MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1111/ctr.12207

Медицинская библиотека · Clinical transplantation · 2013

Public preferences for donor kidney allocation: a study in Iran.

Asghari Fariba, Broumand Mohammadali, Heidari Akram

СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

INTRODUCTION

Fair allocation of donor organs is essential to maintain public trust in a public healthcare system. A study of the public's views and opinions of this could clarify non-medical prioritization criteria. We report our survey of public opinion of criteria for donor kidney allocation.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study using random digit dialing to phone interview 706 Tehran residents. Patient scenarios were presented to determine interviewee opinions on nine recipient criteria: probability for survival, previous transplant history, time on the waiting list, age, an individual's role in developing their kidney failure, gender, marital status, social status, and financial situation. Each scenario introduced two patients and interviewees then chose the better candidate for transplantation.

RESULTS

More than 50% of the participants chose length of waiting time, a patient's role in causing their disease, age, and survival time after transplantation as important allograft allocation criteria.

CONCLUSION

This study disclosed other criteria in addition to the likelihood for successful transplantation-the patient's role in the development of their disease and patient age-which should be prioritization considerations.

Для цитирования: Asghari Fariba, Broumand Mohammadali, Heidari Akram. Public preferences for donor kidney allocation: a study in Iran.. Clinical transplantation. 2013. DOI: 10.1111/ctr.12207.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.