BMC Medical Ethics (Jun 2020)

Egyptians' social acceptance and consenting options for posthumous organ donation; a cross sectional study

  • Ammal M. Metwally,
  • Ghada A. Abdel-Latif,
  • Lobna Eletreby,
  • Ahmed Aboulghate,
  • Amira Mohsen,
  • Hala A. Amer,
  • Rehan M. Saleh,
  • Dalia M. Elmosalami,
  • Hend I. Salama,
  • Safaa I. Abd El Hady,
  • Raefa R. Alam,
  • Hanan A. Mohamed,
  • Hanan M. Badran,
  • Hanan E. Eltokhy,
  • Hazem Elhariri,
  • Thanaa Rabah,
  • Mohamed Abdelrahman,
  • Nihad A. Ibrahim,
  • Nada Chami

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00490-6
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 21, no. 1
pp. 1 – 14

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Organ donation has become one of the most effective ways to save lives and improve the quality of life for patients with end-stage organ failure. No previous studies have investigated the preferences for the different consenting options for organ donation in Egypt. This study aims to assess Egyptians’ preferences regarding consenting options for posthumous organ donation, and measure their awareness and acceptance of the Egyptian law articles regulating organ donation. Methods A cross sectional study was conducted among 2743 participants over two years. Each participant was required to rank eleven consenting options from 1 (most preferred) to 11 (least preferred), and to report his awareness and acceptance of the seven articles of the Egyptian law of organ donation. Results 47% of the participants expressed willingness to donate their organs after death. This percentage increased to 78% when consenting options were explained to participants. “Informed consent by donor only” was the most preferred type of consent for one third of respondents. Awareness of the law articles regulating organ donation was relatively low ranging from 56% to 23%. Conclusion Currently, around half of the Egyptian population agree to posthumous organ donation. This percentage could be increased significantly by raising the awareness about how the process of donation could be regulated and how the patient’s right of decision could be protected.