Exploring the experiences and perspectives of substitute decision-makers involved in decisions about deceased organ donation: a qualitative study protocol

Jacob Crawshaw, Justin Presseau, Zack van Allen, Livia Pinheiro Carvalho, Kim Jordison, Shane English, Dean A Fergusson, Francois Lauzier, Alexis F Turgeon, Aimee J Sarti, Claudio Martin, Frédérick D'Aragon, Alvin Ho-Ting Li, Greg Knoll, Ian Ball, Jamie Brehaut, Karen E A Burns, Marie-Chantal Fortin, Matthew Weiss, Maureen Meade, Pierre Marsolais, Sam Shemie, Sanabelle Zaabat, Sonny Dhanani, Simon C Kitto, Michaël Chassé, Canadian Donation and Transplantation Research Program and the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group, Jacob Crawshaw, Justin Presseau, Zack van Allen, Livia Pinheiro Carvalho, Kim Jordison, Shane English, Dean A Fergusson, Francois Lauzier, Alexis F Turgeon, Aimee J Sarti, Claudio Martin, Frédérick D'Aragon, Alvin Ho-Ting Li, Greg Knoll, Ian Ball, Jamie Brehaut, Karen E A Burns, Marie-Chantal Fortin, Matthew Weiss, Maureen Meade, Pierre Marsolais, Sam Shemie, Sanabelle Zaabat, Sonny Dhanani, Simon C Kitto, Michaël Chassé, Canadian Donation and Transplantation Research Program and the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group

Abstract

Introduction: In Canada, deceased organ donation provides over 80% of transplanted organs. At the time of death, families, friends or others assume responsibility as substitute decision-makers (SDMs) to consent to organ donation. Despite their central role in this process, little is known about what barriers, enablers and beliefs influence decision-making among SDMs. This study aims to explore the experiences and perspectives of SDMs involved in making decisions around the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies, end-of-life care and deceased organ donation.

Methods and analysis: SDMs of 60 patients admitted to intensive care units will be enrolled for this study. Ten hospitals across five provinces in Canada in a prospective multicentre qualitative cohort study. We will conduct semistructured telephone interviews in English or French with SDMs between 6 and 8 weeks after the patient's death. Our sampling frame will stratify SDMs into three groups: SDMs who were not approached for organ donation; SDMs who were approached and consented to donate and SDMs who were approached but did not consent to donate. We will use two complementary theoretical frameworks-the Common-Sense Self-Regulation Model and the Theoretical Domains Framework- to inform our interview guide. Interview data will be analysed using deductive directed content analysis and inductive thematic analysis.

Ethics and dissemination: This study has been approved by the Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal Research Ethics Board. The findings from this study will help identify key factors affecting substitute decision-making in deceased organ donation, reasons for non-consent and barriers to achieve congruency between SDM and patient wishes. Ultimately, these data will contribute to the development and evaluation of tools and training for healthcare providers to support SDMs in making decisions about organ donation.

Trial registration number: NCT03850847.

Keywords: intensive and critical care; qualitative research; quality in health care.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

References

    1. Canadian Blood Services Organ donation and transplantation in Canada: system progress report – 2017 update. Canadian Blood Services, 2018.
    1. Canadian Institute for Health Information Annual statistics on organ replacement in Canada: dialysis, transplantation and donation, 2008 to 2017. Canadian Institute for Health Information, 2018.
    1. Li AH, Naylor KL, Garg AX, et al. . Interventions for increasing solid organ donor registration. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013:CD010829.
    1. Anthony SJ, Toews M, Caulfield T, et al. . Family veto in organ donation in Canada: framing within English-language newspaper articles. CMAJ Open 2017;5:E768–72. 10.9778/cmajo.20170051
    1. Toews M, Caulfield T. Evaluating the “family veto” of consent for organ donation. Can Med Assoc J 2016;188:E436–7. 10.1503/cmaj.160752
    1. Walker W, Broderick A, Sque M. Factors influencing bereaved families' decisions about organ donation: an integrative literature review. West J Nurs Res 2013;35:1339–59. 10.1177/0193945913484987
    1. Sarti AJ, Sutherland S, Healey A, et al. . A multicenter qualitative investigation of the experiences and perspectives of substitute decision makers who underwent organ donation decisions. Prog Transplant 2018;28:343–8. 10.1177/1526924818800046
    1. Shah SK, Kasper K, Miller FG. A narrative review of the empirical evidence on public attitudes on brain death and vital organ transplantation: the need for better data to inform policy. J Med Ethics 2015;41:291–6. 10.1136/medethics-2013-101930
    1. Marck CH, Neate SL, Skinner MR, et al. . Factors relating to consent for organ donation: prospective data on potential organ donors. Intern Med J 2015;45:40–7. 10.1111/imj.12628
    1. Neate SL, Marck CH, Skinner M, et al. . Understanding Australian families' organ donation decisions. Anaesth Intensive Care 2015;43:42–50. 10.1177/0310057X1504300107
    1. Sque M, Walker W, Long-Sutehall T, et al. . Bereaved donor families' experiences of organ and tissue donation, and perceived influences on their decision making. J Crit Care 2018;45:82–9. 10.1016/j.jcrc.2018.01.002
    1. Walker W, Sque M. Balancing hope and despair at the end of life: the contribution of organ and tissue donation. J Crit Care 2016;32:73–8. 10.1016/j.jcrc.2015.11.026
    1. Langston AL, Johnston M, Robertson C, et al. . Protocol for stage 1 of the gap study (genetic testing acceptability for Paget's disease of bone): an interview study about genetic testing and preventive treatment: would relatives of people with Paget's disease want testing and treatment if they were available? BMC Health Serv Res 2006;6:71 10.1186/1472-6963-6-71
    1. Leventhal H, Diefenbach M, Leventhal EA. Illness cognition: using common sense to understand treatment adherence and affect cognition interactions. Cognit Ther Res 1992;16:143–63. 10.1007/BF01173486
    1. Michie S, Johnston M, Abraham C, et al. . Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach. Qual Saf Health Care 2005;14:26–33. 10.1136/qshc.2004.011155
    1. Cane J, O'Connor D, Michie S. Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research. Implement Sci 2012;7 10.1186/1748-5908-7-37
    1. Atkins L, Francis J, Islam R, et al. . A guide to using the theoretical domains framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems. Implement Sci 2017;12:77 10.1186/s13012-017-0605-9
    1. Patey AM, Islam R, Francis JJ, et al. . Anesthesiologists' and surgeons' perceptions about routine pre-operative testing in low-risk patients: application of the theoretical domains framework (TDF) to identify factors that influence physicians' decisions to order pre-operative tests. Implement Sci 2012;7:52 10.1186/1748-5908-7-52
    1. Squires JE, Graham N, Coughlin M, et al. . Barriers and enablers to organ donation after circulatory determination of death: a qualitative study exploring the beliefs of frontline intensive care unit professionals and organ donor coordinators. Transplant Direct 2018;4:e368 10.1097/TXD.0000000000000805
    1. Downar J, Barua R, Sinuff T. The desirability of an intensive care unit (ICU) clinician-led bereavement screening and support program for family members of ICU decedents (ICU Bereave). J Crit Care 2014;29:311.e9–6. 10.1016/j.jcrc.2013.11.024
    1. Cleiren MPHD, Zoelen AJV. Post-Mortem organ donation and grief: a study of consent, refusal and well-being in bereavement. Death Stud 2002;26:837–49. 10.1080/07481180290106607
    1. de Groot J, van Hoek M, Hoedemaekers C, et al. . Request for organ donation without donor registration: a qualitative study of the perspectives of bereaved relatives. BMC Med Ethics 2016;17:38 10.1186/s12910-016-0120-6
    1. van Beinum A, Hornby L, Dhanani S, et al. . Feasibility of conducting prospective observational research on critically ill, dying patients in the intensive care unit. J Med Ethics 2017;43:47–51. 10.1136/medethics-2016-103683
    1. Francis JJ, Johnston M, Robertson C, et al. . What is an adequate sample size? Operationalising data saturation for theory-based interview studies. Psychol Health 2010;25:1229–45. 10.1080/08870440903194015
    1. Presseau J, Mutsaers B, Al-Jaishi AA, et al. . Barriers and facilitators to healthcare professional behaviour change in clinical trials using the theoretical domains framework: a case study of a trial of individualized temperature-reduced haemodialysis. Trials 2017;18:227 10.1186/s13063-017-1965-9
    1. Presseau J, Schwalm JD, Grimshaw JM, et al. . Identifying determinants of medication adherence following myocardial infarction using the theoretical domains framework and the health action process approach. Psychol Health 2017;32:1176–94. 10.1080/08870446.2016.1260724
    1. Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 2005;15:1277–88. 10.1177/1049732305276687
    1. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 2006;3:77–101. 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
    1. Krippendorff K. Reliability in content analysis. Hum Commun Res 2004;30:411–33. 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2004.tb00738.x
    1. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care 2007;19:349–57. 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
    1. Azoulay E, Chaize M, Kentish-Barnes N. Involvement of ICU families in decisions: fine-tuning the partnership. Ann Intensive Care 2014;4:37 10.1186/s13613-014-0037-5
    1. Kentish-Barnes N, McAdam JL, Kouki S, et al. . Research participation for bereaved family members: experience and insights from a qualitative study. Crit Care Med 2015;43:1839–45. 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001092
    1. Kentish-Barnes N, Chaize M, Seegers V, et al. . Complicated grief after death of a relative in the intensive care unit. Eur Respir J 2015;45:1341–52. 10.1183/09031936.00160014
    1. Sque M, Walker W, Long-Sutehall T. Research with bereaved families: a framework for ethical decision-making. Nurs Ethics 2014;21:946–55. 10.1177/0969733014521097
    1. Butler AE, Copnell B, Hall H. Researching people who are bereaved: managing risks to participants and researchers. Nurs Ethics 2019;26:224–34. 10.1177/0969733017695656

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe