Living kidney organ donation: experiences of spousal support of donors

Education Priorities and What Matters to Those Considering Living Kidney Donation

INTRODUCTION

Although informed consent content elements are prescribed in detailed regulatory guidance, many live kidney donors describe feeling underprepared and under informed. The goal of this pilot study was to explore the educational components needed to support an informed decision-making process for living kidney donors.

METHODS/APPROACH

A qualitative description design was conducted with thematic analysis of 5 focus groups with 2 cohorts: living kidney donor candidates (n = 11) and living kidney donors (n = 8).

FINDINGS

The educational components needed to engage in an informed decision-making process were: 1) contingent upon, and motivated by, personal circumstances; 2) supported through explanation of risks and benefits; 3) enhanced by understanding the overall donation experience; and 4) personalized by talking to another donor.

DISCUSSION

Tailoring education to meet the needs for fully informed decision-making is essential. Current education requirements, as defined by regulatory bodies, remain challenging to transplant teams attempting to ensure fully informed consent of living kidney donor candidates. Information on the emotional, financial, and overall life impact is needed, along with acknowledgement of relational ties driving donor motivations and the hoped-for recipient outcomes. Discussion of care practices, and access to peer mentoring may further strengthen the informed decision-making process.

Living Donors: Altruism and Feeling Forgotten

OBJECTIVES

Living donors endure several challenges throughout the organ donation process. Physically related effects are further compounded by social and emotional challenges. To date, no previous studies have addressed the motives and impact of organ donations from living donors in Jordan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a qualitative exploratory study to understand the experiences of a random sample of genetically and legally related living donors in Jordan. Participants were identified through the Directorate of the Jordanian Center for Organ Transplantation database. Our sample included Jordanians and non-Jordanians who donated a kidney or liver. Most data were collected by phone interviews with living donors; some donors were personally interviewed. Donors were asked about their experiences during the periods before and after the process of donation, including their feelings, emotions, and motives. Interviews were analyzed using the thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

In total, 360 participants (337 kidney and 23 liver donors; 290 Jordanians and 70 non-Jordanians) completed the interview. The time from donation to interview ranged from 14 days to 7 years. The period before donation was characterized by fear and confusion. After donation, most donors described a positive emotional state that was marked by selfsatisfaction, pride, and increased support of organ donation. However, many stated that they felt forgotten. Most donors were motivated by social solidarity, and others invoked the role of their religious beliefs as the main motive. Other motives included improving the recipient's life and fear that patients would be abandoned.

CONCLUSIONS

The emotional distress of living donors during the predonation period emphasizes the need for social and psychological support in addition to medical evaluations. Donors who had positive experiences with donation can play a role in advocating for donation. Finally, in Jordan, social solidarity and religious beliefs are the most important factors that motivate donation.

The Efficiency of Evaluating Candidates for Living Kidney Donation: A Scoping Review

Supplemental digital content is available in the text.

Introduction

The process of evaluating candidates for living kidney donation can be inefficient. A structured review of existing information on this topic can provide a necessary foundation for quality improvement.

Methods

We conducted a scoping review to map the published literature to different themes related to an efficient donor candidate evaluation. We reviewed the websites of living donor programs to describe information provided to candidates about the nature and length of the evaluation process.

Results

We reviewed of 273 published articles and 296 websites. Surveys of living donor programs show variability in donor evaluation protocols. Computed tomography (a routinely done test for all successful candidates) may be used to assess split renal volume instead of nuclear renography when the 2 kidneys differ in size. Depending on the candidate’s estimated glomerular filtration rate, a nuclear medicine scan for measured glomerular filtration rate may not be needed. When reported, the time to complete the evaluation varied from 3 months to over a year. The potential for undesirable outcomes was reported in 23 studies, including missed opportunities for living donation and/or preemptive transplants. According to living donor websites, programs generally evaluate 1 candidate at a time when multiple come forward for assessment, and few programs describe completing most of the evaluation in a single in-person visit.

Conclusions

Data on the efficiency of the living donor evaluation are limited. Future efforts can better define, collect, and report indicators of an efficient living donor evaluation to promote quality improvement and better patient outcomes.

"Why throw away something useful?": Attitudes and opinions of people treated for bipolar disorder and their relatives on organ and tissue donation

In regard to mental illness, brain donation is essential for the biological investigation of central pathology. Nevertheless, little is known about the thoughts of people with mental disorders on tissue donation for research. Here, our objective was to understand the attitudes and opinions of people treated for bipolar disorder and their relatives regarding donation in general, and particularly donation for research. This is a qualitative study that used in-depth interviews to determine the thoughts of participants regarding tissue donation for research. Theoretical sampling was used as a recruitment method. Grounded theory was used as a framework for content analyses of the interviews. A semi-structured interview guide was applied with the topics: donation in general; donation for research; mental health and body organs; opinion regarding donation; feelings aroused by the topic. Although all participants were aware of organ donation for transplant, they were surprised that tissue could be donated for research. Nevertheless, once they understood the concept they were usually in favor of the idea. Although participants demonstrated a general lack of knowledge on donation for research, they were willing to learn more and viewed it as a good thing, with altruistic reasons often cited as a motive for donation. We speculate that bridging this knowledge gap may be a fundamental step towards a more ethical postmortem tissue donation process.

Renal transplant failure and disenfranchised grief: participants' experiences in the first year post-graft failure--a qualitative longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

Renal transplant failure has a devastating impact on patients and their families. However, little research has been conducted in this area, which limits insight and understanding of the transplant failure experience that could subsequently inform clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

To explore participants' experiences of renal transplant failure in the first year post-graft failure.

DESIGN

A qualitative, longitudinal study informed by Heideggerian hermeneutics.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTINGS

A purposive sample of 16 participants (8 recipients, 8 'significant others') from a regional renal transplant unit and 3 District General Hospitals in South-West England.

METHODS

Data were collected through a series of three recorded, semi-structured interviews in the first year post-renal transplant failure. Data analysis was informed by a three-step analytical process.

RESULTS

Renal transplantation was the treatment of choice and had a transformative effect on the lives of all participants. Graft failure has 2 distinct phases; failing and failed and the transition from one phase to the other is unpredictable, uncertain and stressful. Transplant failure had a devastating impact on all participants, regardless of time since transplantation and resulted in feelings of shock, grief, loss, anger, guilt and depression. Dialysis was disruptive and demanding and served as a constant reminder of transplant failure and lost freedom. Participants grieved the loss of their 'previous life' and 'imagined future' but, beyond the understanding of close family members, these losses appeared unrecognised, particularly by health professionals. Participants used various coping mechanisms to deal with stressors associated with transplant failure. Factors affecting coping and adjusting included improved physical health and social support, which was especially important within the marital dyad. Healthcare services were positively evaluated, although information concerning the prospect of transplant failure and support post-graft failure could be improved.

CONCLUSION

Renal transplant failure has a profound impact on recipients, spouses and other close family members and appears to resemble a form of disenfranchised grief. The theory of disenfranchised grief provides a coherent explication of participants' experiences in this study, which should help inform clinical practice, particularly in relation to the provision of information and emotional support post-graft failure.

Living kidney donors and their family caregivers: developing an evidence-based educational and social support website

CONTEXT

Although graft and patient survival rates for living kidney donation are improved, some healthcare providers question whether volunteer donors and their informal caregivers are fully informed of the donation process and the risks involved. Donors and their family caregivers have reported that they receive limited information about the predonation and donor recovery process. Offering web-based information and social support is one way to address this gap.

STRATEGY

Living kidney donor candidates and their family caregivers participating in the Living Donor Information Network for Caregiving (LINC) have access to a variety of online informational resources and a social support discussion forum throughout their living kidney donation experience. Strategies in the development and implementation of an online information and social-support resource are presented.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of the LINC website for information and support may assist health care providers in identifying potential barriers in the current donation process and provide direction for enhancing knowledge and confidence among donors and family caregivers.