Balancing Equity and Efficiency in Kidney Allocation: An Overview

Organs for transplantation are a scarce resource. Markedly, the transplant community's primary challenge is the stark disparity between the number of patients awaiting deceased donor organ transplants and the rate at which organs become available. However, the allocation of a limited number of organs poses another constant challenge: maintaining an equilibrium between renal transplant utility and equity, that is, striking a balance between the utilitarian argument of medical efficiency and the principle of equity. In this comprehensive overview, the authors delve into the challenge of maintaining an acceptable balance between equity and efficiency and elaborate on some of the factors that might inform a decisionmaker's evaluation of the extent to which a given allocation scheme is efficient or equitable.

Attitudes, knowledge, and preferences of the Israeli public regarding the allocation of donor organs for transplantation

Background

There is a stark disparity between the number of patients awaiting deceased-donor organ transplants and the rate at which organs become available. Though organs for transplantation are assumed to be a community resource, and the organ supply depends on public willingness to donate, current allocation schemes do not explicitly incorporate public priorities and preferences. This paper seeks to provide insights regarding the Israeli public’s preferences regarding criteria for organ (specifically, kidney) allocation, and to determine whether these preferences are in line with current allocation policies.

Methods

A market research company administered a telephone survey to 604 adult participants representing the Jewish-Israeli public (age range: 18–95; 50% male). The questionnaire comprised 39 questions addressing participants’ knowledge, attitudes, and preferences regarding organ donation and criteria for organ allocation, including willingness to donate.

Results

The criteria that respondents marked as most important in prioritizing waitlist candidates were maximum medical benefit (51.3% of respondents) and waiting time (21%). Donor status (i.e., whether the candidate is registered as an organ donor) was ranked by 43% as the least significant criterion. Most participants expressed willingness to donate the organs of a deceased relative; notably, they indicated that they would be significantly more willing to donate if organ allocation policies took their preferences regarding allocation criteria into account. Unlike individuals in other countries (e.g., the UK, the US, and Australia) who responded to similar surveys, Israeli survey respondents did not assign high importance to the candidate’s age (24% ranked it as the least important factor). Interestingly, in some cases, participants’ declared preferences regarding the importance of various allocation criteria diverged from their actual choices in hypothetical organ allocation scenarios.

Conclusions

The findings of this survey indicate that Israel’s citizens are willing to take part in decisions about organ allocation. Respondents did not seem to have a strict definition or concept of what they deem to be just; yet, in general, their preferences are compatible with current policy. Importantly, participants noted that they would be more willing to donate organs if their preferences were integrated into the allocation policy. Accordingly, we propose that allocation systems must strive to respect community values and perceptions while maintaining continued clinical effectiveness.

Remote Monitoring Systems for Chronic Patients on Home Hemodialysis: Field Test of a Copresence-Enhanced Design

Background

Patients undertaking long-term and chronic home hemodialysis (HHD) are subject to feelings of isolation and anxiety due to the absence of physical contact with their health care professionals and lack of feedback in regards to their dialysis treatments. Therefore, it is important for these patients to feel the “presence” of the health care professionals remotely while on hemodialysis at home for better compliance with the dialysis regime and to feel connected with health care professionals.

Objective

This study presents an HHD system design for hemodialysis patients with features to enhance patient’s perceived “copresence” with their health care professionals. Various mechanisms to enhance this perception were designed and implemented, including digital logbooks, emotion sharing, and feedback tools. The mechanism in our HHD system aims to address the limitations associated with existing self-monitoring tools for HHD patients.

Methods

A field trial involving 3 nurses and 74 patients was conducted to test the pilot implementation of the copresence design in our HHD system. Mixed method research was conducted to evaluate the system, including surveys, interviews, and analysis of system data.

Results

Patients created 2757 entries of dialysis cases during the period of study. Altogether there were 492 entries submitted with “Very Happy” as the emotional status, 2167 entries with a “Happy” status, 56 entries with a “Neutral” status, 18 entries with an “Unhappy” status, and 24 entries with a “Very unhappy” status. Patients felt assured to share their emotions with health care professionals. Health care professionals were able to prioritize the review of the entries based on the emotional status and also felt assured to see patients’ change in mood. There were 989 entries sent with short notes. Entries with negative emotions had a higher percentage of supplementary notes entered compared to the entries with positive and neutral emotions. The qualitative data further showed that the HHD system was able to improve patients’ feelings of being connected with their health care professionals and thus enhance their self-care on HHD. The health care professionals felt better assured with patients’ status with the use of the system and reported improved productivity and satisfaction with the copresence enhancement mechanism. The survey on the system usability indicated a high level of satisfaction among patients and nurses.

Conclusions

The copresence enhancement design complements the conventional use of a digitized HHD logbook and will further benefit the design of future telehealth systems.

[Allocation systems in transplantation medicine: Advantages and disadvantages]

Donor organs for transplantations are a scarce commodity; therefore, allocation systems are needed that guarantee an ethically acceptable distribution to patients on the waiting list (equal treatment and fairness) but also take the probability of survival of the transplant in each recipient into consideration. In this article the allocation systems for lung, liver, kidney and pancreas transplants are presented.For lung transplantations an allocation system based on the lung allocation score (LAS) is currently used. The LAS predicts the probability of survival on the waiting list and the survival rate following transplantation. Organs with a limited range of utilization are distributed in a so-called mini-match procedure.For post-mortem kidney and pancreas transplantations a relatively complex but transparent allocation system has been created in which patients are subdivided into groups, each of which has its own allocation rules. The allocation is principally carried out according to criteria of fairness of distribution and according to the prospects of success. The probability of a mismatch also plays a role. The urgency is important for children and for patients who do not have the possibility of dialysis. Combined pancreas and kidney transplantations have priority over kidney transplantations alone.The criterion for the urgency of liver transplantation in Germany is currently the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), which aims to reduce the waiting list mortality and to prioritize transplantations for those most in need. Because the system insufficiently describes the priority of transplantation for patients with tumors or genetic liver diseases, there is an additional set of rules for so-called standard exceptions.