Public preferences for the allocation of donor liver grafts for transplantation.

To investigate the nature of public preferences in the allocation of donor liver grafts for transplantation a social conjoint analysis (CA) technique was developed for a questionnaire survey. A convenience sample of academic and non-academic employees of a British University were invited to participate in the survey. Respondents were presented with eight choice situations in which they were asked to allocate 100 donor liver grafts between two groups of 100 individuals in urgent need of a transplant. The groups of individuals differed in terms of the length of time spent waiting, the life years gained following transplantation, age, personal responsibility for their illness and whether they were primary or re-transplant candidates. Only two respondents (0.7%) consistently chose to give all of the donor organs to the group of individuals with the highest expected length of survival whilst seven respondents (2%) exhibited strict egalitarian preferences, allocating equal numbers of donor organs to both groups irrespective of their characteristics. The vast majority of respondents indicated that they would be prepared to sacrifice some gain in the efficiency of the transplantation programme for an increase in equity or fairness in the allocation of donor livers. Using social CA it was possible to establish the relative weight attached to each characteristic in determining individual's allocation decisions.

[1]  T. Peters,et al.  Organ donors and nondonors. An American dilemma. , 1996, Archives of internal medicine.

[2]  J. Hausman Specification tests in econometrics , 1978 .

[3]  Setting health care priorities in Sweden: the politician's point of view. , 1993, Health policy.

[4]  E. Nord The Person-trade-off Approach to Valuing Health Care Programs , 1995, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[5]  J. Cairns,et al.  Establishing Patient Preferences for Blood Transfusion Support: An Application of Conjoint Analysis , 1998, Journal of health services research & policy.

[6]  D. Hadorn The role of public values in setting health care priorities. , 1991, Social science & medicine.

[7]  D. Eddy,et al.  Clinical decision making: from theory to practice. The individual vs society. Resolving the conflict. , 1991, JAMA.

[8]  David M. Eddy,et al.  The Individual vs Society: Resolving the Conflict , 1991 .

[9]  J. Richardson,et al.  Maximizing health benefits vs egalitarianism: an Australian survey of health issues. , 1995, Social science & medicine.

[10]  R M Arnold,et al.  Rationing failure. The ethical lessons of the retransplantation of scarce vital organs. , 1993, JAMA.

[11]  F. D. de Charro,et al.  The utility of health at different stages in life: a quantitative approach. , 1993, Social science & medicine.

[12]  J. Olsen Theories of justice and their implications for priority setting in health care. , 1997, Journal of health economics.

[13]  G. Loewenstein,et al.  The efficacy and equity of retransplantation: an experimental survey of public attitudes. , 1995, Health policy.

[14]  J. Neuberger,et al.  Assessing priorities for allocation of donor liver grafts: survey of public and clinicians , 1998, BMJ.

[15]  M. Siegler,et al.  Should alcoholics compete equally for liver transplantation? , 1991, JAMA.

[16]  Stavros A. Drakopoulos,et al.  Hierarchical Choice in Economics , 1994 .

[17]  W. Wall,et al.  The lidocaine monoethylglycinexylidide test of liver function. , 1996, Liver transplantation and surgery : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society.

[18]  J. Ratcliffe,et al.  PATIENTS' PREFERENCES REGARDING THE PROCESS AND OUTCOMES OF LIFE-SAVING TECHNOLOGY , 1999, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[19]  A. Wagstaff QALYs and the equity-efficiency trade-off. , 1991, Journal of health economics.

[20]  J Neuberger,et al.  Allocating donor livers , 1997, BMJ.

[21]  S C Farrow,et al.  Choosing who shall not be treated in the NHS. , 1989, Social science & medicine.

[22]  J. Richardson,et al.  Social Evaluation of Health Care Versus Personal Evaluation of Health States: Evidence on the Validity of Four Health-state Scaling Instruments Using Norwegian and Australian Surveys , 1993, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[23]  G. Loewenstein,et al.  Distributing scarce livers: the moral reasoning of the general public. , 1996, Social science & medicine.

[24]  Ghent Cn Overall evaluation: screening and assessment of risk factors. , 1996 .

[25]  M Ryan,et al.  Using conjoint analysis to assess women's preferences for miscarriage management. , 1997, Health economics.

[26]  Thomas Fahy,et al.  Liver transplantation for alcoholic liver disease , 1997, British Journal of Psychiatry.