Cognitive and non-cognitive factors affecting decision-making about deceased organ donation in Italy: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Decision-making about organ donation (OD) is influenced by interrelated cognitive and non-cognitive factors. The identification of these factors in the general population and among healthcare professionals (HCP) in Italy are key ethical and scientific requirements to inform targeted communication and policy-making interventions, and to promote decision-making processes that are truly informed. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review of articles published between January 1, 1999, and January 31, 2024 was performed by searching four databases using these terms: "organ donation" AND (attitude OR opinion OR knowledge OR awareness OR intention OR beliefs OR norms OR perception) AND (Italy OR Italian). The reference sections of included articles were scrutinized for additional references. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Most respondents (lay citizens and HCPs) were in favor of OD, but many (mainly but not exclusively lay citizens) would not authorize OD in the event of death of a family member. Lack of knowledge about OD and the gap between demand and supply of organs, fear of body mutilation, doubts about the criteria for brain death diagnosis, doubts about the wishes of the deceased family member, and distrust towards medical doctors and the healthcare system were the most commonly reported reasons, confirming that cognitive and non-cognitive factors are at play. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the Italian population supports OD, but cognitive and non-cognitive barriers are present even among HCPs. Communication campaigns, encouraging family discussions about OD, providing better education for HCPs (including medical and nursing students), and making it easier to sign OD cards may promote informed decision-making and possibly increase consent rates.

Disparities in kidney transplantation accessibility among immigrant populations in Europe: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Disparities in access to healthcare for patients with an immigration background are well-known. The aim of this study was to determine whether disparities among immigrant populations translate into a relative difference in the number of kidney transplants (KT) performed in documented immigrant patients (first and second generation) relative to native-born patients in Europe. METHODS: A literature search was performed in PubMed from inception to 11-10-2022. Studies were eligible if: (1) written in English, (2) included immigrant and native-born KT patients, (3) performed in countries registered as Council of Europe members, (4) focused on documented first- and second-generation immigrant populations [1]. Systematic reviews, literature reviews, and case reports or articles about emigration, non-KT, and undocumented immigrants were excluded. The outcome measurement was a relative percentage of KTs to the total population per 100.000 residents. By dividing the immigrant percentages by the native-born resident percentages, the odds ratio (OR) was calculated in a meta-analysis. The risk of bias was assessed; articles with high risk of bias were excluded in a second meta-analysis. RESULTS: Out of 109 articles, 5 were included (n = 24,614). One Italian study (n = 24,174) had a ratio below 1, being 0.910 (95%CI 0.877-0.945). The other four articles (n = 196, n = 283, n = 77, n = 119) had ratios above 1: 1.36 (95%CI 0.980-1.87), 2.04 (95%CI 1.56-2.68), 2.23 (95%CI 1.53-3.25) and 2.64 (95%CI 1.68-4.15). After performing a meta-analysis, the OR did not show a significant difference: 1.68 (95%CI 1.03-2.75). After bias correction, this remained unchanged: 1.78 (95%CI 0.961-3.31). CONCLUSIONS: In our meta-analysis we did not find a significant difference in the relative number of KTs performed in immigrant versus native-born populations in Europe. However, a lesser likelihood for immigrants to receive a pre-emptive kidney transplantation was found. Large heterogeneity between studies (e.g. different sample size, patient origins, study duration, adult vs children patients) was a shortcoming to our analysis. Nevertheless, our article is the first review in this understudied topic. As important questions (e.g. on ethnicity, living donor rate) remain, future studies are needed to address them.

Act of Consoling Helps Those Who Console: A Multicenter Observational Survey Study in Hospice Services.

Background: The contemporary scientific literature documents a lack of attention toward the act of consoling put into practice by health care professionals (HCPs) in hospice services. Objective: To describe the act of consoling and its meaning for hospice-employed HCPs. Design: A multicenter observational survey study was performed through a paper-based questionnaire. Subjects: The study was sent to the directors of 10 hospices in Northern Italy and distributed to 232 HCPs. Results: A total of 218 HCPs responded (94%). The results showed that most HCPs consider the practice of consoling to be essential to their profession, but they also underscored the extreme complexity of the process. Conclusion: The act of consoling is not simply a professional duty defined in contractual clauses. Rather, it is a set of specific communicative practices and skills required of HCPs.