Faisal Omar

Reply: Ethical Perspectives on Living Donor Organ Transplantation in Asia

Live donors are a continuing source of organ grafts for solid organ transplantation in Asia. Ethical issues surrounding the development of living donor organ transplantation in Eastern countries are different from those in Western countries. Donor safety is still the paramount concern in any donor operation. Issues on organ trafficking remain societal concerns in low-income nations. Religion, cultural background, economic prerogatives, and timely legislation contribute to the social acceptance and maturation of organ donation.

Compensated Living Kidney Donation: A Plea for Pragmatism

Kidney transplantation is the most efficacious and cost-effective treatment for end-stage renal disease. However, the treatment’s accessibility is limited by a chronic shortage of transplantable kidneys, resulting in the death of numerous patients worldwide as they wait for a kidney to become available. Despite the implementation of various measures the disparity between supply and needs continues to grow. This paper begins with a look at the current treatment options, including various sources of transplantable kidneys, for end-stage renal disease. We propose, in accordance with others, the introduction of compensated kidney donation as a means of addressing the current shortage. We briefly outline some of the advantages of this proposal, and then turn to examine several of the ethical arguments usually marshaled against it in a bid to demonstrate that this proposal indeed passes the ethics test. Using available data of public opinions on compensated donation, we illustrate that public support for such a program would be adequate enough that we can realistically eliminate the transplant waiting list if compensation is introduced. We urge a pragmatic approach going forward; altruism in living kidney donation is important, but altruism only is an unsuccessful doctrine.

Priority setting in kidney transplantation: A qualitative study evaluating Swedish practices

Background: Transplantation is the treatment of choice for end-stage renal disease; it increases survival and quality of life, while being more cost-effective than dialysis. It is, however, limited by the scarcity of kidneys. The aim of this paper is to investigate the fairness of the priority setting process underpinning Swedish kidney transplantation in reference to the Accountability for Reasonableness (A4R) framework. Methods: Fifteen semi-structured interviews were carried out with transplant surgeons (7), nephrologists (6) and coordinators (2) representing centers nationwide. Collected data was analysed using thematic analysis. To assess fairness in the priority setting process, identified factors were assessed in the reference to the four conditions (publicity, relevance, revision and appeal, enforcement) forming the accountability for reasonableness framework. Results: Decision-making in assessment and allocation is based on clusters of factors. The factors appeal to various values, which are balanced against each other throughout the kidney allocation process: maximizing benefit, priority to the worst off and equality. The factors described by subjects and the values on which they rest satisfy the relevance condition of the accountability for reasonableness framework. However, two potential sources for unfair inequalities in access to treatment are identified: clinical judgment and institutional policies. Conclusions: The development of national guidelines both for assessing transplant candidacy, and for the allocation of kidneys from deceased donors, would contribute to standardize practices across centres; it will also help to better meet the conditions of fairness in reference to Accountability for Reasonableness. The benefits of this policy proposal in Swedish kidney transplantation merits consideration.

Incentivizing deceased organ donation: a Swedish priority-setting perspective.

Aims: The established deceased organ donation models in many countries, relying chiefly on altruism, have failed to motivate a sufficient number of donors. As a consequence organs that could save lives are routinely missed leading to a growing gap between demand and supply. The aim of this paper is twofold; firstly to develop a proposal for compensated deceased organ donation that could potentially address the organ shortage; secondly to examine the compatibility of the proposal with the ethical values of the Swedish healthcare system. Methods: The proposal for compensating deceased donation is grounded in behavioural agency theory and combines extrinsic, intrinsic and signalling incentives in order to increase prosocial behaviour. Furthermore the compatibility of our proposal with the values of the Swedish healthcare system is evaluated in reference to the principles of human dignity, needs and solidarity, and cost effectiveness. Results: Extrinsic incentives in the form of a 5,000 compensation towards funeral expenses paid to the estate of the deceased or family is proposed. Intrinsic and signalling incentives are incorporated by allowing all or part of the compensation to be diverted as a donation to a reputable charity. The decision for organ donation must not be against the explicit will of the donor. Conclusions: We find that our proposal for compensated deceased donation is compatible with the values of the Swedish healthcare system, and therefore merits serious consideration. It is however important to acknowledge issues relating to coercion, commodification and loss of public trust and the ethical challenges that they might pose.

Attitudes towards priority-setting and rationing in healthcare - an exploratory survey of Swedish medical students.

Background: Healthcare priority-setting is inextricably linked to the challenge of providing publicly funded healthcare within a limited budget, which may result in difficult and potentially controversial rationing decisions. Despite priority-settings increasing prominence in policy and academic discussion, it is still unclear what the level of understanding and acceptance of priority-setting is at different levels of health care. Aims: The aim of this study is threefold. First we wish to explore the level of familiarity with different aspects of priority-setting among graduating medical students. Secondly, to gauge their acceptance of both established and proposed Swedish priority-setting principles. Finally to elucidate their attitudes towards healthcare rationing and the role of different actors in decision making, with a particular interest in comparing the attitudes of medical students with data from the literature examining the attitudes among primary care patients in Sweden. Methods: A cross-sectional survey containing 14 multiple choice items about priority-setting in healthcare was distributed to the graduating medical class at Linkoöping University. The response rate was 92% (43/47). Results: Less than half of respondents have encountered the notion of open priority-setting, and the majority believed it to be somewhat or very unclear. There is a high degree of awareness and agreement with the established ethical principles for priority-setting in Swedish health care; however respondents are inconsistent in their application of the cost-effectiveness principle. A larger proportion of respondents were more favourable to physicians and other health personnel being responsible for rationing decisions as opposed to politicians. Conclusions: Future discussion about priority-setting in medical education should be contextualized within an explicit and open process. There is a need to adequately clarify the role of the cost-effectiveness principle in priority-setting. Medical students seem to acknowledge the need for rationing in healthcare to a greater extent when compared with previous results from Swedish primary care patients.

Transplant tourism and compensated kidney donation : A survey of opinions amongst Swedish medical students

Abstract Objective: Transplant tourism and proposals for regulated compensated donation are reactions to the global scarcity in kidneys. These areas raise unique ethical challenges in medical education and clinical practice. We aimed to elucidate the opinions of soon-to-be physicians on transplant tourism, and compensated donation. We investigated how these opinions are formed, if they are interrelated, and their impact on encounters with patients. Design and Methods: a 14 item survey was developed using cognitive interviewing techniques, and distributed to the graduating class at Linköping Medical University. Spearmans correlation coefficient and Pearsons chi-square test were employed to investigate significant associations. Results: The response rate was 43/47 (92%). The majority were strongly (64%), or somewhat (29%) against transplant tourism. Those with strong negative positions on transplant tourism were significantly (p<0.05) more likely to dissuade patients from pursuing it. More students expressed support for regulated compensation from a clinical perspective (34%) as compared with support from an ethical perspective (15%). Conclusions: The opinions of young physicians on transplant tourism are a significant indicator for their clinical approach. Young physicians balance competing ethical responsibilities such as respect for autonomy against concerns for kidney vendors in the developing world. Clinical and policy scenarios, similar to those used in this survey are useful tools for students to explore challenging ethical issues within their medical education, to provide appropriate guidance for patients and empower them through health education.