Next Article in Journal
Examining Factors Associated with Attrition, Strategies for Retention Among Undergraduate Nursing Students, and Identified Research Gaps: A Scoping Review
Previous Article in Journal
Clinical Resilience in Nursing Education: Insights from Thai Instructors on Supporting Student Growth
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Nursing Reports
Volume 15
Issue 6
10.3390/nursrep15060181
nursrep-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Organ Donation and Transplantation Among Nursing Students: A Multicentre Cross-Sectional Study

by
Luca Bertocchi
1,
Cristina Petrucci
2,
Massimo Alex Calzetta
3,
Angelo Dante
2,
Felice Curcio
4,*,
Loreto Lancia
2 and
Cesar Ivan Aviles Gonzalez
5
1
Haematology Unit, Trieste University Hospital (ASUGI), Piazza dell’Ospitale 1, 34125 Trieste, Italy
2
Department of Health, Life and Environment Sciences, University of L’Aquila, 67100 L’Aquila, Italy
3
Clinical Medicine, Santa Maria della Misericordia Hospital of Udine, Piazzale Santa Maria della Misericordia 15, 33100 Udine, Italy
4
Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, University of Sassari (UNISS), 07100 Sassari, Italy
5
Department of Nursing, University of Studies of Enna Kore, 94100 Enna, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Nurs. Rep. 2025, 15(6), 181; https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep15060181
Submission received: 21 March 2025 / Revised: 12 May 2025 / Accepted: 20 May 2025 / Published: 22 May 2025
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background/Objectives: Organ transplantation is a vital treatment for individuals with advanced chronic-degenerative diseases. However, the global shortage of donated organs remains a significant challenge. Improving knowledge and attitudes could positively impact this issue. This study assessed the knowledge and attitudes of nursing students regarding organ donation and transplantation. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a previously validated questionnaire administered to 235 second- and third-year undergraduate nursing students from two Italian universities. Results: The response rate was 67.3%. Only 40.4% of students felt adequately informed about transplants and brain death, while 12.8% would not authorise organ transplantation for a family member. Willingness to authorise organ procurement from family members in a brain-dead state was positively associated with being atheist or agnostic (χ2 = 7.235; p = 0.022), being in the third year of study (χ2 = 4.282; p = 0.039) and having positive self-assessed knowledge (χ2 = 8.061; p = 0.005). Conclusions: Nursing students exhibited suboptimal knowledge and positive attitudes toward organ and tissue donation. However, there is a need for health policymakers to implement strategies to raise awareness of the importance of organ donation through school and community programmes and public education campaigns.

1. Introduction

Organ donation and transplantation offer life-saving therapies for individuals with advanced stages of chronic, irreversible and degenerative diseases [1,2,3]. The scientific community and legal systems in numerous countries acknowledge brain death as the cessation of a person’s vital functions. Embracing this concept has played a pivotal role in advancing the organ donation and transplantation process, particularly because a substantial portion of organ donors are individuals who have experienced brain death [4,5].
Over the years, Italy has seen a systematic increase in the number of donors and transplants. While, from 2001 to 2011, the number of donors and transplants had percentage increases of 25% and 14%, respectively, from 2012 to 2022, this growth had a further boost, reaching a 38% increase for donations and a 25% increase for transplants. In 2022, donors (deceased and living) and resulting transplants were 1.830 and 3.879, respectively [6]. However, the global shortage of donated organs remains a critical issue, as it fails to meet the transplant demands of patients on waiting lists [7,8,9]. To address this challenge, it is crucial to adopt strategies that focus on increasing self-awareness and understanding about organ donation, transplantation and brain death. As a result, solid knowledge and clinical skills concerning organ donation, transplant and brain death are important elements for guaranteeing better teamwork and approaches toward patients.
Nurses play a pivotal role in influencing potential donors’ decisions, as they are often the first point of contact with patients and their families. Nurses can collaborate with other team members [10] to implement effective strategies to encourage more organ donations. Promising approaches to increase donation rates are educational programs for patients and family members [1], revisions to nursing curricula [11,12], counselling for patients and families [10] and the inclusion of a nurse specialist in the organ donation [13].
In nursing education, incorporating comprehensive organ donation content into curricula is crucial. This integration ensures that future nurses are well prepared to engage in discussions about organ donation and transplantation, thereby fostering a more informed healthcare workforce as nursing students represent the future workforce of clinical professionals [14,15]. However, studies have shown that the knowledge and attitudes toward organ donation among nursing students often do not meet the desired standards [10,16,17]. Several factors contribute to this, including the lack of seminars or courses on organ donation in academic curricula [1,18,19,20,21], as well as cultural aspects of organ donation in the country [1,22,23,24].
The lack of knowledge about organ donation by health professionals poses significant challenges at both the healthcare and educational levels. This gap in knowledge contributes to fewer transplants and a growing number of individuals being on transplant waiting lists due to the failure to recognise potential donors [25]. Moreover, the absence of adequate knowledge transmission during training can negatively impact nurses’ ability to collaborate with multidisciplinary teams and support potential donors and their caregivers. To address this issue, early exposure to donation information during nursing university courses has the potential to improve future nurses’ clinical practice, enhancing their ability to collaborate effectively within the healthcare team and fostering more positive attitudes toward organ donation [26]. Increasing students’ knowledge and cultivating positive attitudes toward organ donation can be achieved through dedicated lessons integrated into their study path. Additionally, their willingness to donate organs may also be influenced by a combination of environmental, socio-cultural and educational variables [27,28,29]. In this regard, lectures and reading materials related to the topic have demonstrated a favourable impact on improving the knowledge and attitudes of nursing students [21,30,31,32,33,34].
Although there have been previous studies investigating knowledge and attitudes about organ donation [1,11,27,35,36], to the best of the authors’ knowledge, there is a paucity of multicentre studies in Italy investigating nursing students’ knowledge and attitudes about organ donation and transplantation. Thus, this study aims to assess the knowledge and attitudes of nursing students regarding organ donation and transplantation while comparing these aspects between second- and third-year nursing students.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design and Setting

A cross-sectional study was conducted on a non-probabilistic sample of students enrolled in undergraduate courses at two Italian universities. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist was used for transparency in the reporting of the study [37].
This study was conducted in the Bachelor’s Degree programs in Nursing at the University of Trieste and the University of L’Aquila, Italy. The study plan for nursing degrees in Italy is three years long and requires the completion of 180 European Credit Transfer System (ECTS) credits, 60 of which are to be acquired in internship training activities. The degree program is structured to integrate theoretical learning with practical clinical experience.

2.2. Participants and Sampling Procedure

A non-probabilistic convenience sampling approach was adopted, inviting all eligible second- and third-year undergraduate nursing students enrolled at the University of Trieste and the University of L’Aquila to participate voluntarily in this study. The total eligible population consisted of 349 students, who were contacted via the university’s e-mail system with a link to the online questionnaire. Data collection took place from 8 to 28 October 2021.

2.3. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria and Sample Size Estimation

Participants eligible for inclusion were second- or third-year nursing students who received the survey invitation via their university e-mail. First-year students were excluded because they had not yet acquired any theoretical knowledge or practical experience of transplantation and organ and tissue donation; these topics are only introduced in the curriculum from the second year onward.
The minimum required sample size was calculated using G*Power (Version 3.1.9.7 © Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf) based on an a priori power analysis for chi-square tests (goodness-of-fit, contingency tables). Assuming a medium effect size (w = 0.30), a significance level of α = 0.05 and a power (1-β) of 0.80, the analysis indicated that a minimum of 183 participants was required to detect significant differences. The final sample of 235 students, therefore, exceeded the minimum required sample size.

2.4. Instrument and Study Variables

The knowledge and attitudes of university nursing students toward organ donation were assessed using a self-administered questionnaire. Socio-demographic characteristics, including age, sex, high school attended, religion, university site, academic year and student status, were also collected.
The organ donation questionnaire, used with permission from the original author, was originally developed and validated by Giusti and colleagues (2015) through a literature review and pilot testing, assessing both content and face validity [27]. The instrument is divided in five main sections: (1) self-assessment of knowledge (e.g., Do you think to have sufficient information about transplantation and brain death?); (2) scientific knowledge (e.g., what is ‘brain death’?); (3) attitudes, experiences and personal opinions on donation, organ procurement and transplantation (e.g., Do you believe in the effectiveness of transplants?); (4) experience and lived experiences; (5) information and proposals [27]. As the tool includes mixed-format items (e.g., correct/incorrect knowledge questions, dichotomous attitude items), no psychometric analyses such as internal consistency or test–retest reliability were conducted in either the original study or in the present research.

2.5. Bias

To minimise the response bias and social desirability bias, the anonymity and confidentiality of the responses were guaranteed to encourage honest answers and prevent any pressure that might arise from disclosing personal beliefs. To ensure that the sample of nursing students was representative of a broader nursing student population and minimise sample representation bias, the sample included students from two Italian universities. Both universities do not offer specific courses on organ donation and transplantation, although these topics are generally covered during the second and third year.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

Continuous variables were described by central tendency (mean, median) and dispersion measures such as standard deviation (SD) or interquartile range (IQR). Categorical variables were described as numbers (n) and percentages (%). The normality in distribution of continuous variables was visually assessed using histograms, boxplots, and Q-Q plots and verified using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. For categorical variables, the comparisons between groups were performed using the χ2 test, while for continuous variables, the Mann–Whitney U test was adopted. The level of statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. All data were analysed using the IBM SPSS version 28.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

2.7. Ethical Considerations

This study was conducted according to the ethical principles stated by the Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments and with the General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR). Approval was granted by the Presidency Boards of the Bachelor’s Degree Programs in Nursing at both universities, with the formal authorisation dated 28 August 2020.
Consent for inclusion and data treatment was acquired in electronic format; only after giving informed consent by clicking yes was it possible to start the questionnaire. Students were informed that their participation was voluntary and anonymous, according to Italian Data protection law (e.g., Decree n. 196/2003). In addition, students were informed that they could leave the study at any time without any adverse consequences for their university program.

3. Results

3.1. Socio-Demographic Characteristics

A total of 235 second- and third-year nursing students completed the questionnaires with an overall response rate of 67.3%. The mean age of the students was 23.5 years (SD 4.83), and they were mostly female (84.7%). The most prevalent upper-secondary school attended was scientific (37.5%). The majority of students were Catholic (59.2%), 38.3% were atheist or agnostic and the remaining 8.1% were Orthodox, Muslim, Protestant or Hindu. Most of the students attended the third year (57.3%), and more than 95% of them were ‘in progress’ with their academic studies (Table 1).

3.2. Knowledge About Organ Donation, Transplantation and Brain Death

In the self-rated question about knowledge on transplants and brain death, only 40.4% of the students believe that they have enough information about these topics. Stratifying by academic year, a statistically significant greater percentage of third-year students believed themselves to have enough information on these compared to second-year students (p = 0.011); almost all the participants (97.9%) correctly stated the presence of laws in Italy regulating organ donation. Almost a quarter of the students did not provide the correct definition of brain death. There was a high awareness of the difference between ‘brain death’ and ‘cardiac death’, with 98.3% of students giving correct answers, although almost 12% of the sample believed that it is possible to return to life after being diagnosed with brain death. Moreover, 21.7% of students were unaware of the greater workload required for a patient in a brain death state, although there was a statistically significant higher percentage of correct answers in third-year students in comparison to second-year students (p = 0.008). Finally, 22.5% of the sample wrongly claimed that there are no interferences between drugs, toxic and narcotic substances and the clinical conditions for the diagnosis of brain death (Table 2).

3.3. Attitude Toward Organ Donation

It appears that almost all students (99.6%) have confidence in the effectiveness of transplants. All the students stated that in case of their own need or that of a family member, they would authorise the transplant. However, 12.8% of students state that they would refuse the removal of organs from a family member diagnosed with brain death. Moreover, 41.3% of students believe that organ procurement can be refused if seen by relatives as a form of mutilation. Despite the legislative protection on that matter, 20.0% of students say that an illegal organ trade is possible in Italy, 70.6% of students correctly reject it, and a small percentage is unaware of it (9.4%). Almost 95% of nursing students recognise the role of healthcare workers in positively influencing the number of donations (Table 2). In all the items related to attitudes toward organ donation, any statistical significance differences between the students in second year and third year are shown.
The nursing students’ willingness to permit organ procurement from family members in a brain death state (item 9)” revealed several significant associations. This factor was positively correlated with being atheist or agnostic (χ2 = 7.235; p = 0.022), being in the third year of study (χ2 = 4.282; p = 0.039) and having positive self-knowledge (χ2 = 8.061; p = 0.005) (Table 3).

3.4. Experience, Source of Information and Proposed Strategies for Transplantation

About 40% of students had the opportunity to meet and/or take care of patients awaiting transplant or who had already received a transplant, some of them for family experiences or acquaintances (15.8%) and others during the internship (25.5%). The main sources of information regarding the subject were advertising campaigns (50.6%) and their university (36.6%), while other sources, such as general practitioners, public offices, etc., were less frequently mentioned. The students’ main proposed strategies to raise the population’s awareness were the involvement of health professionals in secondary schools and universities (53.2%), the use of advertising campaigns (25.5%) and the use of the internet (10.2%), while other proposals were less frequently mentioned by the students (Table 2).

4. Discussion

The main purpose of this study was to evaluate nursing students’ knowledge and attitudes regarding organ donation and transplantation. Study participants were mainly female, reflecting the gender of the nursing profession, which is comparable to other previous studies [1,27,35]. The response rate of 67.3% appears to be in line with those of other Italian studies on the topic, which range from 50.0 to 91.9% [1,27,35,36].

4.1. Knowledge About Organ Donation, Transplantation and Brain Death

Nursing students’ self-assessed knowledge about transplantation and brain death was found to be suboptimal since less than half of the students declared that they have enough information on transplantation. However, the proportion of students with positive self-assessed knowledge in our sample was higher compared to a previous monocentric study using the same tool (40.4% vs. 25.3%) [27]. In addition, a statistically significant higher percentage of second-year nursing students reported lacking sufficient information compared to third-year students; these data appear to be in line with the literature that identified an influence of educational training received during the academic period on knowledge [27,36,38,39,40].
Although most of the students were aware that ‘brain death’ and’ cardiac death’ did not have the same meaning, almost a quarter of students were unable to correctly define brain death. This lack of clarity was confirmed by the almost 12% of students who replied that returning to life was possible after experiencing brain death. These alarming results are consistent with the previous study of Giusti et al. [27] that found a percentage of 11% for this item. In addition, Martínez-Alarcón et al. [38] found that 70% of students claimed to understand the concept of brain death, while 27% expressed uncertainty and 3% believed that a person with brain death could recover and live a normal life. Better results, on the other hand, were observed in a study conducted in Poland with medical and nursing students, where when analysing self-perceived knowledge of the definition of brain death, it was recorded that approximately 90% of the sample answered correctly [41].
Several additional gaps were identified regarding scientific knowledge, particularly that a fifth of nursing students’ were not aware of the increased workload healthcare workers face when caring for a patient in a state of brain death; however, third-year students demonstrated significantly higher awareness about this item. These findings suggest that students’ knowledge about transplants and brain death tends to improve through their academic career. This could be due to the deeper theoretical preparation from third-year students, as well as to the clinical experience gained given their higher chance of participating in internships in critical departments. In fact, these types of settings represent opportunities for encountering situations related to ethics dilemmas about donations and transplants [42]. Finally, the students also showed themselves not to be fully aware about the factors and circumstances that could alter the state of brain death.

4.2. Attitudes to Organ Donation

Students showed an overall positive attitude toward organ donation and transplantation; in fact, most of them stated that in case of need, they would authorise this procedure for themselves or for a family member in a brain death state; despite this, about 13% would not authorise organ procurement from a relative. This could be linked to the fact that a fifth of them believed there is a ‘organ trade’ (black market) in the country, while almost 60% viewed transplantation as mutilation.
About 13% of the sample would not authorise donation or transplantation from a family member in a brain dead state. This could be explained by the fact that almost 59% of students reported that the procurement procedure could be considered a form of mutilation by the relatives of the patient. It seems that students have doubts about the existence of a possible illegal organ trade in our country, despite the protections offered by current legislation [27]. Almost all the participants agreed on the idea that health workers are important for increasing and sensitising the population to organ donation, as shown in previous studies [27,43,44]. All students would accept transplantation as a therapy (both for their own needs and for those of family members), while in other sources, the same figure stood at just over 50% [35,45]. In the event of a family member being in a situation of brain death, most of the students would be inclined to take the sample; if, instead, the family were involved in the decision, the positive attitude would decrease; this could probably be related to the procedure being seen as an act of mutilation of the deceased’s body.
From the literature, the data about the attitudes of Italian nursing students on organ donation are contrasting, ranging from a negative attitude [35] to a positive one [1,11,27]. In our sample, a positive attitude toward organ transplantation was found, albeit with a reduction in this attitude when families are involved [14,27,30,46,47].
The analysis of nursing students’ willingness to permit organ procurement from family members in a brain death state offered insight into several factors that appear to influence students’ attitudes toward organ donation in this specific context. The results highlighted key associations that can help us to better understand the complexities of this decision-making process related to religious beliefs, year of study and the self-knowledge of the student.
The association between nursing students’ willingness to consider organ procurement from family members in a brain death state and their religious beliefs aligns with previous research on the role of religion in shaping attitudes toward organ donation. Religious beliefs are known to significantly influence perspectives on organ donation and transplantation [48,49,50]. In our study, students who identified as atheist or agnostic were more likely to be positive about organ donation, whereas those who were religious were less inclined to support it. This finding is consistent with the broader literature, which suggests that people who believe in God or an afterlife and those who adhere to religious values emphasising bodily integrity after death (such as Confucianism or Buddhism), are generally less likely to endorse organ donation [26,46,48,51]. These religious views often relate to concerns about respecting the body or the connection between bodily integrity and respect for ancestors or nature. However, it is important to note that the majority of students in our study were Catholic, which limited our ability to draw definitive conclusions regarding the influence of other religious beliefs on organ donation attitudes. Despite this, the findings contribute to the existing literature by reinforcing the notion that religious beliefs play a crucial role in shaping attitudes toward organ procurement.
Year of study and self-knowledge were also positively associated with nursing students’ willingness for organ procurement from family members in a brain death state. Third-year students demonstrated a significantly greater willingness to authorise the removal of organs from a family member in a state of brain death compared to second-year students, possibly reflecting higher levels of knowledge and maturity. These results are consistent with the literature that showed that year of study is significantly associated with a commitment to organ donation [36,40,52]. This indicates that as students progress further in their education, their attitudes and perspectives on organ donation may evolve, highlighting the potential impact of continuous education and engagement in shaping these views. Finally, students with positive self-knowledge were more likely to consider organ procurement, possibly due to greater confidence in handling complex ethical issues, as found in previous studies [14,15,53,54]. These findings highlight how factors like religious belief, academic experience and self-awareness shape nursing students’ perspectives on organ donation. Studies have shown that nursing students’ knowledge and attitudes toward organ donation are influenced by various factors, including religious beliefs, cultural influences and personal experiences [14,15,55,56]. These findings suggest that a combination of demographic, educational and personal factors can impact nursing students’ decisions regarding organ donation.

4.3. Experience, Source of Information and Proposed Strategies

Most of the students stated that they have not had the opportunity to meet patients who had already undergone transplantation or are on the transplant list, as already described in a previous study [1]. Just over three-quarters of the participants stated that they learned about organ donation through advertising campaigns and/or had received relevant information at school or university. Only a minority of the participants claimed to have received information directly from the organ donor centre; two students claimed to be donors. The students believe that among the strategies required for raising the population’s awareness, the most suitable were speeches given by health professionals in secondary schools and universities and the use of advertising campaigns, the fourth and second options, respectively, chosen in the study by Giusti et al. [27]. In light of current technological advances and in order to facilitate access to the general population, in future studies, it would be interesting to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual active learning methodologies as a strategy to increase awareness for donation, as they have proven to be as effective as face-to-face active learning methodologies [57]. In addition, we suggest designing and validating strategies to increase health profession students’ education, awareness and adherence to donation. For example, in patients with chronic diseases, such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus and hypertension, they have proven to be valuable elements in improving patient education about their diseases and adherence to treatment [58,59].

4.4. Limitations

This study has several limitations. First, although conducted at two Italian universities (in the North and Centre of Italy), we were unable to enrol nursing students from the South of Italy, and the sample was not derived using a randomised multi-stage sampling technique. Furthermore, the small sample size may have affected the significance of the results, which reduces the possibility of generalising the results to all Italian students. It is recommended to repeat the study with a larger sample, including more universities from all of Italy, to validate this hypothesis. Second, while voluntary participation was a key component of this study, this may have introduced selection bias, as those who chose to participate might not fully represent the general nursing student population. To mitigate this, multiple reminders were sent to encourage participation, and the participant pool was expanded to include students from two universities in distinct regions of Italy. This strategy helped to ensure greater diversity and reduce potential bias in the sample. Third, the data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire, so, although we tried to limit problems, evaluation and desirability bias may be present. However, the variables analysed in this study relate to students’ perceptions of their knowledge and attitudes about organ donation and transplantation. Therefore, data collection using self-reported measures was appropriate for perception data. Finally, this study was conducted during the period when the COVID-19 pandemic was ongoing. The pandemic may have influenced the attitudes and perceptions of the students, as public focus shifted toward immediate health concerns and the strain on healthcare systems. The potential impact of COVID-19 on these findings should be considered when interpreting the results, and further research could explore how the pandemic has affected public attitudes toward organ donation.

4.5. Future Directions

Future studies could explore and identify additional predictors of knowledge and attitudes toward organ donation among nursing students, building on the associations already investigated in the present study. Further research could examine the effectiveness of different teaching strategies, such as role play and simulation, in improving understanding and attitudes about organ donation. Additionally, exploring the impact of nursing education on students’ ability to collaborate with multidisciplinary teams in organ donation scenarios would provide valuable insights.

4.6. Concluding Remarks: Strategies for Raising Awareness and Promoting Organ Donation

To address the chronic shortage of organ donors, it is crucial to raise awareness, beginning with students. This study suggests that improving knowledge and attitudes among nursing students can help to alleviate this issue and save lives in the future. Including mandatory university courses on organ donation, incorporating recommended teaching strategies such as role play and simulation, would provide a strong foundation and build nursing students’ confidence in dealing with this often-neglected topic. Moreover, empowering nurses to teach middle and high school students about organ donation could further spread awareness. The introduction of school nurses, as seen in countries like the United Kingdom, could also be explored in other regions to create an educational bridge between schools, homes and communities. Health policymakers could consider integrating these roles to promote organ donation awareness on a broader scale.

5. Conclusions

In our current study, it was found that nursing students’ knowledge appears to be suboptimal: more than half of the students do not believe that they have sufficient information on this topic, with overall better knowledge and attitudes in third-year students in comparison to second-year students. In contrast, attitudes about organ donation appear adequate. This study’s results may help to identify trends in students’ knowledge and attitudes about organ donation and potentially inform educational interventions aimed at raising awareness and encouraging organ donation. Religion, year of study and self-assessed knowledge have been identified as factors influencing nursing students’ willingness to authorise organ procurement from family members in a state of brain death. Further studies are needed to explore the relationship between knowledge, attitudes and other potential predictors for nursing students.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, L.B.; methodology, L.B., F.C. and C.I.A.G.; formal analysis, L.B., F.C. and C.I.A.G.; investigation, L.B. and M.A.C.; data curation, L.B. and M.A.C.; writing—original draft preparation, L.B., M.A.C., F.C. and C.I.A.G.; writing—review and editing, L.B., F.C. and C.I.A.G.; supervision, C.P., A.D. and L.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Approval was granted by the Presidency Boards of the Bachelor’s Degree Programs in Nursing at both universities (authorisation letters dated 28 August 2020).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in this study.

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors on request.

Public Involvement Statement

No public involvement in any aspect of this research.

Guidelines and Standards Statement

This manuscript was drafted by following the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) [37] for cross-sectional research.

Use of Artificial Intelligence

AI or AI-assisted tools were not used in drafting any aspect of this manuscript.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the nursing students who participated in this study. Special thanks are also extended to Giusti for his willingness to share the questionnaire.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Fontana, F.; Massari, M.; Giovannini, L.; Alfano, G.; Cappelli, G. Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Organ Donation in Health Care Undergraduate Students in Italy. Transplant. Proc. 2017, 49, 1982–1987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Mikla, M.; Cybulska, A.M.; Rios, A.; Panczyk, M.; Rachubińska, K.; Kotwas, A.; Karakiewicz, B.; Grochans, E.; Schneider-Matyka, D. Attitudes of Polish Medical Students toward Organ Donation. Front. Public Health 2025, 13, 1531140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Green, B.; Goon, D.T.; Mtise, T.; Oladimeji, O. A Cross-Sectional Study of Professional Nurses’ Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Regarding Organ Donation in Critical Care Units of Public and Private Hospitals in the Eastern Cape, South Africa. Nurs. Rep. 2023, 13, 255–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Aljasem, J.M.; Bohamad, A.H.; Alahmed, A.Y.; Buali, H.H.; Alhussain, A.H.; Aldawood, M.; Aljasem, A.M.; Saleh, S.M. Awareness Level Regarding Brain Death and the Acceptance of Organ Donation in Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia. Cureus 2023, 15, e37760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Basubrain, O. Brain Death Knowledge and Attitudes Among Fourth-Year Medical Students at Umm Al-Qura University. Cureus 2024, 16, e69247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Domini, F.; Vespasiano, F.; Ciaccio, P.D.; Lombardini, L.; Cardillo, M. Trasparenza, efficacia ed efficienza della Rete Nazionale Trapianti dalla sua nascita ai giorni nostri: Evoluzione di un modello organizzativo al servizio del paziente affetto da grave insufficienza di organo. Boll. Epidemiol. Naz. 2023, 4, 27–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Lewis, A.; Koukoura, A.; Tsianos, G.-I.; Gargavanis, A.A.; Nielsen, A.A.; Vassiliadis, E. Organ Donation in the US and Europe: The Supply vs Demand Imbalance. Transplant. Rev. 2021, 35, 100585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Iniesta-Sepúlveda, M.; López-Navas, A.I.; Gutiérrez, P.R.; Ramírez, P.; Ríos, A. The Willingness to Donate Organs in Medical Students From an International Perspective: A Meta-Analysis. Transpl. Int. 2022, 35, 10446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Mekkodathil, A.; El-Menyar, A.; Sathian, B.; Singh, R.; Al-Thani, H. Knowledge and Willingness for Organ Donation in the Middle Eastern Region: A Meta-Analysis. J. Relig. Health 2020, 59, 1810–1823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Mahajan, P.; Koushal, V.; Chhabra, R.; Dhaliwal, N.; Pandey, N.; Kaur, R. Effectiveness of Interventional Strategies in Modulating Knowledge and Attitude of Health Care Professionals for Promoting Organ Donation: A Study in Tertiary Care Public Hospital of North India. Ann. Neurosci. 2020, 27, 242–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ruta, F.; Delli Poggi, A.; Ferrara, P.; Lusignani, M. Analysis of attitude, knowledge and willingness of undergraduate nursing students’ toward organ donation. Prof. Inferm. 2019, 72, 247–252. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  12. Calma, K.R.B.; Halcomb, E.; Stephens, M. The Impact of Curriculum on Nursing Students’ Attitudes, Perceptions and Preparedness to Work in Primary Health Care: An Integrative Review. Nurse Educ. Pract. 2019, 39, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Longo, D.; Ramacciati, N.; Giusti, G.D. Nurse Specialist in the Organ and Tissue Donation Process with Coordination Role: A Scoping Review. Nurs. Rep. 2025, 15, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Chen, X.; Zhou, X.; Xu, Y.; Pan, L.; Li, P.; Liang, W.; Jin, L.; Zhang, C.; He, C. Mediating Effects of Attitude on the Relationship between Knowledge and Willingness to Organ Donation among Nursing Students. Front. Public Health 2024, 12, 1370635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Alwesmi, M.B.; Alharbi, A.I.; Alsaiari, A.A.; Abu Alreesh, A.E.; Alasmari, B.A.; Alanazi, M.A.; Alanizi, M.K.; Alsaif, N.M.; Alanazi, R.M.; Alshdayed, S.A.; et al. The Role of Knowledge on Nursing Students’ Attitudes toward Organ Donation: A Cross-Sectional Study. Healthcare 2023, 11, 3134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Anwar, A.S.M.T.; Lee, J.-M. A Survey on Awareness and Attitudes Toward Organ Donation Among Medical Professionals, Medical Students, Patients, and Relatives in Bangladesh. Transplant. Proc. 2020, 52, 687–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Soyer Er, Ö.; Karaveli Çakır, S. Increasing Positive Attitudes towards Organ Donation and Improving the Competence of Coping with Death through Organ Transplant Nursing Course: A Two-Group Quasi-Experimental Study. Nurse Educ. Pract. 2024, 78, 104008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Symvoulakis, E.K.; Rachiotis, G.; Papagiannis, D.; Markaki, A.; Dimitroglou, Y.; Morgan, M.; Hadjichristodoulou, C.; Jones, R. Organ Donation Knowledge and Attitudes among Health Science Students in Greece: Emerging Interprofessional Needs. Int. J. Med. Sci. 2014, 11, 634–640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Martínez-Alarcón, L.; Ríos, A.; Gutiérrez, P.R.; Santainés-Borredá, E.; Gómez, F.J.; Agras-Suarez, M.C.; Iriarte, J.; Cañadas-De la Fuente, G.A.; Herruzo, R.; Hurtado-Pardos, B.; et al. Exploring Health Science Students’ Notions on Organ Donation and Transplantation: A Multicenter Study. Transplant. Proc. 2020, 52, 1428–1431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Martínez-Alarcón, L.; Ríos, A.; Gutiérrez, P.R.; Gómez, F.J.; Cañadas-De la Fuente, G.A.; García-Mayor, S.; Sánchez, P.; Peña-Amaro, M.P.; Bondía, J.A.; Bas-Sarmiento, P.; et al. Attitudes Toward Organ Donation: Differences Between Medical and Nursing Andalusian Students. Transplant. Proc. 2020, 52, 496–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Araujo, C.A.S.; Siqueira, M.M. The Effect of Educational Initiatives on the Attitude and Knowledge of Health Care Professionals Regarding Organ Donation and Transplantation: An Integrative Literature Review. Transplant. Proc. 2023, 55, 13–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ríos, A.; López-Navas, A.; López-López, A.; Gómez, F.J.; Iriarte, J.; Herruzo, R.; Blanco, G.; Llorca, F.J.; Asunsolo, A.; Sánchez, P.; et al. Medical Students Faced with Related and Unrelated Living Kidney Donation: A Stratified and Multicentre Study in Spain. World J. Urol. 2016, 34, 1673–1684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Jawoniyi, O.; Gormley, K.; McGleenan, E.; Noble, H.R. Organ Donation and Transplantation: Awareness and Roles of Healthcare Professionals-A Systematic Literature Review. J. Clin. Nurs. 2018, 27, e726–e738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Soylu, D.; Özdemir, A.; Soylu, A. Does Religious Attitude Affect Organ Donation and Transplantation? Transpl. Immunol. 2022, 71, 101555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Oo, W.L.; Ong, J.S.; Foong, J.W.; Hossain, M.M.; Baskaran, N.D.; Haron, H.; Varadarajan, R. Knowledge and Attitudes of Healthcare Professionals and the Impact on Willingness to Donate Organs: A Tertiary Hospital Survey. Singap. Med. J. 2020, 61, 154–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Martínez-Alarcón, L.; Balaguer, A.; Santainés-Borredá, E.; Agras-Suarez, M.C.; Cañadas-De la Fuente, G.A.; Hurtado-Pardos, B.; Bárcena-Calvo, C.; Perelló-Campaner, C.; Arribas-Marin, J.M.; García-Mayor, S.; et al. Nursing Students Faced with Organ Donation: Multicenter Stratified National Study. Nurse Educ. Pract. 2022, 63, 103394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Giusti, G.D.; Marini, C.; Gili, A.; Giontella, M. Le conoscenze ed opinioni degli studenti infermieri su donazione e trapianto dâ€TM organi. Scenar®-IL Nurs. Nella Sopravvivenza 2015, 32, 39–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Dibaba, F.K.; Goro, K.K.; Wolide, A.D.; Fufa, F.G.; Garedow, A.W.; Tufa, B.E.; Bobasa, E.M. Knowledge, Attitude and Willingness to Donate Organ among Medical Students of Jimma University, Jimma Ethiopia: Cross-Sectional Study. BMC Public Health 2020, 20, 799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Shrivastav, V.; Murugan, Y.; Gandhi, R.; Nagda, J. Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Regarding Organ Donation Among Medical Students in India: A Mixed Methods Study. Cureus 2024, 16, e56136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. McGlade, D.; McClenahan, C.; Pierscionek, B. Pro-Donation Behaviours of Nursing Students from the Four Countries of the UK. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e91405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. McGlade, D.; Pierscionek, B. Can Education Alter Attitudes, Behaviour and Knowledge about Organ Donation? A Pretest-Post-Test Study. BMJ Open 2013, 3, e003961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Stadlbauer, V.; Steiner, P.; Schweiger, M.; Sereinigg, M.; Tscheliessnigg, K.-H.; Freidl, W.; Stiegler, P. Knowledge and Attitude of ICU Nurses, Students and Patients towards the Austrian Organ Donation Law. BMC Med. Ethics 2013, 14, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Ju, M.K.; Sim, M.K.; Son, S.Y. A Study on Nursing Students’ Knowledge, Attitude, and Educational Needs for Brain-Death Organ Transplantation and Donation and Intent to Donate Organs. Transplant. Proc. 2018, 50, 1187–1191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Liu, C.; Liu, S. Medical Students’ Knowledge and Attitude toward Brain Death and the Influence of Medical Education: A Cross-Sectional Study. BMC Med. Educ. 2024, 24, 346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zampieron, A.; Corso, M.; Frigo, A.C. Undergraduate Nursing Students’ Attitudes towards Organ Donation: A Survey in an Italian University. Int. Nurs. Rev. 2010, 57, 370–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Bozzetti, M.; Caraffini, M.; Agosti, C.; Marcomini, I.; Pendoni, R. Undergraduate Nurses Attitudes towards Organ Donation: A Cross-Sectional Survey in a North Italian University. Diss. Nurs. 2023, 2, 77–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Vandenbroucke, J.P.; von Elm, E.; Altman, D.G.; Gøtzsche, P.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Pocock, S.J.; Poole, C.; Schlesselman, J.J.; Egger, M. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration. Int. J. Surg. 2014, 12, 1500–1524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Martínez-Alarcón, L.; Ríos, A.; López, M.J.; Guzmán, D.; López-Navas, A.; Parrilla, P.; Ramírez, P. Do Nursing Students Understand the Meaning of Brain Death? Transplant. Proc. 2009, 41, 2060–2063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Allahverdi, T.D.; Allahverdi, E.; Akkuş, Y. The Knowledge of Nursing Students About Organ Donation and the Effect of the Relevant Training on Their Knowledge. Transplant. Proc. 2020, 52, 2877–2882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ríos, A.; López Navas, A.I.; Rigabert, M.; Martínez-Alarcón, L.; Ayala-García, M.A.; Ruiz-Merino, G.; de Moya, M.; Ramírez, P. Usefulness of an Organ Donation Opinion Survey as a Tool to Promote Organ Donation among the Adolescent Population. Transpl. Int. 2021, 34, 2138–2145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Rydzewska-Rosołowska, A.; Jamiołkowska, M.; Kakareko, K.; Naumnik, B.; Zbroch, E.; Hryszko, T. Medical Students’ Attitude Toward Organ Donation in a Single Medical University. Transplant. Proc. 2020, 52, 695–699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. You, J.; Kim, M.; Son, S.; Lee, I. Organ Donation and Transplantation Coordinators’ Experience and Needs for Ethics Education. Nurs. Ethics 2025, 32, 588–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Fernández-Alonso, V.; Palacios-Ceña, D.; Silva-Martín, C.; García-Pozo, A. Facilitators and Barriers in the Organ Donation Process: A Qualitative Study among Nurse Transplant Coordinators. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Curtis, R.M.K.; Manara, A.R.; Madden, S.; Brown, C.; Duncalf, S.; Harvey, D.; Tridente, A.; Gardiner, D. Validation of the Factors Influencing Family Consent for Organ Donation in the UK. Anaesthesia 2021, 76, 1625–1634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Contiero, P.P.; Wilson, D.M. Understanding Ambivalence toward Organ Donation and Transplantation: An Exploratory Study of Nursing Students. Nurse Educ. Today 2019, 76, 191–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Lei, L.; Deng, J.; Zhang, H.; Dong, H.; Luo, Y.; Luo, Y. Level of Organ Donation-Related Knowledge and Attitude and Willingness Toward Organ Donation Among a Group of University Students in Western China. Transplant. Proc. 2018, 50, 2924–2931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Costa-Font, J.; Rudisill, C.; Salcher-Konrad, M. “Relative Consent” or “Presumed Consent”? Organ Donation Attitudes and Behaviour. Eur. J. Health Econ. 2021, 22, 5–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Tsubaki, M.; Tougo, S.; Kobayashi, M.; Arakawa, S.; Yoshida, K. Narrative Review on Attitudes toward Organ Donation of Undergraduate Nurse Students. Jpn. J. Nurs. Sci. 2020, 17, e12291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Taş, F.; Selçuk Tosun, A.; Akgül Gündoğdu, N. The Effect of Islamic Belief and Spiritual Well-Being on Organ Donation in Turkey: A Descriptive-Relational Study. J. Relig. Health 2022, 61, 2121–2140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Pelicic, D.; Vojinovic, T.; Vukovic, M.; Bokan, D.; Radevic, S. Sociodemographic Characteristics and the Influence of Religion on the Knowledge of Doctors, Nurses, and the General Population in Montenegro About Transplant and Organ Donation. Exp. Clin. Transplant. 2023, 21, 973–979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Arisal, I.; Atalar, T. Influence of Knowledge, Bodily Integrity, Religion and Media on Attitudes toward Organ Donation on the University Campus. Int. J. Nonprofit Volunt. Sect. Mark. 2020, 25, e1647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Tam, W.W.S.; Suen, L.K.P.; Chan, H.Y.L. Knowledge, Attitudes and Commitment toward Organ Donation among Nursing Students in Hong Kong. Transplant. Proc. 2012, 44, 1196–1200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Poreddi, V.; Katyayani, B.V.; Gandhi, S.; Thimmaiah, R.; Badamath, S. Attitudes, Knowledge, and Willingness to Donate Organs among Indian Nursing Students. Saudi J. Kidney Dis. Transpl. 2016, 27, 1129–1138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Majchrowicz, B.; Tomaszewska, K.; Guzak, B. Opinion of Surveyed Nurses on Transplantation and Reasons for Negative Public Attitudes toward Organ Donation. Front. Transplant. 2023, 2, 1193680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Krucińska, B.; Pendraszewska, M.; Wyzgał, J.; Czyżewski, Ł. Assessment of Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Transplantation Among Nursing Students. Transplant. Proc. 2020, 52, 1991–1993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Tasdemir, H.I.; Tasdemir, D. From Gift to Mutilation: Exploring Nursing Students’ Metaphorical Conceptions of Organ Donation: A Qualitative Study. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2025, 164, 105026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Moreno, G.; Meneses-Monroy, A.; Mohamedi-Abdelkader, S.; Curcio, F.; Domínguez-Capilla, R.; Martínez-Rincón, C.; Pacheco Del Cerro, E.; Mayor-Silva, L.I. Virtual Active Learning to Maximize Knowledge Acquisition in Nursing Students: A Comparative Study. Nurs. Rep. 2024, 14, 128–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Gorina, M.; Limonero, J.T.; Álvarez, M. Effectiveness of Primary Healthcare Educational Interventions Undertaken by Nurses to Improve Chronic Disease Management in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension and Hypercholesterolemia: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2018, 86, 139–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Martínez-Riera, J.R.; Aviles Gonzalez, C.I.; Zambrano Bermeo, R.N.; Curcio, F.; González Correa, J.A.; Estrada González, C.; Melo, P.; Galletta, M. Educational Strategies to Promote Adherence to Treatment in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 9841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of participants (n = 235).
Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of participants (n = 235).
Variablen/%Mean (SD)/
Median (IQR)
Age 23.5 (4.83)/22.0 (21–24)
Sex
               Female199/84.7
               Male36/15.3
High school
               Scientific88/37.5
               Technical61/25.9
               Classical24/10.2
               Professional20/8.5
               Other42/17.9
Religion
               Catholic126/53.6
               Atheist/Agnostic90/38.3
               Other religions19/8.1
University site
               Northern Italy151/64.3
               Central Italy84/35.7
Academic year
  Second
               In progress99/99.0
               Out of course1/1.0
  Third
               In progress129/95.6
               Out of course6/4.4
IQR: Interquartile range; SD: standard deviation.
Table 2. Knowledge and attitudes toward organ donation and transplantation in nursing students stratified by academic year.
Table 2. Knowledge and attitudes toward organ donation and transplantation in nursing students stratified by academic year.
Fields/Items Total
(n = 235)		Second Year
(n = 100)		Third Year
(n = 135)
n%n%n%
Self-assessment of knowledge acquiredPositive/Correct
1. Do you think that you have sufficient information about transplantation and brain death? *Yes9540.43131.06447.4
2. Are there laws that regulate these themes?Yes23097.99898.013297.8
Scientific knowledgePositive/Correct
3. What is ‘brain death’? §Correct17775.37272.010577.8
Incorrect a4820.42222.02619.3
Incorrect b104.366.043.0
4. Do ‘brain death’ and ‘cardiac death’ have the same meaning?No23198.39797.013499.3
5. Is it possible for a person to come back to life after being diagnosed with brain death?No20788.18585.012290.4
6. Do you think that a patient in a state of brain death requires a greater workload for healthcare workers? †Yes18478.37070.011484.4
7. Is it possible that some circumstances (drug treatment, drug addiction) alter the clinical conditions for the diagnosis of brain death?Yes18277.57979.010376.3
Attitudes, experiences and personal opinions on donation, organ procurement and transplantationPositive
8. Do you believe in the effectiveness of transplants?Yes23499.6100100.013499.3
9. Would you authorise organ procurement from your family members in a ‘brain death’ state? ‡Yes20587.28282.012391.1
10. Would you allow organ transplant as a therapy for you or your family members, if necessary?Yes235100.0100100.0135100.0
11. Do you think that organ procurement could be refused by relatives as it can be considered a form of mutilation?Yes13858.75555.08361.48
12. Despite legislative protection, do you think that a ‘trade’ in organs exists in our country?Yes4720.02323.02417.8
No229.488.01410.4
I don’t know16670.66969.09771.9
13. Do you think that healthcare workers are important for increasing transplants?Yes22394.99494.012995.6
Experience and lived experiencesResponses
14. Have you already had experience with clients in need of or who underwent to a transplant?Yes, acquaintances or family members3715.81414.02317.0
Yes, during the internship6025.51010.05037.0
No13858.77676.06245.9
Information and proposalsResponses
15. From which main ‘source’ did you find information on the subject?Information advertising campaigns (newspapers, radio, internet)11950.65454.06548.2
School, university (internship)8636.63232.05440.0
Family93.855.043.0
General practitioner72.944.032.2
Public offices (e.g., Municipal Registry)72.922.053.7
Organ and tissue donation centres72.933.043.0
16. What should be the main strategy to raise awareness among the population on this issue?Health professionals in upper-secondary schools and universities12553.25353.07253.3
Use of advertising campaigns (TV, documentaries, testimonials, commercials, brochures)6025.52424.03626.7
Use of the internet (blogs, forums, social networks, e-mails)2410.21212.0128.9
Diffusion of movies and short movies177.277.0107.4
Explanation of pros and cons through the participation of Very Important People52.111.043.0
Show people’s suffering41.833.010.7
* p = 0.011; † p = 0.008; ‡ p = 0.039, § Answers to Item 3—Correct: The irreversible cessation of all brain functions but not the arrest of other biological activities; Incorrect a: The irreversible cessation of all brain functions resulting from the arrest of any other biological activity; Incorrect b: A state of irreversible coma.
Table 3. Factors associated with nursing students’ willingness to permit organ donation (n = 235).
Table 3. Factors associated with nursing students’ willingness to permit organ donation (n = 235).
VariablesWillingness for Organ Procurement from Your Family Members in a ‘Brain Death’ State (Item 9)
YesNoc2/U Test;
p-Value
n%n%
Gender
 Female17688.42311.61.703
 Male2980.6719.40.185
Religion beliefs
 Catholic10986.51713.5
 Atheist/Agnostic8392.277.87.235
 Other religions1368.4631.60.022
University site
 Northern Italy13186.82013.20.087
 Central Italy7488.11011.90.768
Academic year
 Second8282.01818.04.282
 Third13291.1128.90.039
High school
 Scientific7686.41213.6
 Technical5183.61016.42.001
 Classical2187.5312.50.744 *
 Professional1890.0210.0
 Other3992.937.1
Age (years)
 Average (SD)23.55(4.816)23.23(4.960)2625
0.190 **
Self-knowledge (Item 1)
 Positive self-knowledge9094.755.38.061
 Negative self-knowledge11582.12517.90.005
* Chi-square test, ** Mann–Whitney U test. Bold values denote statistical significance at the p < 0.05 level.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bertocchi, L.; Petrucci, C.; Calzetta, M.A.; Dante, A.; Curcio, F.; Lancia, L.; Aviles Gonzalez, C.I. Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Organ Donation and Transplantation Among Nursing Students: A Multicentre Cross-Sectional Study. Nurs. Rep. 2025, 15, 181. https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep15060181

AMA Style

Bertocchi L, Petrucci C, Calzetta MA, Dante A, Curcio F, Lancia L, Aviles Gonzalez CI. Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Organ Donation and Transplantation Among Nursing Students: A Multicentre Cross-Sectional Study. Nursing Reports. 2025; 15(6):181. https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep15060181

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bertocchi, Luca, Cristina Petrucci, Massimo Alex Calzetta, Angelo Dante, Felice Curcio, Loreto Lancia, and Cesar Ivan Aviles Gonzalez. 2025. "Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Organ Donation and Transplantation Among Nursing Students: A Multicentre Cross-Sectional Study" Nursing Reports 15, no. 6: 181. https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep15060181

APA Style

Bertocchi, L., Petrucci, C., Calzetta, M. A., Dante, A., Curcio, F., Lancia, L., & Aviles Gonzalez, C. I. (2025). Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Organ Donation and Transplantation Among Nursing Students: A Multicentre Cross-Sectional Study. Nursing Reports, 15(6), 181. https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep15060181

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop