Table 2 Description of the interventions on organ and tissue donation with comparison groups

Dettle, Sagel and Chrysler (1994); United States

To gain a better understanding of health care professionals’ experience, knowledge, attitudes, and comfort level regarding organ and tissue donation

Nurses and Chaplains (n = 343)

Educational:

6 months

• Provide instruction

Health professionals survey

Approached family

Experimental 18% → 38% (P = .039)

• Formal in-service on organ and tissue donation

Control 4% → 25% (P < .001)

• Unit meeting addressing donation issues

• Dealing with a family of an actual donor

Kittur, McMenamin and Knott (1990); United States

To evaluate the impact of an organ donor and tissue donor advocacy program on community hospitals

Hospital staff: physicians, nurses and administrators (n = not mentioned)

Educational:

12 months

• Provide instruction

Not mentioned

Referred potential donor

44 donors versus 2 donors

• Hospital’s organ and tissue donation policies and procedures

• Provide contingent rewards

• Teach to use prompts or cues

Organ and/or tissue donor recovered

18 donors versus 1 donor

• Sending letter of gratitude to requestors

• Sending letter reminding to request all eligible patients

Organizational:

• Developing a donor advocate role

Light (1987); United States

To evaluate the efficacy of including printed criteria and procedures with the autopsy permits as a simple, inexpensive method of increasing cornea donation

Residents (n = 84)

Educational:

4 months

• Provide information on consequence

Eye bank data analysis

Organ and/or tissue donor recovered

Experimental 1.8% → 10.2% (P = .009)

• Instruction for cornea donation and a checklist of donation procedures

• Provide instruction

Control 7.1% → 8.5% (not significant)

Nelson, Marymont, Durand, Reyes and Davis (1992); United States

To examine the organ procurement organization’s educational activities and their effects on attitudes, knowledge, and referral behavior

Nurses, physicians and chaplains (n = 265)

Educational:

Not mentioned

• Intervention not described

Health professionals survey

Approached family

59% versus 46% (P = .027)

• Continuing medical education

• Newsletters

• Other publications

• Requestor’s workshop

• In-service training session

• Others programs

Referred potential donor

46% versus 9% (P = .001)

Riker and White (1995); United States

To evaluate physician response to an educational program to increase referral of potential organ or issue donors in an emergency department

Physicians (n = not mentioned)

Educational:

6 months

• Provide instruction

Hospital charts review

Approached family

65% versus 6.6% (P = .001)

• One-hour conference on the physician’s role in requesting donation and review the criteria for donation and services available from transplant program

Obtained donation consent

32% versus 6.6% (P = .08)

Organ and/or tissue donor recovered

48% versus 5.5% (P = .003)