Original Research

Organ donation attitudes and general self-efficacy: exploratory views from a rural primary care setting

AUTHORS

name here
Emmanouil Symvoulakis1
MD, PhD, Assistant Professor

name here
Adelais Markaki2
PhD, APRN-BC, Associate Professor *

name here
George Rachiotis3
MD, PhD, Associate Professor

name here
Manolis Linardakis4
PhD, Statistician

name here
Spyridon Klinis5
MD, MSc, General Practitioner

name here
Myfanwy Morgan6
PhD, FFPH, FHEA, Professor

AFFILIATIONS

1 Clinic of Social and Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Crete, Greece

2 School of Nursing, University of Alabama at Birmingham, USA

3 Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Thessaly, Greece

4 Department of Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Crete, Greece

5 Primary Health Care Unit of Alonakia, Siatista, Greece

6 Institute of Pharmaceutical Science King’s College London, London, UK

ACCEPTED: 9 September 2019


early abstract:

Background: Behavioral determinants can enable or hinder motivation towards registration and donorship and subsequently, action or inertia towards organ donation. Nevertheless, there is limited information about the role of self-efficacy in relation to organ donation awareness and presumed consent among individuals and their families.

Aims: To explore knowledge, attitudes and general self-efficacy as behavioral determinants for organ donation among rural primary care attendants, in order to tailor awareness strategies for reversing inertia within an opt-out system.

Methods: A prospective face-to-face survey during regularly scheduled appointments of 203 attendants at a rural primary care unit in northern Greece. Responses to a 12-item adapted “Organ Donation Awareness” questionnaire measuring knowledge, attitudes and awareness were related to participants’ “General Self-Efficacy (GSE) Scale” score. Hierarchical modeling of a multiple linear regression model was adopted with GSE scale score added.

Results: About one third of respondents (34.0%) had discussed presumed consent with a partner, family member or friend. More than half (54.2%) were concerned that donated organs might be used without consent for other purposes, such as medical research. A 30% found organ donation unacceptable because of religious beliefs. Organ donation awareness was not influenced by respondents’ specific characteristics, but was significantly related to the GSE score (stand. beta=0.155, p=0.033).

Conclusion: Overall, organ donation perceptions among rural primary care recipients were determined by knowledge of the presumed consent procurement system, pre-conceptions, religious beliefs, altruism, and GSE scores. The association of self-efficacy with raised awareness could potentially explain the gap between high intent to consent as a donor and subsequent lack of follow-up action. Further comparative research across behavioral determinants between rural/urban groups is needed in order to tailor awareness strategies suitable for an opt-out system.