organ recovery.     

Knowledge and attitudes of Polish university students toward organ donation and transplantation

Although the number of patients needing organ transplantation systematically increases, recent years have seen a considerable shortage of donors. The level of knowledge and attitudes toward donation are critical factors in achieving the required balance between supply and demand. This pilot study assessed the knowledge, opinions, and behaviors related to organ donation and transplantation among 625 students representing eight different fields of study from the University of Rzeszow in south-eastern Poland. Although the participants provided evidence of knowledge about human organ donation and transplantation, they were aware of the main organs of the human body for potential transplants, and generally showed positive attitudes; only 24% of the subjects indicated their willingness to register as a donor; only 3% stated that they had already registered and had a donor card. The findings suggest that good intentions do not translate into action and that Poland needs to develop a nation-wide, up-to-date, and youth-oriented health education program that builds on favorable attitudes toward organ donation and transplantation.     

Blood and organ donation: health impact,prevalence, correlates,and interventions

Abstract

Objective: Without a supply of blood, health services could not meet their clinical needs. Similarly, organs for transplantation save and transform lives. Donations are acts of generosity that are traditionally seen as altruistic, and accordingly, interventions to recruit and retain blood and organ donors have focused on altruism. We review the predictors, prevalence and correlates of these two behaviours, how effective interventions have been, and draw common themes.

Design: Narrative review.

Results: We highlight that both recipients and donors benefit, and as such neither blood nor organ donation is purely altruistic. We also highlight health problems associated with both types of donation. In evaluating interventions, we highlight that a move to an opt-out policy for organ donation may not be the simple fix it is believed to be, and propose interventions to enhance the effectiveness of an opt-in policy (e.g. social media updates). We show that incentives, text messaging, feedback and a focus on prosocial emotions (e.g. ‘warm-glow’, ‘gratitude’) may be effective interventions for both blood and organ donation. Interventions designed to reduce fainting (e.g. water pre-loading) are also effective for blood donation.

Conclusions: We conclude that affect is key to understanding both types of donation and in designing effective interventions.     

Value Priorities and Organ Donation in Young Adults

This research identifies major personal values among American university students that predict organ-donation registration with the Department of Motor Vehicles. Participants responded to a factual test of their knowledge about organ donation, indicated whether or not they had registered as posthumous donors, and filled out a personality inventory measuring their personal values (Schwartz, 1992, 1994). The data indicated a high level of factual knowledge about organ donation; and the greater the level of knowledge, the more likely participants were registered to donate their organs. Also, participants higher in benevolence, universalism, achievement, and stimulation were more likely to have registered to donate their organs. The results are discussed in terms of the need to develop more effective health-communication campaigns by using specific health-education messages tailored to students majoring in different disciplines or to people in various occupations as a means of increasing their willingness to donate.     

Conflict of interest in the procurement of organs from cadavers following withdrawal of life support

The University of Pittsburgh policy for procuring organs from non-heart-beating cadaver donors recognizes the potential for conflicts of interest between caring for a "hopelessly ill" patient who has forgone life-sustaining treatment and caring for a potential organ donor. The policy calls for a separation between those medical personnel who care for the gravely ill patient and those involved with the care of transplant recipients. While such a separation is possible in theory, it is difficult or impossible to attain in practice. However, such a separation of duties would be unnecessary if an arbitrator were appointed to monitor the proceedings as they take place on a case-by-case basis. In this way, the biases--real or potential--of the individuals involved could be identified, and the harmful effects of the unavoidable conflicts of interest could be minimized.     

Operation Blue,ULTRA: DION--the donation inmate organ network

Presently more than 80,000 Americans await an organ transplant, while 10 to 12 people die each day because of the lack of organs. The program proposed here would allow federal inmates additional "time off" for agreeing to become living donors or to provide organs or their bodies upon death. Such a program could add 100 to 170 thousand new organ donors to the pool, with another 10 to 12 thousand added annually. If the program were applied to all state inmates, up to 4 million new donors might be added, with another 10 to 13 thousand added annually. Given the extreme need for more organ donors and the need for more living donors, the current National Transplant Act of 1984 and the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act must be amended, while still retaining control of donation procedures.     

Death, organ transplantation and medical practice

A series of papers in Philosophy, Ethics and Humanities in Medicine (PEHM) have recently disputed whether non-heart beating organ donors are alive and whether non-heart beating organ donation (NHBD) contravenes the dead donor rule. Several authors who argue that NHBD involves harvesting organs from live patients appeal to "strong irreversibility" (death beyond the reach of resuscitative efforts to restore life) as a necessary criterion that patients must meet before physicians can declare them to be dead. Sam Shemie, who defends our current practice of NHBD, holds that in fact physicians consider patients to be dead or not according to physician intention to resuscitate or not. We suggest that criteria for a concept are not necessarily truth conditions for assertions involving the concept. Hence, non-heart beating donors may be declared dead without meeting the criterion of strong irreversibility even though strong irreversibility is implied by the concept of death. Our perception that a concept applies in a given case is determined not by the concept itself but by our necessary skill and judgment when using it. In the case of deciding that a patient is dead, such judgment is learned by physicians as they learn the practice of medicine and may vary according to circumstances. Current practice of NHBD can therefore be defended without abandoning death as an empirical concept, as Shemie appears to do. We conclude that the dead donor rule continues to be viable and ought to be retained so as to guarantee what the public most cares about as regards organ donation: that physicians can be trusted to make determinations of eligibility for organ donation in the interests of patients and not for other purposes such as increasing the availability of organs.     

American Muslim Physician Attitudes Toward Organ Donation

Religious beliefs and values impact Muslim patients' attitudes toward a variety of healthcare decisions, including organ donation. Muslim physician attitudes toward organ donation, however, are less well studied. Utilizing a national survey of physician members of the Islamic Medical Association of North America, relationships between religiosity, patterns of bioethics resource utilization, and sociodemographic characteristics with attitudes toward organ donation were assessed. Of 255 respondents, 251 answered the target question, “in your understanding, does Islamic bioethics and law permit organ donation?.” 177 respondents (70%) answered positively, 30 (12%) negatively, and 46 (18%) did not know. Despite the overwhelming majority of respondents believing organ donation to be permitted by Islamic bioethics and law, fewer than one-third (n = 72, 30%) are registered donors. Several sociodemographic features had a positive association with believing organ donation to be permitted: ethnic descent other than that of South Asian, having immigrated to the USA as an adult, and male sex. When using a logistic regression model controlling for these three variables as potential confounders, the best predictor of Muslim physicians believing organ donation to be permissible was utilization of an Imam as a bioethical resource (odds ratio 5.9, p = 0.02). Religiosity variables were not found to be associated with views on the Islamic permissibility of organ donation. While Muslim American physicians appear to believe there is religious support for organ donation, only a minority sign up to be donors. Greater study is needed to understand how physicians' attitudes regarding donation impact discussions between patients and physicians regarding the possibility of donating and of receiving a transplant.     

Procuring organs from a non-heart-beating cadaver: commentary on a case report

Procurement of organs from non-heart-beating cadaver donors raises concerns. Standards for optimal patient care during withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy are evolving and continue to be debated and studied. Consensus on specific procedures and methods has not been attained, however, and protocols for the procurement of organs from patients following the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies may compromise the evolving standards and harm the patient and the attendant family. In addition, there is little evidence to suggest that such protocols will significantly increase the number of organs procured. "Non-heart-beating cadaver" protocols that do not give comprehensive attention to optimal patient/family care at the time of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy ought not to be endorsed.     

Earning points for moral behavior: organ allocation based on reciprocity

Anticipating the reevaluation of the Dutch organ procurement system, in late 2003 the Rathenau Institute published a study entitled 'Gift or Contribution?' In this study, the author, Govert den Hartogh, carries out a thorough moral analysis of the problem of organ shortage and fair allocation of organs. He suggests there should be a change in mentality whereby organ donation is no longer viewed in terms of charity and the volunteer spirit, but rather in terms of duty and reciprocity. The procurement and allocation of donor organs should be seen as a system of mutually assured help. Fair allocation would imply to give priority to those who recognize and comply with their duty: the registered donors. The idea of viewing organ donation as an undertaking involving mutual benefit rather than as a matter of charity, however, is not new. Notwithstanding the fact that reference to charity and altruism is not required in order for the organ donation to be of moral significance, we will argue against the reciprocity-based scenario. Steering organ allocation towards those who are themselves willing to donate organs is both an ineffective and morally questionable means of attempting to counter organ shortage.     

Organ transplants,foreign nationals,and the free rider problem

There is strong sentiment for a policy which would exclude foreigners from access to organs from American cadaver donors. One common argument is that foreigners are ‘free riders’; since they are not members of the community whichgives organs, it would be unfair to allow them toreceive such a scarce resource. This essay examines the philosophical basis for the free rider argument, and compares that with the empirical data about organ donation in the U.S. The free rider argument ought not to be used to exclude foreign nationals because it is based on fallacious assumptions about group membership, and how the ‘giving community’ is defined. Polls show that even among the seventy-five per cent of Americans who support organ donation, only seventeen per cent had taken the small step of filling out donor cards. Therefore, it goes against logic to define the giving community as coextensive with American residency, while excluding foreigners who might well have become donors had they lived in countries which provided that option.     

Individualism–collectivism and organ donation intentions

This article investigates the impact of individualism–collectivism on a person's willingness to donate organs. In Study 1, an online survey showed that individualism–collectivism was significantly and positively associated with participants' willingness to register as organ donors while perceived benefit mediated this relationship. Study 2 demonstrated the causal effect of individualism–collectivism on organ donation intentions using a priming technique. Participants primed with collectivism were more likely to register as organ donors than those primed with individualism. Our findings provide unique insights into whether cultural values (i.e., individualism–collectivism) can predict people's organ donation intentions.     

Intention to consent to living organ donation: an exploratory study

Living organ donation, that is the removal and transplantation of whole organs or segments of organs that a volunteering donor can live without, has been proposed as an effective and sustainable source of transplantable organs to mitigate the deficit in supply from the traditional cadaveric donor pool. In 2006, the Irish government deemed the development of a national Living Transplant Programme a service priority. The current study aimed to investigate the efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) in the context of living organ donation intentions in an Irish sample. One hundred and thirty five undergraduate students (75 females, 60 males; mean age 20.6 years, SD 3.76) completed a self-report questionnaire assessing TPB variables while imagining themselves in a potential living liver donation scenario. In general, attitudes towards living donation were favourable. TPB components explained 44.8% of the variance in intentions. Attitude towards living donation emerged as the strongest predictor of intention. Self-reported levels of knowledge regarding living donation were generally poor. In light of recent EU Communications proposing the expansion of the use of living donors greater understanding of the determinants, psychological implications and ethical considerations in living donation decisions is necessary.