Journal of Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences University (Oct 2015)
Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Patterns Regarding Eye Donation, Eye Banking and Corneal Transplant in a Tertiary Care Hospital
Abstract
Background: Corneal diseases constitute a significant cause of visual impairment and blindness in the developing world. Corneal transplantation remains a major treatment option for restoring sight among those suffering from corneal blindness. The number of corneal transplants done is far less than the actual requirement in India. This is largely due to the inadequate numbers of corneas collected. Factors affecting procurement of corneas and public attitude towards eye donation has recently received much attention in our country. Tertiary care hospitals with ICUs and trauma centers have high morbidity rates and cornea procurement rates can be higher with readily available patient investigation, previous treatment and other data to consider suitability of cornea for transplantation. Aims and Objectives: To assess awareness regarding eye donation, eye banking and corneal transplant among patient attendants in ICU, Casualty and Eye Out Patient Department in a Tertiary Care Hospital. Materials and Methods: The prospective analysis from August 2014 to May 2015 of 1100 proforma of relatives found in waiting areas of ICU, casualty and eye out Patient Department were asked to fill a pretested questionnaire containing questions on demographic details, awareness regarding eye donation, intention to donate eyes, reasons for donating or pledging and not, and sources of information. The data collected was studied and analyzed. Results: Of the 1100 participants, 570 were males and 530 females. 1052 people (95.6%) knew about eye donation, 406 (36.9%) people knew that eye to be collected within 6-8 hours of death, 829 subjects (75.36%) knew that one eye donation benefits two blind people. The contact place for donation was known to only 413 subjects (37.55%).483 subjects (43.9%) agreed to donate eye of their relative in case of demise. Newspaper was most common source of information for 1005 participants (91.4%), followed by television (76.4%), doctors (68.6%), Pamphlets (59.2%), Friends (57.8%), Radio (52.7%), posters (51.3%), nursing and other staff (47.8%) and others (25.5%). Of those 888 willing to donate 95.2% (845 subjects) would be doing as a noble deed, 745 (83.9%) for pleasure to help blind, 690 (77.7%) were motivated by the idea of giving vision to someone after their death. Of 212 unwilling, 178 participants (83.9%) disliked the idea of body being tampered with and 124 participants (58.5%) had objection by family members. Conclusion: The reasons for not donating need to be considered while creating awareness about eye donation in the community. Knowledge, attitude and practice in the context of eye donation may not complement each other and need to be addressed to bring about a change in patterns observed.
