Assessing Global Organ Donation Policies: Opt-In vs Opt-Out

被引:64
作者
Etheredge, Harriet Rosanne [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Witwatersrand, Wits Donald Gordon Med Ctr, Sch Clin Med, Johannesburg, South Africa
[2] Univ Witwatersrand, Steve Biko Ctr Bioeth, Sch Clin Med, Johannesburg, South Africa
关键词
organ donation; opt-in; opt-out; consent; transparency; developing countrie; PRESUMED CONSENT; LIVER-TRANSPLANT; SOUTH; JOHANNESBURG; PROCUREMENT; KNOWLEDGE; COUNTRIES; ATTITUDES; CARE;
D O I
10.2147/RMHP.S270234
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
This paper argues that there is little difference between opt-in and opt-out organ donation systems for increasing donor numbers when used in isolation. Independently diverting to an opt-out system confers no obvious advantage and can harm efforts to bolster donations. Rather, it is essential to address barriers to organ donation on several levels along with a switch in system. Moreover, for many countries, it may be more beneficial to adequately capacitate the donation system already in place, rather than entertain a significant change with its attendant resource requirements. For decades, the international transplant community has been involved in vigorous debate as to the merits of moving from default opt-in systems to opt-out policies to grow organ donor numbers and better meet the ever- increasing demand for lifesaving transplants. Opt-out is certainly en vogue, with Wales, England and Nova Scotia recently switching over, Scotland due to become opt-out in March 2021 and Northern Ireland and Canada seriously considering a similar move. Thanks to several countries making the switch from opt-in to opt-out over the last 20-30 years, there are sets of robust longitudinal data that aid in analysing the efficacy of donation systems. However, these data are often contradictory and largely inconclusive, suggesting other factors may be in play. This paper reviews some emerging trends in opt-in versus opt-out organ donation policies and considers recent data that elucidates some of the main contentions across each. Ethical frameworks underpinning donation systems, such as informed consent, trust and transparency, are discussed in detail. Substantial time is also devoted to opt-in vs opt-out systems in developing countries, which tend to be excluded from many analyses, and where the challenges faced are magnified by socio-economic constraints. This constitutes a major gap in recently published literature, as developing countries often lag far behind their developed counterparts in donor and transplant numbers.
引用
收藏
页码:1985 / 1998
页数:14
相关论文
共 48 条
[1]   A Systematic Review of Opt-out Versus Opt-in Consent on Deceased Organ Donation and Transplantation (2006-2016) [J].
Ahmad, M. Usman ;
Hanna, Afif ;
Mohamed, Ahmed-Zayn ;
Schlindwein, Alex ;
Pley, Caitlin ;
Bahner, Ingrid ;
Mhaskar, Rahul ;
Pettigrew, Gavin J. ;
Jarmi, Tambi .
WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2019, 43 (12) :3161-3171
[2]   Organ donation and transplant: The Islamic perspective [J].
Ali, Abeera ;
Ahmed, Tibyan ;
Ayub, Ali ;
Dano, Sumaya ;
Khalid, Maroof ;
El-Dassouki, Noor ;
Orchanian-Cheff, Ani ;
Alibhai, Shabbir ;
Mucsi, Istvan .
CLINICAL TRANSPLANTATION, 2020, 34 (04)
[3]   Seven Faces of a Fatwa: Organ Transplantation and Islam [J].
Ali, Mansur ;
Maravia, Usman .
RELIGIONS, 2020, 11 (02)
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2013, 2012 NAT SURV ORG DO
[5]   Comparison of organ donation and transplantation rates between opt-out and opt-in systems [J].
Arshad, Adam ;
Anderson, Benjamin ;
Sharif, Adnan .
KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL, 2019, 95 (06) :1453-1460
[6]  
Botha J, 2018, AIDS, V32, pF13, DOI [10.1097/qad.0000000000002000, 10.1097/QAD.0000000000002000]
[7]  
Brown S.J., 2018, Clin. Ethics, V13, P143, DOI [10.1177/1477750918772264, DOI 10.1177/1477750918772264]
[8]  
Budiani DA., 2008, Social Medicine, V4, P48
[9]   A Comprehensive Analysis of the Current Status and Unmet Needs in Kidney Transplantation in Southeast Asia [J].
Chan-on, Chitranon ;
Sarwal, Minnie M. .
FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE, 2017, 4
[10]  
Crymble K, 2017, SOUTH AFR J CRIT CAR, V33, P52, DOI [10.7196/322, 10.7196/sajcc.2017.v33i2.322]