{"title":"Family physicians' role in recruitment of organ donors.","authors":"S A Bidigare, A R Ellis","doi":"10.1001/archfami.9.7.601","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine if family physicians can increase the commitment of patients to organ donation.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Prospective, systematically randomized, cross-sectional study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Family practice residency medical center associated with an urban, community-based teaching institution.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>A total of 300 patients aged 18 years or older, able to give consent, and being seen for non-life-threatening visits; 247 patients returned valid second questionnaires.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Instruments included 2 self-administered questionnaires. All patients received questionnaire 1 to be completed in the examination room. They also received an informational brochure, a Michigan Secretary of State driver's license sticker (donor sticker) and questionnaire 2. Group 1 received the written materials only. Group 2 received written materials plus a brief verbal discussion by the investigators following a standard protocol. Questionnaire 2 was to be completed and returned after the interventions.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Self-reported completion of donor sticker was used to evaluate commitment to organ donation. Knowledge scores were summed for preintervention and postintervention means.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>Thirty-three percent of patients had already committed to organ donation prior to the study. Of those not previously committed, 40% decided to do so after the interventions. There was no statistical difference in the recruitment of donors between the 2 intervention groups. Of new donors identified, 65% stated their decision was due to written materials provided, while 34% attributed this to discussion with a physician. Thirty-five percent of the family members made arrangements to donate their own organs after the discussion with the patient. There was a significant difference between mean pretest and posttest knowledge scores (10 questions; 7.9 vs 9.2; P<.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Family physicians can increase the commitment to organ donation through a relatively simple intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":8295,"journal":{"name":"Archives of family medicine","volume":"9 7","pages":"601-4; discussion 605"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"41","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of family medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/archfami.9.7.601","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 41
Abstract
Objective: To determine if family physicians can increase the commitment of patients to organ donation.
Setting: Family practice residency medical center associated with an urban, community-based teaching institution.
Patients: A total of 300 patients aged 18 years or older, able to give consent, and being seen for non-life-threatening visits; 247 patients returned valid second questionnaires.
Interventions: Instruments included 2 self-administered questionnaires. All patients received questionnaire 1 to be completed in the examination room. They also received an informational brochure, a Michigan Secretary of State driver's license sticker (donor sticker) and questionnaire 2. Group 1 received the written materials only. Group 2 received written materials plus a brief verbal discussion by the investigators following a standard protocol. Questionnaire 2 was to be completed and returned after the interventions.
Main outcome measures: Self-reported completion of donor sticker was used to evaluate commitment to organ donation. Knowledge scores were summed for preintervention and postintervention means.
Result: Thirty-three percent of patients had already committed to organ donation prior to the study. Of those not previously committed, 40% decided to do so after the interventions. There was no statistical difference in the recruitment of donors between the 2 intervention groups. Of new donors identified, 65% stated their decision was due to written materials provided, while 34% attributed this to discussion with a physician. Thirty-five percent of the family members made arrangements to donate their own organs after the discussion with the patient. There was a significant difference between mean pretest and posttest knowledge scores (10 questions; 7.9 vs 9.2; P<.01).
Conclusion: Family physicians can increase the commitment to organ donation through a relatively simple intervention.
目的:确定家庭医生是否能提高患者对器官捐献的承诺。设计:前瞻性、系统随机、横断面研究。环境:家庭执业住院医师医疗中心与城市,社区为基础的教学机构。患者:总共300名18岁或以上的患者,能够表示同意,并且正在进行无生命危险的访问;247例患者返回有效的第二次问卷。干预措施:工具包括2份自填问卷。所有患者均收到调查表1,在检查室完成。他们还收到了一本信息小册子,一张密歇根州州务卿驾驶执照贴纸(捐赠者贴纸)和一份问卷。第一组只收到书面材料。第二组收到书面材料,外加调查人员按照标准方案进行简短的口头讨论。问卷2在干预后完成并返回。主要观察指标:使用自我报告的供体贴纸完成情况来评估器官捐赠的承诺。对干预前和干预后的知识得分进行汇总。结果:33%的患者在研究前已经承诺捐献器官。在那些以前没有承诺的人中,40%的人在干预后决定这样做。两个干预组在供体招募方面无统计学差异。在确定的新捐赠者中,65%的人表示他们的决定是由于提供的书面材料,而34%的人将其归因于与医生的讨论。35%的家属在与患者讨论后决定捐献自己的器官。测试前和测试后的平均知识得分有显著差异(10题;7.9 vs 9.2;结论:家庭医生可以通过一个相对简单的干预来增加器官捐献的意愿。