Preferences for Policy Options for Deceased Organ Donation for Transplantation: A Discrete Choice Experiment

simKAP: simulation framework for the kidney allocation process with decision making model

Organ shortage is a major barrier in transplantation and rules guarding organ allocation decisions should be robust, transparent, ethical and fair. Whilst numerous allocation strategies have been proposed, it is often unrealistic to evaluate all of them in real-life settings. Hence, the capability of conducting simulations prior to deployment is important. Here, we developed a kidney allocation simulation framework (simKAP) that aims to evaluate the allocation process and the complex clinical decision-making process of organ acceptance in kidney transplantation. Our findings have shown that incorporation of both the clinical decision-making and a dynamic wait-listing process resulted in the best agreement between the actual and simulated data in almost all scenarios. Additionally, several hypothetical risk-based allocation strategies were generated, and we found that these strategies improved recipients' long-term post-transplant patient survival and reduced wait time for transplantation. The importance of simKAP lies in its ability for policymakers in any transplant community to evaluate any proposed allocation algorithm using in-silico simulation.

Introducing Incentives and Reducing Disincentives in Enhancing Deceased Organ Donation and Transplantation

Despite the effectiveness of solid organ transplantation, progress to close the gap between donor organs and demand remains slow. An organ shortage increases the waiting time for transplant and involves significant costs including patient morbidity and mortality. Against the background of a low deceased organ donation rate, this article discusses the option of introducing incentives and removing disincentives to deceased organ donation. Perspectives from ethics, general public opinion, and the health care profession are examined to ensure a comprehensive appraisal and illustrate different facets of opinion on this complex area. Special cultural and psychosocial considerations in Asia, including the family based consent model, are discussed.

Healthcare professional and community preferences in deceased donor kidney allocation: A best-worst scaling survey

Deceased donor kidneys are a scarce community resource; therefore, the principles underpinning organ allocation should reflect societal values. This study aimed to elicit community and healthcare professional preferences for principles guiding the allocation of kidneys from deceased donors and compare how these differed across the populations. A best-worst scaling survey including 29 principles in a balanced incomplete block design was conducted among a representative sample of the general community (n = 1237) and healthcare professionals working in transplantation (n = 206). Sequential best-worst multinomial logistic regression was used to derive scaled preference scores (PS) (range 0-100). Thematic analysis of free text responses was performed. Five of the six most valued principles among members of the community related to equity, including priority for the longest waiting (PS 100), difficult to transplant (PS 94.5) and sickest (PS 93.9), and equitable access for men and women (PS 94.0), whereas the top four principles for healthcare professional focused on maximizing utility (PS 89.9-100). Latent class analysis identified unmeasured class membership among community members. There are discordant views between community members and healthcare professionals. These should be considered in the design, evaluation, and implementation of deceased donor kidney allocation protocols.

Australian Perspectives on Opt-In and Opt-Out Consent Systems for Deceased Organ Donation

Introduction: As many countries change to opt-out systems to address organ shortages, calls for similar reform in Australia persist. Community perspectives on consent systems for donation remain under-researched, therefore Australian perspectives on consent systems and their effectiveness in increasing donation rates were explored. Design: In this descriptive cross-sectional study, participants completed a survey presenting opt-in, soft opt-out, and hard opt-out systems, with corresponding descriptions. Participants chose the system they perceived as most effective and described their reasoning. Results: Participants (N = 509) designated soft opt-out as the most effective system (52.3%; hard opt-out 33.7%; opt-in 13.7%). Those who identified with an ethnic/cultural group or were not registered had greater odds of choosing opt-out. Six themes identified in thematic analysis reflected their reasoning: (1) who decides (individual, shared decision with family); (2) right to choose; (3) acceptability (ethics, fairness); and utility in overcoming barriers for (4) individuals (apathy, awareness, ease of donating, fear/avoidance of death); (5) family (easier family experience, family veto); (6) society (normalizing donation, donation as default, expanding donor pool). Choice and overcoming individual barriers were more frequently endorsed themes for opt-in and opt-out, respectively. Discussion: Results suggested the following insights regarding system effectiveness: uphold/prioritize individual's recorded donation decision above family wishes; involve family in decision making if no donation preference is recorded; retain a register enabling opt-in and opt-out for unequivocal decisions and promoting individual control; and maximize ease of registering. Future research should establish whether systems considered effective are also acceptable to the community to address organ shortages.

Potential donor characteristics and decisions made by organ procurement organization staff: Results of a discrete choice experiment

Organ procurement organizations (OPOs) evaluate referrals for deceased organ donation in the United States. Efforts to expand the donor pool, such as the HIV organ policy equity (HOPE) Act that permits transplants from HIV-positive donors to HIV-positive recipients, can only succeed if OPOs pursue referrals. However, relatively little is known about how OPO staff evaluate referrals. To better understand this process, OPO staff completed a discrete choice experiment to quantify the relative importance of seven donor characteristics on the decision to pursue a theoretical donor. Relative importance was defined by Partworth utility using a hierarchical Bayesian conditional logit model. There were 51 respondents from 36 of 58 OPOs in the United States. Of the seven attributes, organ and tissue potential were the most influential, followed by age, type of death, HIV status, donor registration, and Hepatitis C status. To be preferred to an HIV-negative donor, an HIV-positive donor needed to have the potential to donate two additional organs. These data provide insight into the preferences of OPO referral staff and may help explain the lower than expected number of HIV-positive transplants performed since the passage of the HOPE Act.

Discrete Choice Experiments to Elicit Patient Preferences for Decision Making in Transplantation

Providing care for transplant recipients is challenging given the need to maintain optimal graft function and survival while managing the debilitating side effects and complications associated with immunosuppression including infection, cancer, new-onset diabetes mellitus, and cardiovascular disease. Given the complexity of treatment options and the uncertainty about long-term benefits and harms of treatment, understanding patient preferences and values are key to ensuring that clinical decisions take into consideration patient priorities to support shared decision making and self-management. Choice experiments are increasingly used to quantify patient and community preferences, including in the field of transplantation. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are a well-established, validated methodology used to elicit preferences for decision making in health and other settings. In transplantation, for example, DCEs have been used to elicit patient preferences for outcomes following kidney transplantation, to identify community preferences factors for organ allocation and in establishing core outcomes. This article provides an overview of the concepts and methods used in the design of DCEs and how patients' preferences can be applied in shared decision making in transplantation.

Organ donation and transplantation: a multi-stakeholder call to action

Although overall donation and transplantation activity is higher in Europe than on other continents, differences between European countries in almost every aspect of transplantation activity (for example, in the number of transplantations, the number of people with a functioning graft, in rates of living versus deceased donation, and in the use of expanded criteria donors) suggest that there is ample room for improvement. Herein we review the policy and clinical measures that should be considered to increase access to transplantation and improve post-transplantation outcomes. This Roadmap, generated by a group of major European stakeholders collaborating within a Thematic Network, presents an outline of the challenges to increasing transplantation rates and proposes 12 key areas along with specific measures that should be considered to promote transplantation. This framework can be adopted by countries and institutions that are interested in advancing transplantation, both within and outside the European Union. Within this framework, a priority ranking of initiatives is suggested that could serve as the basis for a new European Union Action Plan on Organ Donation and Transplantation.

Willingness of Hemodialysis Patient's Family Members Toward Kidney Donation: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

There is a significant shortage of kidneys available for donation. Family members of hemodialysis (HD) patients are experiencing the suffering of their close relatives, which can be a factor toward better acceptance to kidney donation. Knowledge is also an important factor that might affect willingness. In this study, we aimed to estimate the rate of willingness to donate kidneys as live donors (LD) and identify related potential barriers among family members of HD patients.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional observational study involving family members of adult HD patients from King Abdulaziz Medical City and the King Abdullah International Foundation dialysis project in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Participants were interviewed through phone calls using a pretested questionnaire. Calculated sample size was 385.

RESULTS

A total of 370 family members of HD patients were included. Median age was 37 (interquartile range: 33-44) years and 64% were male. All participants were first-degree relatives to HD Patients. The majority reported willingness to donate kidneys as LD (n = 300, 81%), a proportion 0.81% with 95% confidence interval (CI; 0.77-0.85). Only 42 (11%) graded their knowledge about kidney transplantation as high or very high. On multivariable analysis, less willingness was shown with age >40 years (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.459; 95% CI 0.266-0.792; P = .005), and female gender (AOR 0.496; 95% CI 0.287-0.856; P = .012).

CONCLUSION

The majority of family members of HD patients were willing to donate kidneys. The willingness rate was lower among participants 40 years of age and older, as well as among women. The majority of patients graded their knowledge about kidney transplantation as average or lower. Therefore, education targeting of relatives of HD patients may help optimize knowledge and hence improve acceptance of kidney donation.

How to increase kidney transplant activity throughout Europe-an advocacy review by the European Kidney Health Alliance

Kidney transplantation offers better outcomes and quality of life at lower societal costs compared with other options of renal replacement therapy. In this review of the European Kidney Health Alliance, the current status of kidney transplantation throughout Europe and suggestions for improvement of transplantation rates are reported. Although the European Union (EU) has made considerable efforts in the previous decade to stimulate transplantation activity, the discrepancies among European countries suggest that there is still room for improvement. The EU efforts have partially been neutralized by external factors such as economic crises or legal issues, especially the illicit manipulation of waiting lists. Hence, growth in the application of transplantation throughout Europe virtually remained unchanged over the last few years. Continued efforts are warranted to further stimulate transplantation rates, along with the current registration and data analysis efforts supported by the EU in the Effect of Differing Kidney Disease Treatment Modalities and Organ Donation and Transplantation Practices on Health Expenditure and Patient Outcomes project. Future actions should concentrate on organization, harmonization and improvement of the legal consent framework, population education and financial stimuli.

Measuring trade-offs in nephrology: a systematic review of discrete choice experiments and conjoint analysis studies

Background

Discrete choice experiment (DCE), conjoint analysis or adaptive conjoint analysis methods are increasingly applied to obtain patient, clinician or community preferences in nephrology. This study systematically reviews the above-mentioned published choice studies providing an overview of the issues addressed, methods and findings.

Methods

Choice studies relating to nephrology were identified using electronic databases, including Medline, Embase, PsychINFO and Econlit from 1990 to 2015. For inclusion in the review, studies had to primarily relate to kidney disease and include results from statistical (econometric) analyses of respondents' choice or preference. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were assessed against a range of systematic review criteria, and methods and results summarized.

Results

We identified 14 eligible studies from Europe, Australasia, North America and Asia, reporting preferences for treatment or screening, patient experiences, quality of life (QOL), health outcomes and priority-setting frameworks. Specific contexts included medical interventions in kidney transplantation and renal cell carcinoma, health policies for organ donation and allocation, dialysis modalities and end-of-life care, using a variety of statistical models. The characteristics of 'time' (i.e. transplant waiting time, dialysis hours, transport time) and QOL (pre- and post-transplant, or pre- and post-dialysis) consistently influenced patient and clinician preferences across the choice studies.

Conclusions

DCE are increasingly used to obtain information about key preferences in kidney transplantation and dialysis. These study methods provide quantitative information about respondents' trade-offs between conflicting clinical and policy objectives, and can establish how preferences vary among stakeholder groups.

Public attitudes toward contemporary issues in liver allocation

Allocation of scarce livers for transplantation seeks to balance competing ethical principles of autonomy, utility, and justice. Given the history and ongoing dependence of transplantation on public support for funding and organs, understanding and incorporating public attitudes into allocation decisions seems appropriate. In the context of the current controversy around liver allocation, we sought to determine public preferences about issues relevant to the debate. We performed multiple surveys of attitudes around donation and evaluated these using conjoint analysis and clarifying follow-up questions. We found little public support that allocation decisions should be based solely on risk of waiting-list mortality. Strong public sentiment supported maximizing outcomes after transplantation, prioritizing US citizens or residents, keeping organs local, and considering cost in allocation decisions. We then present a methodology for incorporating these preferences into the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (or MELD) priority score. Taken together, these findings suggest that current allocation schemes do not accurately reflect public preferences and suggest a framework to better align allocation with the values of the public.

Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future

OBJECTIVES

Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are increasingly advocated as a way to quantify preferences for health. However, increasing support does not necessarily result in increasing quality. Although specific reviews have been conducted in certain contexts, there exists no recent description of the general state of the science of health-related DCEs. The aim of this paper was to update prior reviews (1990-2012), to identify all health-related DCEs and to provide a description of trends, current practice and future challenges.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify health-related empirical DCEs published between 2013 and 2017. The search strategy and data extraction replicated prior reviews to allow the reporting of trends, although additional extraction fields were incorporated.

RESULTS

Of the 7877 abstracts generated, 301 studies met the inclusion criteria and underwent data extraction. In general, the total number of DCEs per year continued to increase, with broader areas of application and increased geographic scope. Studies reported using more sophisticated designs (e.g. D-efficient) with associated software (e.g. Ngene). The trend towards using more sophisticated econometric models also continued. However, many studies presented sophisticated methods with insufficient detail. Qualitative research methods continued to be a popular approach for identifying attributes and levels.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of empirical DCEs in health economics continues to grow. However, inadequate reporting of methodological details inhibits quality assessment. This may reduce decision-makers' confidence in results and their ability to act on the findings. How and when to integrate health-related DCE outcomes into decision-making remains an important area for future research.

Public, medical professionals' and patients' preferences for the allocation of donor organs for transplantation: study protocol for discrete choice experiments

INTRODUCTION

Organ transplantation is the treatment of choice for patients with severe organ failure. Nevertheless, donor organs are a scarce resource resulting in a large mismatch between supply and demand. Therefore, priority-setting leads to the dilemma of how these scarce organs should be allocated and who should be considered eligible to receive a suitable organ. In order to improve the supply-demand mismatch in transplantation medicine, this study explores preferences of different stakeholders (general public, medical professionals and patients) for the allocation of donor organs for transplantation in Germany. The aims are (1) to determine criteria and preferences, which are relevant for the allocation of scarce donor organs and (2) to compare the results between the three target groups to derive strategies for health policy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We outline the study protocol for discrete choice experiments, where respondents are presented with different choices including attributes with varied attribute levels. They were asked to choose between these choice sets. First, systematic reviews will be conducted to identify the state of art. Subsequently, focus group discussions with the public and patients as well as expert interviews with medical professionals will follow to establish the attributes that are going to be included in the experiments and to verify the results of the systematic reviews. Using this qualitative exploratory work, discrete choice studies will be designed to quantitatively assess preferences. We will use a D-efficient fractional factorial design to survey a total sample of 600 respondents according to the public, medical professionals and patients each. Multinomial conditional logit model and latent class model will be analysed to estimate the final results.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has received Ethics Approval from the Hannover Medical School Human Ethics Committee (Vote number: 7921_BO_K_2018). Findings will be disseminated through conference presentations, workshops with stakeholders and peer-reviewed journal articles.

Using Latent Class Analysis to Model Preference Heterogeneity in Health: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Latent class analysis (LCA) has been increasingly used to explore preference heterogeneity, but the literature has not been systematically explored and hence best practices are not understood.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to document all applications of LCA in the stated-preference literature in health and to inform future studies by identifying current norms in published applications.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, EconLit, Web of Science, and PsycINFO databases. We included stated-preference studies that used LCA to explore preference heterogeneity in healthcare or public health. Two co-authors independently evaluated titles, abstracts, and full-text articles. Abstracted key outcomes included segmentation methods, preference elicitation methods, number of attributes and levels, sample size, model selection criteria, number of classes reported, and hypotheses tests. Study data quality and validity were assessed with the Purpose, Respondents, Explanation, Findings, and Significance (PREFS) quality checklist.

RESULTS

We identified 2560 titles, 99 of which met the inclusion criteria for the review. Two-thirds of the studies focused on the preferences of patients and the general population. In total, 80% of the studies used discrete choice experiments. Studies used between three and 20 attributes, most commonly four to six. Sample size in LCAs ranged from 47 to 2068, with one-third between 100 and 300. Over 90% of the studies used latent class logit models for segmentation. Bayesian information criterion (BIC), Akaike information criterion (AIC), and log-likelihood (LL) were commonly used for model selection, and class size and interpretability were also considered in some studies. About 80% of studies reported two to three classes. The number of classes reported was not correlated with any study characteristics or study population characteristics (p > 0.05). Only 30% of the studies reported using statistical tests to detect significant variations in preferences between classes. Less than half of the studies reported that individual characteristics were included in the segmentation models, and 30% reported that post-estimation analyses were conducted to examine class characteristics. While a higher percentage of studies discussed clinical implications of the segmentation results, an increasing number of studies proposed policy recommendations based on segmentation results since 2010.

CONCLUSIONS

LCA is increasingly used to study preference heterogeneity in health and support decision-making. However, there is little consensus on best practices as its application in health is relatively new. With an increasing demand to study preference heterogeneity, guidance is needed to improve the quality of applications of segmentation methods in health to support policy development and clinical practice.

Reducing the costs of chronic kidney disease while delivering quality health care: a call to action

The treatment of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) imposes substantial societal costs. Expenditure is highest for renal replacement therapy (RRT), especially in-hospital haemodialysis. Redirection towards less expensive forms of RRT (peritoneal dialysis, home haemodialysis) or kidney transplantation should decrease financial pressure. However, costs for CKD are not limited to RRT, but also include nonrenal health-care costs, costs not related to health care, and costs for patients with CKD who are not yet receiving RRT. Even if patients with CKD or ESRD could be given the least expensive therapies, costs would decrease only marginally. We therefore propose a consistent and sustainable approach focusing on prevention. Before a preventive strategy is favoured, however, authorities should carefully analyse the cost to benefit ratio of each strategy. Primary prevention of CKD is more important than secondary prevention, as many other related chronic diseases, such as diabetes mellitus, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, liver disease, cancer, and pulmonary disorders could also be prevented. Primary prevention largely consists of lifestyle changes that will reduce global societal costs and, more importantly, result in a healthy, active, and long-lived population. Nephrologists need to collaborate closely with other sectors and governments, to reach these aims.