Pular para o conteúdo principal

ETHNOS_APP

Início • Busca • Periódicos • Lista 0

Public preferences for the allocation of donor organs for transplantation

Focus group discussions

Dados Bibliográficos

ID19506002
AutoresCarina Oedingen (0000-0002-5070-284X, Institute for Epidemiology Social Medicine and Health Systems Research Hannover Medical School Hannover Germany, autor correspondente), Tim Bartling (0000-0002-2867-8396, Institute for Epidemiology Social Medicine and Health Systems Research Hannover Medical School Hannover Germany), Marie-Luise Dierks (0000-0002-0225-6048, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover), Marie‐Luise Dierks (Institute for Epidemiology Social Medicine and Health Systems Research Hannover Medical School Hannover Germany), Axel C Mühlbacher (Institute of Health Economics and Health Care Management Hochschule Neubrandenburg Neubrandenburg Germany), Axel Mühlbacher (0000-0003-4402-9211, Duke University), Harald Schrem (0000-0002-5527-7555, Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery Medical University Graz Graz Austria), Christian Krauth (0000-0003-0836-9737, Institute for Epidemiology Social Medicine and Health Systems Research Hannover Medical School Hannover Germany)
Ano2020
Volume23
Fascículo3
Páginas670-680
Data de publicação2020-06-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoHealth Expectations (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 1369-6513 • E-ISSN: 1369-7625
EditoraWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/hex.13047
PMID32189453
OpenAlexW3011929133
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas4
Referências citadas30

BACKGROUND: Deceased donor organs are scarce resources because of a large supply-and-demand mismatch. This scarcity leads to an ethical dilemma, forcing priority-setting of how these organs should be allocated and whom to leave behind. OBJECTIVE: To explore public preferences for the allocation of donor organs in regard to ethical aspects of distributive justice. METHODS: Focus groups were facilitated between November and December 2018 at Hannover Medical School. Participants were recruited locally. Transcripts were assessed with content analysis using the deductive framework method. All identified and discussed criteria were grouped according to the principles of distributive justice and reported following the COREQ statement. RESULTS: Six focus groups with 31 participants were conducted. Overall, no group made a final decision of how to allocate donor organ; however, we observed that not only a single criterion/principle but rather a combination of criteria/principles is relevant. Therefore, the public wants to allocate organs to save as many lives as possible by both maximizing success for and also giving priority to urgent patients considering the best compatibility. Age, waiting time, reciprocity and healthy lifestyles should be used as additional criteria, while sex, financial status and family responsibility should not, based on aspects of equality. CONCLUSIONS: All participants recognized the dilemma that prioritizing one patient might cause another one to die. They discussed mainly the unclear trade-offs between effectiveness/benefit and medical urgency and did not establish an agreement about their importance. The results suggest a need of preference studies to elucidate public preferences in organ allocation

Actuarial science · Business · Dilemma · Distributive justice · Economic Justice · Economics · Focus group · Health care rationing · Microeconomics · Organ donation · Political science · Scarcity · Law · Medicine · Organ Donation and Transplantation · Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes · Psychology · Renal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments · Social Psychology · Marketing · Surgery · Transplantation

  • Public values and guiding principles for implementing epitope compatibility in kidney transplantation allocation criteria

    Open Access•Caitlin Slomp, Louisa Edwards et al.•BMC Public Health•2023

  • Israeli Medical Experts’ Knowledge, Attitudes, and Preferences in Allocating Donor Organs for Transplantation

    Open Access•Amir Elalouf•International Journal of…•2022

  • Abolishing age criterion to determine organ transplant recipients in Israel

    Open Access•Eyal Katvan, Orly Korin et al.•Health Policy•2024

  • Religio-cultural facilitators and barriers in decision-making on organ donation

    Farzin Mollazadeh, Naser Parizad et al.•Death Studies•2024

  • Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research

    Open Access•Nicola Gale, Nicola K Gale et al.•BMC Medical Research Methodology•2013

  • Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (Coreq)

    A Jaure, A Tong et al.•International Journal for Quality…•2007

  • Distributive Justice

    Julian Lamont•Distributive Justice•2017

  • Distributive Justice

    David Miller•Ethics•1992

  • Qualitative Interviewing

    Open Access•Frank B Brooks, Herbert J Rubin et al.•Modern Language Journal•1996

  • Principles of distributive justice used by members of the general public in the allocation of donor liver grafts for transplantation

    Open Access•Stephen Wilmot, Julie Ratcliffe•Health Expectations•2002

  • "Focus group research and "the patient's view

    Open Access•P Lehoux, Blake Poland et al.•Social Science & Medicine•2006

Obras citantes distintas4
Citações por ano1
Intervalo de citações2022 - 2024 (3)
Velocidade de citaçãorecent
Altamente citadoNão
Tipos de citaçãoNeutras: 4
Ethnos_APP • Projeto Open Source • Licença MIT • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacidade e Cookies • Documentação da API: api.ethnos.app/docs • Código da API: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Código do Frontend: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae