Public preferences for the allocation of donor organs for transplantation: A discrete choice experiment

被引:4
|
作者
Oedingen, Carina [1 ,2 ]
Bartling, Tim [1 ,2 ]
Schrem, Harald [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Muehlbacher, Axel C. [5 ,6 ,7 ]
Krauth, Christian [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Hannover Med Sch, Inst Epidemiol Social Med & Hlth Syst Res, Carl Neuberg Str 1, D-30625 Hannover, Germany
[2] Ctr Hlth Econ Res Hannover CHERH, Otto Brenner Str 7, D-30159 Hannover, Germany
[3] Med Univ Graz, Dept Gen Visceral & Transplant Surg, Auenbruggerpl 29, A-8036 Graz, Austria
[4] Med Univ Graz, Transplant Ctr Graz, Auenbruggerpl 29, A-8036 Graz, Austria
[5] Hsch Neubrandenburg, Inst Hlth Econ & Hlth Care Management, Brodaer Str 2, D-17033 Neubrandenburg, Germany
[6] Duke Univ, Duke Dept Populat Hlth Sci, 215 Morris St, Durham, NC 27701 USA
[7] Duke Univ, Duke Global Hlth Inst, 215 Morris St, Durham, NC 27701 USA
关键词
Discrete choice experiment; Distributive justice; Organ allocation; Preferences; Public perspective; Germany; HEALTH ECONOMICS; TRADE-OFF; CARE; PRINCIPLES; DONATION; DECISION; SUCCESS; URGENCY; STATE;
D O I
10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114360
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
This study aimed to assess public preferences for the allocation of donor organs in Germany with the focus on ethical principles of distributive justice. We performed a discrete choice experiment (DCE) using a self-completed online questionnaire. Based on a systematic review and focus group discussions, six attributes, each with two-four levels, were selected (corresponding principle of distributive justice in brackets), including (1) life years gained after transplantation (principle of distributive justice: effectiveness/benefit - utilitarianism), (2) quality of life after transplantation (effectiveness/benefit - utilitarianism), (3) chance for a further donor organ offer (principle of distributive justice: medical urgency - favouring the worst-off), (4) age (medical and social risk factors: sociodemographic status), (5) registered donor (principle of distributive justice: value for society), and (6) individual role in causing organ failure (principle of distributive justice: own fault). Each respondent was presented with eight choice sets and asked to choose between two hypothetical patients without an opt-out. Data were analysed using conditional logit, mixed logit and latent class models. The final sample comprised 1028 respondents. Choice decisions were significantly influenced by all attributes except chance for a further donor organ offer. The attributes of good quality of life after transplantation, younger age, and no individual role in causing organ failure had the greatest impact on choice decisions. Life years gained after transplantation and being a registered donor were less important for the public. The latent class model identified four classes with preference heterogeneities. Respondents preferred to allocate deceased donor organs by criteria related to effectiveness/benefit, whereas medical urgency was of minor importance. Therefore, a public propensity for a rational, utilitarian, ethical model of allocation could be identified. Public preferences can help to inform policy to warrant socially responsible allocation systems and thus improve organ donation rates.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Community Preferences for the Allocation of Donor Organs for Transplantation A Discrete Choice Study
    Howard, Kirsten
    Jan, Stephen
    Rose, John M.
    Wong, Germaine
    Irving, Michelle
    Tong, Allison
    Craig, Jonathan C.
    Chadban, Steven
    Allen, Richard D.
    Cass, Alan
    [J]. TRANSPLANTATION, 2015, 99 (03) : 560 - 567
  • [2] Public, medical professionals' and patients' preferences for the allocation of donor organs for transplantation: study protocol for discrete choice experiments
    Oedingen, Carina
    Bartling, Tim
    Krauth, Christian
    [J]. BMJ OPEN, 2018, 8 (10):
  • [3] Donor motives, public preferences and the allocation of UK foreign aid: a discrete choice experiment approach
    Feeny, Simon
    Hansen, Paul
    Knowles, Stephen
    McGillivray, Mark
    Ombler, Franz
    [J]. REVIEW OF WORLD ECONOMICS, 2019, 155 (03) : 511 - 537
  • [4] Donor motives, public preferences and the allocation of UK foreign aid: a discrete choice experiment approach
    Simon Feeny
    Paul Hansen
    Stephen Knowles
    Mark McGillivray
    Franz Ombler
    [J]. Review of World Economics, 2019, 155 : 511 - 537
  • [5] PUBLIC PREFERENCES FOR THE ALLOCATION OF DONOR ORGANS FOR TRANSPLANTATION: PRINCIPLES OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE
    Oedingen, C.
    Bartling, T.
    Muehlbacher, A. C.
    Schrem, H.
    Krauth, C.
    [J]. TRANSPLANT INTERNATIONAL, 2019, 32 : 22 - 23
  • [6] Public preferences for the allocation of donor organs for transplantation: Focus group discussions
    Oedingen, Carina
    Bartling, Tim
    Dierks, Marie-Luise
    Muehlbacher, Axel C.
    Schrem, Harald
    Krauth, Christian
    [J]. HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2020, 23 (03) : 669 - 679
  • [7] Attitudes, knowledge, and preferences of the Israeli public regarding the allocation of donor organs for transplantation
    Amir Elalouf
    Joseph S. Pliskin
    Tehila Kogut
    [J]. Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, 9
  • [8] Attitudes, knowledge, and preferences of the Israeli public regarding the allocation of donor organs for transplantation
    Elalouf, Amir
    Pliskin, Joseph S.
    Kogut, Tehila
    [J]. ISRAEL JOURNAL OF HEALTH POLICY RESEARCH, 2020, 9 (01)
  • [9] Public Preferences in Organ Allocation: A Discrete Choice Experiment Regarding Distributive Justice
    Oedingen, Carina
    Bartling, Tim
    Schrem, Harald
    Muehlbacher, Axel C.
    Krauth, Christian
    [J]. PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 2022, 15 (06): : 733 - 733
  • [10] Public preferences in healthcare resource allocation: A discrete choice experiment in South Korea
    Bae, Eun-Young
    Lim, Min Kyoung
    Lee, Boram
    Bae, Green
    Hong, Jihyung
    [J]. HEALTH POLICY, 2023, 138