The need for transplantable organs exceeds the available supply. Organ procurement organizations (OPOs) have undergone both voluntary and mandated changes to optimize available organs. The data from a single statewide OPO was reviewed from 1993 to 2008 and tracked with implementation of new protocols. During the study, 5548 organs were recovered with 4875 transplanted from 1441 donors (3.38 organs transplanted/donor (OTPD)). The conversion rate (CR) for consent rose from 42 to 72 per cent whereas the average age of donors increased from 33 to 45 years. After implementation of a family support liaison program, a higher performing hospital in the OPO realized an increase in CR from 57 to 97 per cent over 8 years. Implementation of an intensivist program improved OTPD. The number of standard criteria donors and extended criteria donors (ECD) increased. The increase in standard criteria donors yielded a large number of thoracic organs. ECD increased as did the organ discard rate from 8 to 16 per cent. Increases in organ retrieval were noted after incremental changes in OPO protocol. Family support and intensivist programs enhanced CR and OTPD. Increases in the number of ECD were noted with increasing age after the introduction of the intensivist program and an increase in transplant center use of these organs.
References
1.
Annual Report of the U.S.Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients: Transplant Data 1997–2006.Rockville MD: Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Healthcare Systems Bureau, Division of Transplantation; Richmond, VA: United Network for Organ Sharing; Ann Arbor, MI: University Renal Research and Education Association, 2007.
2.
DuBoisJ.M., DeVitaM.Donation after cardiac death in the United States: How to move forward.Crit Care Med2006; 34: 3045–7.
3.
WendlerD., DickertN.The consent process for cadaveric organ procurement: How does it work? How can it be improved?JAMA2001; 285: 329–33.
4.
SiminofL.A., BurantC., YoungnerS.J.Death and organ procurement: Public beliefs and attitudes.Kennedy Inst Ethics J2004; 14: 217–34.
5.
SiminofL.A., LawrenceR.H.Knowing patients’ preferences about organ donation: Does it make a difference?J Trauma2002; 53: 754–60.
6.
AulisioM.P., DeVitaM., LuebkeD.Taking values seriously: Ethical challenges in organ donation and transplantation for critical care professionals.Crit Care Med2007; 35(suppl.): S95–101.
7.
FlodenA., KelveredM., FridI., BackmanL.Causes why organ donation was not carried out despite the deceased being positive to donation.Transplant Proc2006; 38: 2619–21.
8.
GarrisonR.N., BentleyF.R., RaqueG.H.There is an answer to the shortage of organ donors.Surg Gyn and Ob.1991; 173: 391–6.
9.
WilliamsM.A., LipsettP.A., RushtonC.H.The physician's role in discussing organ donation with families.Crit Care Med2003; 31: 1568–73.
10.
GillJ.S., KlarenbachS., ColeE., ShemieS.D.Decreased organ donation in Canada: An opportunity to heal a fractured system.Am J Transplant2008; 8: 1580–7.
11.
ReubsaetA., BrugJ., MijkampM.D.The impact of an organ donation registration information program for high school students in the Netherlands.Soc Sci Med2005; 60: 1479–86.
12.
PiccoliG.B., SoragnaG., PutaggioS.Efficacy of an educational programme for secondary school students on opinions on renal transplantation and organ donation: A randomized controlled trial.Nephrol Dial Transplant2006; 21: 499–509.
13.
CantarovichF.The role of education in increasing organ donation.Ann Transplant2004; 9: 39–42.
14.
VinokurA.D., MerionR.M., CouperM.P.Educational web-based intervention for high school students to increase knowledge and promote positive attitudes toward organ donation.Health Educ Behav2006; 33: 773–86.
15.
QuinnM.T., AlexanderG.C., HollingsworthD.Design and evaluation of a workplace intervention to promote organ donation.Prog Transplant2006; 16: 253–9.
16.
KohH.K., JacobsonM.D., LyddyM.A statewide public health approach to improving organ donation: The Massachusetts Organ Donation Initiative.Am J Public Health2007; 97: 30–6.
17.
ChristmasA.B., BurrisG.W., BogartT.A., SingR.F.Organ donation: Family members not honoring patient wishes.J Trauma2008; 65: 1095–7.
18.
ChristmasA.B., MallicoE.J., BurrisG.W.A paradigm shift in the approach to families for organ donation: Honoring patients’ wishes versus request for permission in patients with Department of Motor Vehicles donor designation.J Trauma2008; 65: 1507–9.
19.
SalimA., BrownC., InabaK.Improving consent rates for organ donation: The effect of an inhouse coordinator program.J Trauma2007; 62: 1411–4.
20.
JacobyL., CroslerV., PohlH.Providing support to families considering the option of organ donation: An innovative training method.Prog Transplant2006; 16: 247–52.
21.
LockM., Crowley-MakotaM.Situating the practice of organ donation in familial, cultural, and political context.Transp Rev2008; 22: 154–7.
22.
KurzR.S., ScharffD.P., TerryT.Factors influencing organ donation decisions by African-Americans: A review of the literature.Med Care Res Rev2007; 64: 475–517.
23.
PhuaJ., LimT.K., ZygunD.A., DoigC.J.Pro/con debate: In patients who are potential candidates for organ donation after cardiac death, starting medications and/or interventions for the sole purpose of making the organs more viable is an acceptable practice.Crit Care2007; 11: 211.