0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Special Communication |

The Consent Process for Cadaveric Organ Procurement:  How Does It Work? How Can It Be Improved?

Dave Wendler, PhD; Neal Dickert, BA
JAMA. 2001;285(3):329-333. doi:10.1001/jama.285.3.329.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Context Understanding the consent process that organ procurement organizations (OPOs) use is crucial to improving the process and thereby reducing the number of individuals who die each year for want of an organ transplant. However, no data exist on OPOs' current consent practices.

Objective To assess whose wishes OPOs follow when procuring solid organs from deceased individuals and whether advance directives and computerized registries might improve the consent process for solid organ procurement.

Design, Setting, and Participants Telephone survey conducted from June to August 1999 of all 61 active OPOs.

Main Outcome Measures Responses to the 49-question survey addressing consent practices in specific scenarios of deceased and next of kin wishes.

Results Widespread divergence exists in OPOs' consent practices for cadaveric solid organ procurement. Regarding overall consent practices, 19 (31%) OPOs reported that they follow the deceased's wishes, 19 (31%) follow the next of kin's wishes, 13 (21%) procure organs if neither party objects, 8 (13%) procure organs if either party consents or neither objects, and 2 (3%) do not follow any of these 4 overall practices. These differences appear to be traceable to implicit ethical disagreements about whose wishes should be followed. A total of 29 (48%) OPOs reported having an official policy to address whether they follow the family's or deceased's wishes. Regarding factors that influence OPOs' choice of consent practice, 29 (48%) respondents ranked impact on the deceased's family as the most important factor, 13 (21%) ranked state law as most important, and 7 (11%) ranked the priority of the deceased's wishes as most important. Durable power of attorney appeared to have substantial weight in OPOs' decisions; for example, in the scenario in which the deceased supported organ donation and the next of kin opposed it, 34 (56%) OPOs reported they were likely to procure organs based on the consent of the holder of the deceased's durable power of attorney, whereas only 7 (11%) reported they were likely to procure organs based on a document of gift (a living will, donor card, or driver's license).

Conclusions Expanding the legal scope of living wills to cover individuals' organ donation preferences would likely have little impact on procurement rates. In contrast, expanding the legal scope of durable powers of attorney for health care may have a significant impact. A national discussion should take place addressing the underlying ethical issues that appear to account for much of the divergence among OPOs' consent practices for cadaveric solid organ procurement.

Figures in this Article
Sign in to download this free article PDF

Sign in

Create a free personal account to sign up for alerts, share articles, and more.

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview

Figures

Figure. Possible Deceased and Next of Kin Preference Combinations
Graphic Jump Location
* Scenarios not assessed ("procure" and "do not procure" are assumptions and not based on any data).

Tables

References

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 54

Sign in to download this free article PDF

Sign in

Create a free personal account to sign up for alerts, share articles, and more.

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...
Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Jobs
brightcove.createExperiences();