Attitudes & Perceptions of Organ Donation

Attitudes & Perceptions of Organ Donation Prepared by: Paige Anderson, Brooke Egelston, Emma Hunsaker, Kourtney Spurgeon, andKevin King

Executive Summary • LifeShare Oklahoma is the state’s organization dedicated to the education and procurement of organs for transplantation. • LifeShare Oklahoma is currently involved in Donate Life America’s campaign, “20 Million in 2012”. This was developed to help increase organ donors to a total of 20 million across the United States. The focus is to spread awareness on college campuses and understand why students are not organ donors already. • The goal of the research was to collect data on the behaviors, attitudes, and knowledge of students at OU. Throughout the study we targeted specific student populations such as those affiliated with religious organization, registered organ donors and non-donors.

Executive Summary • Researchers of this study utilized secondary research and conducted primary research through quantitative and qualitative methodologies. After spending a semester researching the client and the topic of organ donation, the research group discovered some key themes that will benefit LifeShare Oklahoma. • The research group found that lack of knowledge and awareness were key factors in the decision process. • Religion was a possibility, however, research proved that was not a main factor. • 73.6 percent of the study participants knew what it meant to be a registered organ donor.

Background of the study • According to Pomerantz, “Fear of not receiving sufficient medical attention and the suggestion for public schools to educate children” was found to be true in our research. Participants said they would pay closer attention to the issue if they were educated at an early age. One participant in focus group two feared he would not receive adequate medical attention and that was preventing him from becoming an organ donor.

SWOT Analysis • After conducting primary and secondary research, the researchers concluded the following: • Strengths: LifeShare Oklahoma’s main goal is to save lives. This goal can relate emotionally, logically, and ethically. The client has a great reputation among its publics. Technology is only growing and helping LifeShare Oklahoma make it easier to become an organ donor. • Weaknesses: The client does not utilize efficient social media and the information to the public is limited. This decreases awareness. Both organ donors and non registered donors lack knowledge on the issue of organ donation.

SWOT Analysis • Opportunities: In order to help improve LifeShare Oklahoma, social media activity needs to increase. LifeShare Oklahoma has an opportunity to target every person getting a driver’s license for the first time, or renewing their license. If education on the issue took place before going to the DMV, organ donors could increase significantly. • Threats: There are a lot of misconceptions about organ donation. Also, lack of information exists and is preventing the public from making an educated decision about becoming an organ donor. Lastly, lack of communication between family and friends makes it significantly more tough to make a decision.

Limitations • The researchers were able to gain sufficient research and incite to the perceptions on organ donation. However, there were factors that prevented from the research being fully effective. • Before the researchers started the study, the researchers wanted to gain information on religious affiliated students. The organizations were difficult to contact, however, the Christian fraternity responded to our email. • Another limitation was time. • Lastly, the majority of the survey questions used were either interval or nominal questions.

Purpose of Study • The purpose of the study was to target OU students and find out their attitudes and behaviors toward organ donation by means of face-face surveys. Two focus groups were conducted, each sixty minutes long. The information the research group gathered was to present to the client, LifeShare Oklahoma. In 2012, they have a campaign that is trying to gain 20 million organ donors in the United States by the end of year 2012. The research group wants to help target ways they can recruit more organ donors.

Short description and justification of mixed methods • The researches used both quantitative and qualitative research methods in order to obtain the most in-depth information from the study population. After completing secondary research, a survey questionnaire was produced and completed by 121 participants. • Surveys are useful for obtaining quick information that assesses the participants’ factual knowledge of the subject and their cognitive perceptions towards a certain topic. • The weakness of using survey research is that respondents do not have a great opportunity to go into depth.

Short description and justification of mixed methods • Along with the survey, focus groups were conducted to obtain qualitative data. By conducting a focus group, the researchers were able to get in depth responses and change questions by adding or eliminating the wording throughout the discussion. • Advantages of conducting a focus group are getting detailed responses to the questions and seeing how participants changed their attitudes towards organ donation over the course of the focus group. • Drawbacks to the focus group were that some respondents felt uncomfortable talking about organ donation and others did not have significant input.

Survey Nonprobability purposive sampling was utilized. The study population for the research group’s survey consisted of current OU students in religious affiliated organizations. The survey population age group ranged from 18 to 24-years old. The research group had 121 surveys. 65% were registered organ donors, and 35% were not. Few participants cared about being buried as a whole person, the affect on quality of care, or had religious reasons for not becoming a donor.

Survey • The research group targeted Christian fraternity and sorority members, a sampling frame constructed from the nonprobability purposive technique. • The survey that the group constructed was distributed face-to-face. • The research group spoke to the chapter on behalf of LifeShare Oklahoma and explained what the purpose of our study was. This helped the participants understand why the survey was being distributed, and the fact that we needed the most accurate data possible.

Donors

Demographics Age Frequency

Major Results and Discussion from Survey • The results gathered by the research group found that the majority of non-donor respondents did not have a real reason behind not being an organ donor. This could be caused by the lack of discussion within the age group and college students normally do not think ahead about if they want to donate their organs. • Through the data collection, the study proves that the lack of education and family influence are the two most important factors for LifeShare Oklahoma. • Although many students are uninformed about the issue, this gives LifeShare Oklahoma an opportunity to jump right in and start spreading awareness. • Each focus group had similar results with the emphasis being primarily on lack of knowledge and influence of family.

Major Results and Discussion From Survey • LifeShare Oklahoma needs to now focus on spreading information to the publics. The group members suggested that receiving information at school or from the DMV would be helpful in preparing for the decision. • It was discovered that the rushed process at the DMV turned many participants away from becoming an organ donor. • LifeShare Oklahoma should reach non-donors by widening education in Driver’s Education courses at an early age.

Major Results and Discussion From Survey • Throughout the study, family influence on organ donation was represented both positively and negatively. • In the first focus group, one participant mentioned his mother just told him to check yes at the DMV, and didn’t explain what he was doing. • In the second focus group , a participant was told directly by her parents to never become an organ donor. They wished to have her body built as a whole. • Throughout the study, it became apparent that family beliefs are a value that individuals hold onto.

Focus Group One • Focus group one took place on Thursday night at 9 p.m at an off-campus house. Six members of Beta Upsilon Chi Christian Fraternity were apart of the focus group. The focus group lasted for sixty minutes.

Focus Group Two • Focus group two took place on Sunday at 2 p.m. in Gaylord Hall. The participants were comprised of non-registered and registered organ donors at OU for a total of five participants. Within this group, there were four males and one female.

Major Results and Findings from Focus Group • The research group discovered that many of the participants in the focus groups reference family as being an influential factor for deciding whether or not they became registered organ donors. • Many of the participants mentioned that social media would help spread awareness. • Personal testimonies would also help persuade the non-donors to become registered donors. • The overall lack of knowledge, education, family impact, and common misconceptions that surround organ donation were all apparent themes throughout the focus groups for shaping the attitudes and beliefs of the participants.

Recommendations • The research group recommends that LifeShare Oklahoma have more effective social media, personal testimonies, events on OU’s campus, and raise awareness to children at an early age. This would help students become more educated about the process before making a decision on their own at the DMV. • According to Anker & Feeley ((K)), “ Four communication messages used to convince one to become an organ donor: education on donation, benefits of donation, information about the recipient of the organ donated, and involvement of potential donors family.”

Thank you Paige Anderson, Kourtney Spurgeon, Brooke Egelston, Emma Hunsaker, & Kevin King

Attitudes & Perceptions of Organ Donation