Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Staff’s Views from One Canadian Organ Procurement Organization on Organ Donation and Organ Transplant Technologies: a Content Analysis

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
NanoEthics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Advancements in scientific research and technological development (SRTD) influence the practice of organ donation and organ transplantation (ODOT). Many SRTD governance discourses put forward the need for multi-stakeholder engagements. We posit that staff employed by organ procurement organizations have a stake in the discussions around SRTD applicable to ODOT because SRTD is one factor that shapes ODOT and because staff are involved in ODOT education and awareness raising while acting as a nexus between donors and the public. Therefore, we performed a content analysis of eight semi-structured in-depth interviews with staff of one Canadian organ procurement organization to ascertain the views that staff had on the use of (a) SRTD in ODOT in general; (b) specific SRTD envisioned to be used in the future in ODOT namely xenotransplantation, embryonic and non-embryonic stem cells, cloning, bionic/artificial organs, and 3-D printed organs; and (c) the emerging ability of SRTD applicable in ODOT to enhance bodily abilities beyond the normal. We found that staff had views on the topics covered in this study, and staff acknowledged that they do not possess sufficient knowledge to be able to engage meaningfully in governance discussions of the SRTD covered and to educate others on these SRTDs. We recommend implementing continuous education for the staff on SRTD envisioned to be applied in ODOT as a capacity-building measure to enable their participation in the governance discussions of these SRTDs and to enhance their ability to educate others on ODOT applicable SRTD.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Canadian Society of Transplantation (2016) Transplant programs and OPOS. Canadian Society of Transplantation. http://www.cst-transplant.ca/cgi/page.cgi/transplant-programs-opos.html. Accessed 03 Aug 2016

  2. Canadian Institute for Health Information (2012) e-Statistics on organ transplants, waiting lists and donors. Canadian Institute for Health Information. http://www.cihi.ca/CIHI-ext-portal/internet/en/document/types+of+care/specialized+services/organ+replacements/report_stats2012. Accessed 03 August 2016

  3. Canadian Institute for Health Information (2016) Treatment of end-stage organ failure in Canada, Canadian organ replacement register, 2005 to 2014 Canadian Institute for Health Information. https://secure.cihi.ca/free_products/2016_CORR_Snapshot_EN(web).pdf. Accessed 03 August 2016

  4. Singer P (1992) Xenotransplantation and speciesism. Transplant Proc 24(2):728–732

    Google Scholar 

  5. Brown N (1999) Debates in xenotransplantation: on the consequences of contradiction. New Genet Soc 18(2–3):181–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Barnes J (1999) Transpigging organs. The Globe and Mail A18.

  7. Platt JL (1998) New directions for organ transplantation. Nature 392(6679 Suppl):11–17

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hull CW (1986) Apparatus for production of three-dimensional objects by stereolithography. http://www.google.ca/patents/US4575330. Accessed 03 Aug 2016.

  9. Tatsumi E, Nakatani T, Imachi K, Umezu M, Kyo S-e, Sase K, Takatani S, Matsuda H (2007) Domestic and foreign trends in the prevalence of heart failure and the necessity of next-generation artificial hearts: a survey by the Working Group on Establishment of Assessment Guidelines for Next-Generation Artificial Heart Systems. J Artif Organs 10(4):187–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Li J, He L, Zhou C, Zhou Y, Bai Y, Lee FY, Mao JJ (2015) 3D printing for regenerative medicine: from bench to bedside. MRS Bull 40(02):145–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ozbolat IT, Yu Y (2013) Bioprinting toward organ fabrication: challenges and future trends. Biomed Eng IEEE Trans 60(3):691–699

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Malchesky PS (2014) Artificial organ technologies around the world. Artif Organs 38(2):99–100

  13. Pal S (2014) Overview of human system and its artificial replacement. In: Design of artificial human joints & organs. Springer, New York, pp 1–21

  14. Pal S (2014) The liver and its artificial replacement. In: Design of artificial human joints & organs. Springer, New York, pp 353–359

  15. Pal S (2014) The kidney and its artificial replacement. In: Design of artificial human joints & organs. Springer, New York, pp 311–328

  16. Kwan-Gett C, Wu Y, Collan R, Jacobsen S, Kolff W (1969) Total replacement artificial heart and driving system with inherent regulation of cardiac output. ASAIO J 15(1):245–250

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kresse H (1970) Implantable body actuated artificial heart system. http://www.google.ca/patents/US3731322. Accessed 03 Aug 2016

  18. DeVries WC, Anderson JL, Joyce LD, Anderson FL, Hammond EH, Jarvik RK, Kolff WJ (1984) Clinical use of the total artificial heart. N Engl J Med 310(5):273–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Nose Y (2009) Dr. Willem J. Kolff: the godfather of artificial organ technologies (February 14, 1911-February 11, 2009). Artif Organs 33(5):389–402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hamlett PW, Cobb MD (2006) Potential solutions to public deliberation problems: structured deliberations and polarization cascades. Policy Stud J 34(4):629–648

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hansson SO (2005) Implant ethics. J Med Ethics 31(9):519–525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Jotterand F (2008) Beyond therapy and enhancement: the alteration of human nature. NanoEthics 2(1):15–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Schweda M, Schicktanz S (2009) The “spare parts person”? Conceptions of the human body and their implications for public attitudes towards organ donation and organ sale. Philos Ethics Humanit Med 4(1):1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Childress JF (2001) Putting patients first in organ allocation: an ethical analysis of the US debate. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 10(04):365–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Bramstedt KA (2006) Is it ethical to prioritize patients for organ allocation according to their values about organ donation? Prog Transplant 16(2):170–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Browning CJ, Thomas SA (2001) Community values and preferences in transplantation organ allocation decisions. Soc Sci Med 52(6):853–861

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Whitehead AT (1998) Rejecting organs: the organ allocation process and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Am JL Med 24:481–522

    Google Scholar 

  28. Martens MA, Jones L, Reiss S (2006) Organ transplantation, organ donation and mental retardation. Pediatr Transplant 10(6):658–664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Truog RD, Robinson WM (2003) Role of brain death and the dead-donor rule in the ethics of organ transplantation. Crit Care Med 31(9):2391–2396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Veatch RM (2003) Why liberals should accept financial incentives for organ procurement. Kennedy Inst Ethics J 13(1):19–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Rothman SM, Rothman DJ (2006) The hidden cost of organ sale. Am J Transplant 6(7):1524–1528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Truog RD (2005) The ethics of organ donation by living donors. N Engl J Med 353(5):444–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Daar AS (1997) Ethics of xenotransplantation: animal issues, consent, and likely transformation of transplant ethics. World J Surg 21(9):975–982

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ellison T (2006) Xenotransplantation—ethics and regulation. Xenotransplantation 13(6):505–509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Mathieu R (2016) Jewish ethics and xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation 23(4):258–68

  36. Sandel MJ (2004) Embryo ethics—the moral logic of stem-cell research. N Engl J Med 351:207–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Herder M, Brian JD (2008) Canada’s stem cell corporation: aggregate concerns and the question of public trust. J Bus Ethics 77(1):73–84. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9294-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Salter B, Qiu R-Z (2009) Bioethical governance and basic stem cell science: China and the global biomedicine economy. Sci Public Policy (SPP) 36(1):47–59. doi:10.3152/030234209X410381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Pepper MS, Gouveia C, Nothling-Slabbert M (2015) Legislation governing pluripotent stem cells in South Africa. S Afr J Bioethics Law 8(2):23–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Cornwall J (2016) The ethics of 3D printing copies of bodies donated for medical education and research: what is there to worry about? Aust Med J 9(1):8–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Hilmert LJ (2002) Cloning human organs: potential sources and property implications. Ind LJ 77(2):363–388

    Google Scholar 

  42. Clemmons A (2009) Organ transplantation: is the best approach a legalized market or altruism? J Healthc Manag 54(4):231–240

    Google Scholar 

  43. Macnaghten P, Chilvers J (2013) The future of science governance: publics, policies, practices. Environ Plann C Gov Policy 32(3):530–548. doi:10.1068/c1245j

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Marris C, Rose N (2010) Open engagement: exploring public participation in the biosciences. PLoS Biol 8(11):e1000549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Flipse S, Vrielink JO, van der Sanden M (2016) Building interactive communication tools to support interdisciplinary responsible innovation. J Innov Manage 3(4):119–133

    Google Scholar 

  46. Diep L, Cabibihan J-J, Wolbring G (2014) Social robotics through an anticipatory governance lens. In: Beetz M, Johnston B, Williams M-A (eds) Social robotics. Lecture notes in computer science 8755. Springer, Cham, pp 115–124. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11973-1_12

  47. Guston D (2010) The anticipatory governance of emerging technologies. J Korean Vacuum Soc 19(6):432–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Gregory R, Satterfield T, Hasell A (2016) Using decision pathway surveys to inform climate engineering policy choices. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113(3):560–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Jellema J, Mulder HA (2016) Public engagement in energy research. Energies 9(3):125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Radchuk O, Kerbe W, Schmidt M (2016) Homo Politicus meets Homo Ludens: public participation in serious life science games. Public Understanding of Science Published online before print June 13, 2016, :1–16. doi:10.1177/0963662516653030

  51. Delgado A, Kjølberg KL, Wickson F (2011) Public engagement coming of age: from theory to practice in STS encounters with nanotechnology. Public Underst Sci 20(6):826–845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Nerlich B, McLeod C (2016) The dilemma of raising awareness “responsibly”. EMBO Rep 17(4):481–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Wiek A, Foley RW, Guston DH, Bernstein MJ (2016) Broken promises and breaking ground for responsible innovation—intervention research to transform business-as-usual in nanotechnology innovation. Technol Anal Strat Manag 28(6):639–650. doi:10.1080/09537325.2015.1129399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Munshi D, Kurian PA, Morrison T, Morrison SL (2016) Redesigning the architecture of policy-making: engaging with Māori on nanotechnology in New Zealand. Public Underst Sci 25(3):287–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Burke BJ, Welch-Devine M, Gustafson S, Heynen N, Rice JL, Gragson TL, Evans SR, Nelson DR (2016) Can science writing collectives overcome barriers to more democratic communication and collaboration? Lessons from environmental communication praxis in Southern Appalachia. Environ Commun 10(2):169–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Wolbring G, Diep L (2016) Cognitive/neuroenhancement through an ability studies lens. In: Jotterand F, Dubljevic V (eds) Cognitive enhancement. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 57–75

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  57. Einsiedel EF (2002) Assessing a controversial medical technology: Canadian public consultations on xenotransplantation. Public Underst Sci 11(4):315–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Canadian Public Health Association (2001) Animal-to-human transplantation: should Canada proceed: a public consultation on xenotransplantation. Canadian Public Health Association. http://www.cpha.ca/uploads/progs/_/xeno/execsum_e.pdf. Accessed 03 August 2016

  59. Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 15(9):1277–1288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Fereday J, Muir-Cochrane E (2006) Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. Int J Qualitative Methods 5(1):80–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Lincoln YS, Lynham SA, Guba EG (2011) Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisited. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research 4:97–128

  62. Wolbring G (2012) Nanotechnology for democracy versus democratization of nanotechnology. In: van Lente H, Coenen C, Fleischer T, Konrod K, Krabbenborg L, Milburn C, and Thoreau T (eds) Little by little: expansions of nanoscience and emerging technologies. AKA-Verlag/IOS Press, Dordrecht, p 89–105

  63. Toumey C (2011) Democratizing nanotech, then and now. Nat Nano 6(10):605–606. doi:10.1038/nnano.2011.168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Einsiedel EF (2004) Commentary: on the position paper of the Ethics Committee of the International Xenotransplantation Association. Transplantation 78(8):1110–1111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Schneider MK, Seebach JD (2014) Xenotransplantation literature update, November–December 2013. Xenotransplantation 21(1):91–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Salvatori M, Peloso A, Katari R, Soker S, Lerut JP, Stratta RJ, Orlando G (2015) Semi-xenotransplantation: the regenerative medicine-based approach to immunosuppression-free transplantation and to meet the organ demand. Xenotransplantation 22(1):1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Reichardt J-O (2016) Xenotransplantation and tissue engineering technologies: safeguarding their prospects sans sacrificing our future. In: Jox, R.J., Assadi, G., and Marckmann, G. (eds), Organ transplantation in times of donor shortage. Springer, Cham, pp 239–254

  68. Canadian Nurses Association (2004) Position statement: promoting continuing competence for registered nurses. Canadian Nurses Association. https://www.cna-aiic.ca/~/media/cna/page-content/pdf-en/promoting-continuing-competence-for-registered-nurses_position-statement.pdf?la=en. Accessed 03 August 2016

  69. Wolbring G, Diep L (2014) Engaging with technology governance in social work education: an essential for preparing future social work(ers). Journal of Continuing Social Work Education 17(2):63–75

    Google Scholar 

  70. BC transplant (2016) Continuing education. BC transplant. http://www.transplant.bc.ca/health-professionals/continuing-education. Accessed 03 August 2016

  71. BC Transplant (2016) About BC Transplant. BC Transplant. http://www.transplant.bc.ca/about. Accessed 03 August 2016

  72. BC Transplant (2016) Strategic Direction. BC Transplant. http://www.transplant.bc.ca/about-us/strategic-direction. Accessed 03 August 2016

  73. Alberta Health Services (2016) Organ, tissue and eye donation information for the public. Alberta Health Services. http://www.albertahealthservices.ca/services/Page13174.aspx#details-panel13559. Accessed 03 August 2016

  74. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) (2016) Knowledge translation. Canadian Institute for Health Research. http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/29418.html#details-panel1. Accessed 03 August 2016

  75. Trillium Gift of Life Network (2016) Who we are. Trillium Gift of Life Network. http://www.giftoflife.on.ca/en/aboutus.htm. Accessed 03 August 2016

  76. Trillium Gift of Life Network (2016) Community. Trillium Gift of Life Network. http://www.giftoflife.on.ca/en/community.htm. Accessed 03 August 2016

  77. Trillium Gift of Life Network (2016) Supporting healthcare professionals. Trillium Gift of Life Network. http://www.giftoflife.on.ca/en/professionals.htm#hp-contedu. Accessed 03 August 2016

  78. Multi-Organ Transplant Program (2016) MOTP research. Multi-Organ Transplant Program. http://www.motpatlantic.ca/ResearchEducation/MOTPResearch. Accessed 03 August 2016

  79. Legacy of Life (2016) About us. Legacy of Life. http://www.legacyoflife.ns.ca/about_us/index.html. Accessed 03 August 2016

  80. Multi-Organ Transplant Program (2015) Taking heart: mechanical hearts and other advances. Multi-Organ Transplant Program. https://www.motpatlantic.ca/Content/ResearchPublications/transplantResearchFocus.pdf. Accessed 03 August 2016

  81. Cheung J, Wolbring G (2015) Analysis of the science and technology narrative within organ donation and transplantation coverage in Canadian newspapers. Technologies 3(2):74–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the participants who gave us their precious time to answer our questions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cumming School of Medicine, Department of Community Health Sciences, Specialization Community Rehabilitation and Disability Studies, University of Calgary, 3330 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, T2N4N1, Alberta, Canada

    Jennifer Cheung & Gregor Wolbring

Authors
  1. Jennifer Cheung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gregor Wolbring
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gregor Wolbring.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cheung, J., Wolbring, G. Staff’s Views from One Canadian Organ Procurement Organization on Organ Donation and Organ Transplant Technologies: a Content Analysis. Nanoethics 11, 187–202 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-017-0292-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-017-0292-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation