↓ Skip to main content

COMmunication with Families regarding ORgan and Tissue donation after death in intensive care (COMFORT): protocol for an intervention study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
158 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
COMmunication with Families regarding ORgan and Tissue donation after death in intensive care (COMFORT): protocol for an intervention study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1964-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julie E. Potter, Robert G. Herkes, Lin Perry, Rosalind M. Elliott, Anders Aneman, Jorge L. Brieva, Elena Cavazzoni, Andrew T. H. Cheng, Michael J. O’Leary, Ian M. Seppelt, Val Gebski, the COMFORT study investigators

Abstract

Discussing deceased organ donation can be difficult not only for families but for health professionals who initiate and manage the conversations. It is well recognised that the methods of communication and communication skills of health professionals are key influences on decisions made by families regarding organ donation. This multicentre study is being performed in nine intensive care units with follow-up conducted by the Organ and Tissue Donation Service in New South Wales (NSW) Australia. The control condition is pre-intervention usual practice for at least six months before each site implements the intervention. The COMFORT intervention consists of six elements: family conversations regarding offers for organ donation to be led by a "designated requester"; family offers for donation are deferred to the designated requester; the offer of donation is separated from the end-of-life discussion that death is inevitable; it takes place within a structured family donation conversation using a "balanced" approach. Designated requesters may be intensivists, critical care nurses or social workers prepared by attending the three-day national "Family Donation Conversation" workshops, and the half-day NSW Simulation Program. The design is pre-post intervention to compare rates of family consent for organ donation six months before and under the intervention. Each ICU crosses from using the control to intervention condition after the site initiation visit. The primary endpoint is the consent rate for deceased organ donation calculated from 140 eligible next of kin families. Secondary endpoints are health professionals' adherence rates to core elements of the intervention; identification of predictors of family donation decision; and the proportion of families who regret their final donation decision at 90 days. The pragmatic design of this study may identify 'what works' in usual clinical settings when requesting organ donation in critical care areas, both in terms of changes in practice healthcare professionals are willing and able to adopt, and the effect this may have on desired outcomes. The findings of this study will be indicative of the potential benefits of the intervention and be relevant and transferrable to clinical settings in other states and countries. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12613000815763 (24 July 2013). ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01922310 (14 August 2013) (retrospectively registered).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 158 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 11%
Researcher 17 11%
Student > Master 17 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 8%
Other 11 7%
Other 33 21%
Unknown 50 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 34 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 20%
Social Sciences 11 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 4%
Psychology 4 3%
Other 16 10%
Unknown 56 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 April 2019.
All research outputs
#7,262,745
of 23,659,844 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#3,529
of 7,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,751
of 421,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#55
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,659,844 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,884 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,284 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 128 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.