Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Israel Journal of Health Policy Research 1/2020

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Original research article

Attitudes, knowledge, and preferences of the Israeli public regarding the allocation of donor organs for transplantation

Authors: Amir Elalouf, Joseph S. Pliskin, Tehila Kogut

Published in: Israel Journal of Health Policy Research | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

There is a stark disparity between the number of patients awaiting deceased-donor organ transplants and the rate at which organs become available. Though organs for transplantation are assumed to be a community resource, and the organ supply depends on public willingness to donate, current allocation schemes do not explicitly incorporate public priorities and preferences. This paper seeks to provide insights regarding the Israeli public’s preferences regarding criteria for organ (specifically, kidney) allocation, and to determine whether these preferences are in line with current allocation policies.

Methods

A market research company administered a telephone survey to 604 adult participants representing the Jewish-Israeli public (age range: 18–95; 50% male). The questionnaire comprised 39 questions addressing participants’ knowledge, attitudes, and preferences regarding organ donation and criteria for organ allocation, including willingness to donate.

Results

The criteria that respondents marked as most important in prioritizing waitlist candidates were maximum medical benefit (51.3% of respondents) and waiting time (21%). Donor status (i.e., whether the candidate is registered as an organ donor) was ranked by 43% as the least significant criterion. Most participants expressed willingness to donate the organs of a deceased relative; notably, they indicated that they would be significantly more willing to donate if organ allocation policies took their preferences regarding allocation criteria into account. Unlike individuals in other countries (e.g., the UK, the US, and Australia) who responded to similar surveys, Israeli survey respondents did not assign high importance to the candidate’s age (24% ranked it as the least important factor). Interestingly, in some cases, participants’ declared preferences regarding the importance of various allocation criteria diverged from their actual choices in hypothetical organ allocation scenarios.

Conclusions

The findings of this survey indicate that Israel’s citizens are willing to take part in decisions about organ allocation. Respondents did not seem to have a strict definition or concept of what they deem to be just; yet, in general, their preferences are compatible with current policy. Importantly, participants noted that they would be more willing to donate organs if their preferences were integrated into the allocation policy. Accordingly, we propose that allocation systems must strive to respect community values and perceptions while maintaining continued clinical effectiveness.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
7.
go back to reference Sperling D, Gurman GM. Factors encouraging and inhibiting organ donation in Israel. Bioeth Inq. 2012;9:479–97.CrossRef Sperling D, Gurman GM. Factors encouraging and inhibiting organ donation in Israel. Bioeth Inq. 2012;9:479–97.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference The Transplantation Society of Australia and New Zealand. Organ transplantation from deceased donors: consensus statement on eligibility criteria and allocation protocols. (version 1.1): Australian Government: Organ and Tissue Authority; 2011. The Transplantation Society of Australia and New Zealand. Organ transplantation from deceased donors: consensus statement on eligibility criteria and allocation protocols. (version 1.1): Australian Government: Organ and Tissue Authority; 2011.
12.
go back to reference Norman DJ. The kidney transplant wait-list: allocation of patients to a limited supply of organs. Semin Dial. 2005;18:456–9.CrossRef Norman DJ. The kidney transplant wait-list: allocation of patients to a limited supply of organs. Semin Dial. 2005;18:456–9.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Tong A, Jan S, Wong G, Craig JC, Irving M, Chadban S, et al. Patient preferences for the allocation of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation: a mixed methods study. BMC Nephrol. 2012;13:18.CrossRef Tong A, Jan S, Wong G, Craig JC, Irving M, Chadban S, et al. Patient preferences for the allocation of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation: a mixed methods study. BMC Nephrol. 2012;13:18.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Wilmot S, Ratcliffe J, Allen C. How well do members of the public deal with a distributive justice problem in health care? J Health Serv Res Policy. 2004;9(1):7–13.CrossRef Wilmot S, Ratcliffe J, Allen C. How well do members of the public deal with a distributive justice problem in health care? J Health Serv Res Policy. 2004;9(1):7–13.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Neuberger J, Adams D, MacMaster P, Maidment A, Speed M. Assessing priorities for allocation of donor liver grafts: survey of public and clinicians. BMJ. 1998;317:172–5.CrossRef Neuberger J, Adams D, MacMaster P, Maidment A, Speed M. Assessing priorities for allocation of donor liver grafts: survey of public and clinicians. BMJ. 1998;317:172–5.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Ratcliffe J. Public preferences for the allocation of donor liver grafts for transplantation. Health Econ. 2000;9:137–48.CrossRef Ratcliffe J. Public preferences for the allocation of donor liver grafts for transplantation. Health Econ. 2000;9:137–48.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Khalaila R. Religion, altruism, knowledge and attitudes toward organ donation: A survey among a sample of Israeli college students. Med Law. 2013;32:115–29.PubMed Khalaila R. Religion, altruism, knowledge and attitudes toward organ donation: A survey among a sample of Israeli college students. Med Law. 2013;32:115–29.PubMed
31.
go back to reference Siegal G. Making the case for directed organ donation to registered donors in Israel. Isr J Health Policy Res. 2014;3:1.CrossRef Siegal G. Making the case for directed organ donation to registered donors in Israel. Isr J Health Policy Res. 2014;3:1.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Besser A, Amir M, Barkan S. Who signs an organ transplant donor card? A study of personality and individual differences in a sample of Israeli university students. Personal Individ Differ. 2004;36:1709–23.CrossRef Besser A, Amir M, Barkan S. Who signs an organ transplant donor card? A study of personality and individual differences in a sample of Israeli university students. Personal Individ Differ. 2004;36:1709–23.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Israel Transplant Center. Public attitudes towards organ donation–national survey. Tel Aviv: Israel Transplant Center; 2004. Israel Transplant Center. Public attitudes towards organ donation–national survey. Tel Aviv: Israel Transplant Center; 2004.
37.
go back to reference Dolan P, Shaw R. A note on a discussion group study of public preferences regarding priorities in the allocation of donor kidneys. Health Policy. 2004;68:33–6.CrossRef Dolan P, Shaw R. A note on a discussion group study of public preferences regarding priorities in the allocation of donor kidneys. Health Policy. 2004;68:33–6.CrossRef
38.
go back to reference Wilmot S, Ratcliffe J. Principles of distributive justice used by members of the general public in the allocation of donor liver grafts for transplantation: a qualitative study. Health Expect. 2002;5:199–209.CrossRef Wilmot S, Ratcliffe J. Principles of distributive justice used by members of the general public in the allocation of donor liver grafts for transplantation: a qualitative study. Health Expect. 2002;5:199–209.CrossRef
41.
go back to reference Gofen A. Mind the gap: dimensions and influence of street-level divergence. J Public Adm Res Theory. 2013;24:473–93.CrossRef Gofen A. Mind the gap: dimensions and influence of street-level divergence. J Public Adm Res Theory. 2013;24:473–93.CrossRef
42.
go back to reference Kogut T. Public decisions or private decisions? When the specific case guides public decisions. J Behav Decis Mak. 2009;22:91–100.CrossRef Kogut T. Public decisions or private decisions? When the specific case guides public decisions. J Behav Decis Mak. 2009;22:91–100.CrossRef
43.
go back to reference Kogut T, Ritov I. Target dependent ethics: discrepancies between ethical decisions toward specific and general targets. Curr Opin Psychol. 2015;6:145–9.CrossRef Kogut T, Ritov I. Target dependent ethics: discrepancies between ethical decisions toward specific and general targets. Curr Opin Psychol. 2015;6:145–9.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Attitudes, knowledge, and preferences of the Israeli public regarding the allocation of donor organs for transplantation
Authors
Amir Elalouf
Joseph S. Pliskin
Tehila Kogut
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Israel Journal of Health Policy Research / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 2045-4015
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-020-00376-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

Israel Journal of Health Policy Research 1/2020 Go to the issue