Psychosocial Assessment of Living Organ Donors: Clinical and Ethical Considerations

The psychological examination and evaluation of unrelated kidney donors in Israel: a suggested model

Altruistic organ donors represent a special population when compared to related living donors, requiring appropriate protection and attention regarding informed consent and psychological aspects related to the donation. Following the introduction of the Israeli Transplant Law of 2008, a retrospective study of altruistic donor files revealed that important psycho-diagnostic aspects were not emphasized in the existing guidelines. Thus, a new tool was formulated which incorporated those elements, including assessment of emotional maturity, ego strength, degree of interest in others, reality testing, degree of pressure to donate, anxiety, dysphoric and depressive factors and the ability to function under stress. The study examined 598 cases reviewed by the Central Evaluation Board over the period May 2008 - June 2016. Overall, 23.4% candidates were disqualified of whom 41% were declined on grounds related to mental health. Most of the donors were rejected based on 3-5 elements. Of these, a deficient assessment of reality in ambiguous situations, lack of emotional maturity, and lacking or partial ability to function effectively under stress, were most commonly cited as reasons for rejection. This model allowed the detection of important conditions previously not incorporated into existing guidelines and may serve as a model for other transplantation programs worldwide.

Psychosocial and Ethical Behaviors and Attitudes of Health Care Professionals in the Clinical Setting of Living Kidney Donors: A Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

There are several psychosocial and ethical issues surrounding the decision making of living kidney transplant donors. This study aimed to determine what health care professionals (HPs) consider in their clinical practice and their attitudes toward donors' decision-making processes.

METHODS

Face-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted with 15 HPs. A thematic analysis was performed to categorize the thematic elements of the transcripts. All procedures were approved by the relevant review board and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

RESULTS

Six main categories-maintaining family relationships, improving donor understanding, supporting voluntary decision making, setting the environment for the examination, having different attitudes toward the donor's intentions, and resisting confirmation of intent-were identified. The HPs provided diverse considerations to respect the donors' autonomy.

CONCLUSION

In clinical practice, there is a lack of practical methods to confirm living donors' levels of understanding and spontaneity, suggesting that these methods need to be established. Factors related to family functioning may reflect the unique culture of Japan, and this may be indicative of the need to consider treatment based on cultural values.

Organ donation in the US and Europe: The supply vs demand imbalance

Organ donation and transplantation remain the best and most cost-effective clinical solution for end-stage organ failure. Several agencies across the US and Europe provide legislative, regulatory, and humanitarian services to generate smoother applications in all transplantation processes and donor-recipient relationships. US and European statistics present nine types of grafts, with kidneys being the most transplanted organ worldwide. However, organ shortage, religion, underrepresented minority groups, difficulties in obtaining consent, lack of understanding, and general ethical concerns present challenging barriers to organ donation, reflecting the complexity of graft procurement and allocation. Breaking down these barriers to reduce the organ-supply imbalance requires an appropriate multifaceted approach. Some of the key areas include increasing the potential donor pool and consent rates, apt organ allocation, and improving organ health. Additionally, suitable policies and standardized guidelines for both donors and recipients, alongside educational initiatives, are needed to ensure patient safety and global awareness. Looking forward, novel and effective research plans and initiatives are needed if we are to avoid a colossal supply-demand gap.

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.

Personality and psychopathology in potential live kidney donors: A cluster analysis of personality features

Background

The previous psychosocial evaluation of the potential living kidney donors (PLKD) requires a detailed understanding of the psychosocial benefits and the possible damages of the act of donation.

Objective

The aim was to create clusters by using the clinical patterns of personality and to evaluate their influence on psychopathological variables.

Methods

Observational, analytical and cross-sectional study that included the PLKD from February 2009 to March 2017. The patients were referred to the Hospital Psychology Unit by the Transplant Coordination Unit. The total sample was composed of 100 participants. The socio-demographic characteristics, the relationship with the recipient and the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory were included.

Results

The final sample was composed by 100 PLKD. The mean age of the participants was 45.70, and most were women (70%). The analysis showed a final result of 3 personality clusters that best represented the data, in agreement with the DSM-5 classification. The PLKD from cluster 3 obtained greater scores in all the clinical syndromes.

Conclusions

The personality evaluation of the PLKD could help with the planning of monitoring protocols of the participants who were classified to cluster 3, in order to improve their post-transplant psychosocial adjustment. This result makes us consider the usefulness of the psychosocial evaluation to preserve the psychological health of the PLKD.

Multicenter investigation of the reliability and validity of the live donor assessment tool as an enhancement to the psychosocial evaluation of living donors

The live donor assessment tool (LDAT) is the first psychosocial assessment tool developed to standardize live donor psychosocial evaluations. A multicenter study was conducted to explore reliability and validity of the LDAT and determine its ability to enhance the psychosocial evaluation beyond its center of origin. Four transplant programs participated, each with their own team of evaluators and unique demographics. Liver and kidney living donors (LDs) undergoing both standard psychosocial evaluation and LDAT from June 2015 to September 2016 were studied. LDAT interrater reliability, associations between LDAT scores and psychosocial evaluation outcome, and psychosocial outcomes postdonation were tested. 386 LD evaluations were compared and had a mean LDAT score of 67.34 ± 7.57. In 140 LDs with two LDATs by different observers, the interrater scores correlated (r = 0.63). LDAT scores at each center and overall stratified to the conventional grouping of psychosocial risk level. LDAT scores of 131 subjects who proceeded with donation were expectedly lower in LDs requiring postdonation counseling (t = -2.78, P = .01). The LDAT had good reliability between raters and predicted outcome of the psychosocial evaluation across centers. It can be used to standardize language among clinicians to communicate psychosocial risk of LD candidates and assist teams when anticipating postdonation psychosocial needs.

Supplementing living kidney transplantees' medical records with donor- and recipient-narratives

Norway provides total social welfare coverage for organ transplantations, including free immunosuppressive medication and prepaid life-long follow up for both recipients and donors. Despite these benefits the proportion of living kidney donors (LKD) has in recent years declined from around 40% (2011) of all kidney transplantations to 24% (2016). This study suggests harnessing patient- and donor-narratives as a tool for addressing the current fall in donation rates. The hospital records of 18 recipient/donor dyads were compared with patient and donor accounts elicited in semi-structured interviews. Narratives afford a pertinent supplement to the primarily biomedical and technical information stored in medical records. Even in condensed form, the messages embedded in narratives contribute to a 'thicker' understanding of the complexity of living kidney donation (LKD)-decisions. Narratives represent a source of education for referring-nephrologists wishing to deepen their evaluation skills and avoid making decisions based on insufficient insight into patients' and potential donors' values and life-situation. Recipients' and donors' unedited accounts of their motivations, worries, doubts and expectations afford a revealing and edifying supplement to the primarily biomedical and technical information stored in medical records. In narratives, the predicaments and dilemmas surrounding LKD become visible and debatable and can serve as support for future donors, recipients and the nephrologists responsible for evaluation-conclusions. Generating narratives raises a number of practical, epistemic and normative challenges.

Urological Nephrectomies for Benign Disease: A Possible Missed Resource in Organ Donation

OBJECTIVES

The deficit of organs for renal transplant is a global issue. The United Kingdom Hospital Episode Statistics indicates there that were 8168 nephrectomies undertaken in 2014. Furthermore, according to the British Association of Urological Surgeons 2014 nephrectomy report, 71.8% of patients undergoing a nephrectomy had creatinine levels of less than 120 IU/L and roughly 20% had the procedure for benign and functional causes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We report a prospective case series from March 2014 to March 2016 involving 6 patients showing 3 successful transplants performed following 3 native nephrectomies.

RESULTS

All recipients had normal creatinine levels with good function at 12 months, and all nephrectomy patients, in addition to maintaining normal renal function, had definitive resolution of symptoms. The main limitation of this series was the small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no doubt that all should be done to save native organ function, and all salvage procedures and psychological testing must be robust before considering this route. However, within the group that proceeds to nephrectomy, some cases may have the potential to generate a new pool of donor organs suitable for transplant, helping to tackle the organ deficit in renal transplantation.

Swaps and Chains and Vouchers, Oh My!: Evaluating How Saving More Lives Impacts the Equitable Allocation of Live Donor Kidneys

Live kidney donation involves a delicate balance between saving the most lives possible and maintaining a transplant system that is fair to the many thousands of patients on the transplant waiting list. Federal law and regulations require that kidney allocation be equitable, but the pressure to save patients subject to ever-lengthening waiting times for a transplant has been swinging the balance toward optimizing utility at the expense of justice. This article traces the progression of innovations created to make optimum use of a patient's own live donors. It starts with the simplest - direct donation by family members - and ends with voucher donations, a very recent and unique innovation because the donor can donate 20 or more years before the intended recipient is expected to need a kidney. In return for the donation, the intended recipient receives a voucher that can be redeemed for a live kidney when it is needed. Other innovations that are discussed include kidney exchanges and list paired donation, which are used to facilitate donor swaps when donor/recipient pairs have incompatible blood types. The discussion of each new innovation shows how the equity issues build on each other and how, with each new innovation, it becomes progressively harder to find an acceptable balance between utility and justice. The article culminates with an analysis of two recent allocation methods that have the potential to save many additional lives, but also affirmatively harm some patients on the deceased donor waiting list by increasing their waiting time for a life-saving kidney. The article concludes that saving additional lives does not justify harming patients on the waiting list unless that harm can be minimized. It also proposes solutions to minimize the harm so these new innovations can equitably perform their intended function of stimulating additional transplants and extending the lives of many transplant patients.

Safe and ethical living kidney donation in Qatar: A national health system's approach

The increasing incidence of end-stage kidney disease in Qatar has led to growing demand for donor kidneys. The deceased donor kidney program has yet to achieve its full potential; hence, living kidney donation has been widely adopted as an appropriate alternative. The reliance on living kidney donors however, raises a number of social, ethical, and legal concerns surrounding informed consent, voluntarism, psychosocial evaluation, perioperative care, and long-term follow-up of living kidney donors. Many of these concerns become heightened in a multicultural, multilingual society within a Gulf country such as Qatar. This article provides an insight into the challenges that living kidney donation poses in a multiethnic society with significant socioeconomic divides. It also discusses the remedial measures that the Qatari government, healthcare authorities, and transplant community have adopted to address these issues.

Separate, Dedicated Care Teams for Living Organ Donors

Living donation is an increasingly common option offered to patients in most transplant programs. Staff involved in the education, assessment, and care of this patient group is faced with increasingly complicated assessments both medically and psychologically. Supporting arguments for dedicated care teams for living organ donors include the large number of transplantations performed using living donors, the continued need to promote living organ donation, and the growing complexity of both medical and psychological factors in donor assessments. In addition, there is a need to implement the standards proposed by the 2000 Consensus Group, as well as to develop a body of evidence-based research related both to short- and long-term issues for this patient group. The ethical issues related to simultaneous involvement with both donors and recipients, and a need to ensure confidentiality are additional supporting arguments for the need to provide separate care providers for donors and recipients.

Electronic Psychosocial Evaluation Tool: Use in a Living Donor Organ Transplant Program

Psychosocial evaluation of potential organ donors ensures that these patients are prepared for donation and that their psychosocial issues have been addressed. The determination that the decision to donate an organ has been made voluntarily by a competent individual is a primary concern for living donor transplant programs, which must work to the highest ethical standard in this unique area of medicine. Identification of potential vulnerabilities on the part of the donor permits monitoring and/or intercession both before and after donation. Ensuring the confidentiality of patient information is important and represents a cornerstone of social work practice. At our institution, social workers have developed an electronic recording tool for use in evaluating organ donors; this tool is designed to maximize quality and ease of information gathering, ensure standardization of practice across programs, simplify record keeping, and enhance communication while minimizing time investment and ensuring patient confidentiality.

Evaluation of Living Liver Donors

As a result of the cadaveric organ shortage, the number of centers performing living donor liver transplantation has increased. Living donor liver transplantation provides immediate organ availability and avoids the risk of life-threatening complications that occur with long waiting times for cadaveric organs; however, it puts a healthy person at risk for little personal gain. A standardized approach to donor evaluation ensures safety to potential donors. Careful medical (physical examination as well as laboratory and radiological evaluation) and psychological evaluation is imperative to reduce donor complications and ensure good outcomes in recipients. A social worker and psychiatrist assess for mental competency, provide emotional support, and can serve as independent donor advocates. Informed understanding and consent are crucial aspects of the evaluation and include ensuring that the donor understands all potential complications and is free of coercion. Safety of the donor must be the highest priority.

A longitudinal interpretative phenomenological analysis of the process of kidney recipients’ resolution of complex ambiguities within relationships with their living donors

Much previous research into living kidney donation has focused on the decision-making of the donor, despite evidence suggesting this may be a more psychologically challenging time for the recipient. This longitudinal study explores the experiences of four recipients of kidneys from living donors throughout the transplant process. Transcripts were analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis. Three themes arose from the data, which were as follows: changing perceptions of relationships with kidney donors; upbeat, temporal strategies for remaining positive and journey of the self. Findings from the first theme are presented in detail here. It was found that each participants’ relationship with their donor grew and developed in different ways, presenting their own complex challenges in terms of developing relationships and ambiguity around the decision to use the chosen donor.

Role of the Independent Donor Advocacy Team in Ethical Decision Making

Adult living donor liver transplantation has developed as a direct result of the critical shortage of deceased donors. Recent regulations passed by New York State require transplant programs to appoint an Independent Donor Advocacy Team to evaluate, educate, and consent to all potential living liver donors. Ethical issues surround the composition of the team, who appoints them, and the role the team plays in the process. Critics of living liver donation have questioned issues surrounding motivation and the ability of donors to provide true informed consent during a time of family crisis. This article will address issues surrounding the controversies and discuss how using the team can effectively evaluate and educate potential living liver donors and improve practice to ensure safety of living donors.

Ethical Analysis of Living Organ Donation

In 2003, the first 3-way living kidney donor-swap was performed at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Md. Three new donor protocols including paired donation now allow unrelated individuals to serve as donors. Some ethicists have suggested that emotionally unrelated individuals not be permitted to donate because they will not experience the same satisfaction that a family member who is a donor experiences. Others who frame living donation as an autonomous choice do not see emotionally unrelated or even nondirected donation as ethically problematic. This article uses an ethical framework of principlism to examine living donation. Principles salient to living donation include autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence. The following criteria are used to evaluate autonomous decision making by living donors, including choices made (1) with understanding, (2) without influence that controls and determines their action, and (3) with intentionality. Empirical work in these areas is encouraged to inform the ethical analysis of the new living donor protocols.

Racial Differences in the Living Kidney Donation Experience and Implications for Education

Context

Much has been written about the barriers to deceased organ donation in the African American community. However, relatively little research has been conducted on barriers to living donation among African Americans. A shortage of suitable deceased donor kidneys among African Americans has encouraged donation from living donors.

Objective

As a follow-up to several focus groups with health professionals about barriers to living donation and suggestions for educational interventions, we sought to determine kidney donors' thoughts and feelings about their donation.

Design

Telephone interviews with past donors.

Participants

Nine African Americans and 9 whites were selected from a database of laparoscopic donor nephrectomies from 1993 to 2003.

Outcome Measures

Transcribed phone interviews were reviewed by 3 researchers to determine recurring themes and categorize responses.

Results

Responses were categorized into 8 areas of concern: health, financial, life with 1 kidney, procreation, psychosocial matters, surgery related, success of the transplant, and concerns about the future. Whites (n =9) tended to volunteer more for laparoscopic kidney donation than did African Americans (n = 2). African American concerns focused on future health and living with only 1 kidney, whereas whites had concerns about the surgery and the medical system.

Conclusions

Findings indicated that education is the best way to reach living donors and dispell fears. Promoting general health of African Americans may increase their willingness to be a living donor. Altruistic motives are the main motivation for donation, and intervention programs should target groups on a personal level to help individuals see that they can make a difference in improving or saving lives.

Social Work Interventions with Living Related Liver Donors: The Implications for Practice

Living related liver donations are increasingly used to address the lack of organs available to patients faced with end-stage liver disease. A significant need exists for enhanced psychosocial intervention for donors. We sought to explore donor reactions by assessing psychosocial issues after donation. A descriptive review of donors was undertaken. The overall incidence of psychosocial issues after donation was examined by using a uniform interview questionnaire and by anecdotal case studies. Responses tend to indicate a general positive reaction to donation; yet, findings suggest a need for more preparation in the predonor stage, 100% social work follow-up after donation to provide needed support services, and inclusion of the donor as a critical partner in organ transplant treatment. A more extensive study drawing on the questionnaire may offer a standardized approach to the treatment of organ donors.

BARTERING FOR A COMPATIBLE KIDNEY USING YOUR INCOMPATIBLE, LIVE KIDNEY DONOR: LEGAL AND ETHICAL ISSUES RELATED TO KIDNEY CHAINS

Kidney chains are a recent and novel method of increasing the number of available kidneys for transplantation and have the potential to save thousands of lives. However, because they are novel, kidney chains do not fit neatly within existing legal and ethicalframeworks, raising potential barriers to their full implementation. Kidney chains are an extension of paired kidney donation, which began in the United States in 2000. Paired kidney donations allow kidney patients with willing, but incompatible, donors to swap donors to increase the number of donor/recipient pairs and consequently, the number of transplants. More recently, transplant centers have been using non-simultaneous, extended, altruistic donor ("NEAD") kidney chains--which consist of a sequence of donations by incompatible donors--to further expand the number of donations. This Article fully explains paired kidney donation and kidney chains and focuses on whether NEAD chains are more coercive than traditional kidney donation to a family member or close friend and whether NEAD chains violate the National Organ Transplant Act's prohibition on the transfer of organs for valuable consideration.

Relieved or disappointed--experiences of accepted and rejected living kidney donors: a prospective qualitative study

AIM AND OBJECTIVES

To investigate the perceived experiences and considerations among potential kidney transplantation donors in relation to acceptance or rejection as donors.

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantations are successfully performed in all Western countries, but the prevalence of patients waiting for organs from deceased donors far exceeds the number of organs available. This shortfall has promoted donation by living donors, who enter the donation process with feelings of hope, concern and patience to be accepted or rejected for donation.

DESIGN

A phenomenological-hermeneutic approach was applied in the study.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 participants. Data were interpreted and discussed in accordance with Ricoeur's theory of interpretation involving: naïve reading, structural analysis, critical interpretation and discussion.

RESULTS

Accepted donors experienced relief and delight. Reflections were made on being prepared for donation and on the risks involved. Relationships between donors and recipients became closer. Rejected donors experienced frustration and disappointment, including anxiety about the recipient's prospects. Rejected donors reflected on the reason for rejection, and this could include considerations about changes to their own lifestyle. Reactions from relatives had an impact on donors.

CONCLUSIONS

The study concluded that both the accepted and rejected donors were vulnerable and in need of attention, engagement, support and care. The study draws attention to the need for healthcare professionals to be open and sensitive to the donors' descriptions of their unique experiences of being accepted or rejected for kidney donation.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Nurses should be aware that dialogue with donors, including reflections on experiences, is important to reduce and alleviate vulnerability and to give the best possible support and attention, including the opportunity to promote optimal postdonation outcomes.

Prevention of poor psychosocial outcomes in living organ donors: from description to theory-driven intervention development and initial feasibility testing

CONTEXT

Although some living donors experience psychological, somatic, and interpersonal difficulties after donation, interventions to prevent such outcomes have not been developed or evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

To (1) summarize empirical evidence on psychosocial outcomes after donation, (2) describe a theoretical framework to guide development of an intervention to prevent poor outcomes, and (3) describe development and initial evaluation of feasibility and acceptability of the intervention.

METHODS

Based on a narrative literature review suggesting that individuals ambivalent about donation are at risk for poor psychosocial outcomes after donation, the intervention targeted this risk factor. Intervention structure and content drew on motivational interviewing principles in order to assist prospective donors to resolve ambivalence. Data were collected on donors' characteristics at our institution to determine whether they constituted a representative population in which to evaluate the intervention. Study participants were then recruited to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention. They were required to have scores greater than 0 on the Simmons Ambivalence Scale (indicating at least some ambivalence about donation).

RESULTS

Our population was similar to the national living donor population on most demographic and donation-related characteristics. Eight individuals who had been approved to donate either a kidney or liver segment were enrolled for pilot testing of the intervention. All successfully completed the 2-session telephone-based intervention before scheduled donation surgery. Participants' ratings of acceptability and satisfaction were high. Open-ended comments indicated that the intervention addressed participants' thoughts and concerns about the decision to donate.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention is feasible, acceptable, and appears relevant to donor concerns. A clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention is warranted.

Altruistic kidney donation to a stranger: psychosocial and functional outcomes at two US transplant centers

BACKGROUND

The number of living kidney donors with no preexisting relationship to the recipient has increased sharply. This study compared the psychosocial and functional outcomes of these altruistic donors to a stranger (ADs) with donors with a longstanding relationship with the recipient (traditional donors [TDs]).

METHODS

ADs (n=39) and TDs (n=52), who were similar on age, sex, and year of donation, were recruited from two transplant programs in the United States. Participants completed validated measures of psychosocial and functional outcomes a median of 5 years after donation (range, 1-12 years).

RESULTS

ADs and TDs did not differ significantly in the total number of donation motives. Both were motivated by a desire to help, the benefits to the recipient outweighing the risks to the donor, a sense of moral duty, and imagining oneself in the position of the recipient. Psychological benefits were endorsed equally by both types of donors, although TDs reported higher Quid Pro Quo scores relative to ADs (P=0.04). ADs and TDs did not differ significantly on any of the Short Form-36, Version 2 scales (P values ranged from 0.19 to 0.85). Few donors (3 ADs and 1 TD) regretted their donation decision.

CONCLUSION

Overall, findings indicate that carefully screened ADs experience psychosocial and functional outcomes comparable with those of TDs and should not be systematically excluded from the opportunity to donate.

What the medical excuse teaches us about the potential living donor as patient

Since the inception of living donor kidney transplantation, physicians have expressed concern about the voluntariness of the donors and their ability to recuse themselves. The literature from the late 1960s and early 1970s reveals the practice of offering a false medical excuse, although more recent comments seem to focus more on a 'general statement of lack of suitability' or 'a blameless explanation'. Simmerling et al. argue that the provision of a medical excuse rests on deception, which is wrong on deontological grounds (that physicians should hold to a principle of veracity) and on consequential grounds (deception threatens to damage trust and the doctor-patient relationship and deception may have adverse impact on the donor's relationship with his family). In this paper I examine and reject these objections. I argue that a false medical excuse is morally unjustifiable, but the medical excuse understood as a 'general statement of lack of suitability' is morally permissible because it promotes donor autonomy (the donor's right to decide whether or not to donate), and protects and preserves the donor's rights to privacy and confidentiality (by affirming the donor as an independent patient).

The dilemma of unintentional discovery of misattributed paternity in living kidney donors and recipients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss the issue of misattributed paternity and highlight the complex implications transplant centers must consider when this unsought information is discovered. Policies should be implemented to guide transplant centers in consistent and ethical treatment of this sensitive issue. Effective policy development will require close examination and transparent discussion by the transplant community.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite the fact that little attention has been given to the discovery of misattributed paternity in the field of transplant, transplant centers do encounter this dilemma. The burden of deciding how to treat the information is significant and reaching consensus can be difficult. Recent findings suggest that policy implementation regarding this issue would help to guide practice for professionals who encounter discovery of this unsought information.

SUMMARY

This review explores the complex considerations that must occur when misattributed paternity is unintentionally uncovered in living donor-recipient pairs and recommends that the transplant community pursue policies to guide practice in the treatment of this issue.

The Kidney Transplant Failure Experience: A Longitudinal Case Study

Purpose

To explore participants' experiences of kidney transplant failure.

Background

Kidney transplants are effective and efficient but not without complications. About 7% to 12% of kidney transplants fail within a year, and rates of failure increase over time. Graft failure can have profound effects, often resulting in depression and, occasionally, suicidal feelings. Despite these issues, the personal dimensions of graft failure have been poorly researched.

Methods

One donor-recipient couple experienced irreversible graft rejection immediately after a kidney transplant. This article is a longitudinal case study of this family's experiences. Data were collected through 3 semistructured interviews, conducted before the transplant and at 3 and 10 months after the transplant. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and data coded into categories arising from the participants' accounts.

Results

Transplantation represented a significant source of hope. Fear of transplant failure was a major concern, but was dealt with by using emotion-focused coping mechanisms. Graft rejection was devastating, causing feelings of grief, loss, suicide, and depression. Depression improved as physical health and a sense of personal control improved. The recipient felt inadequately prepared for graft failure and poorly supported by health professionals.

Conclusion

The primary source of grief and depression appeared to be related to the recipient's “loss of imagined future” (ie, the life that she anticipated after transplant). Study findings have potential implications for the provision of care, i nformation, and support for patients and their families before and after transplantation and for future related research.

Factitious Wound Infections in an Altruistic Living Liver Donor

We report a case of recurrent factitious wound infections in an altruistic living liver donor. Costs for the infections after donation were billed to the recipient, creating a threat to the recipient's lifetime benefits. This case illustrates the importance of obtaining previous medical records on living donors.

Consideration of Psychosocial Factors in the Evaluation of Living Donors

Results of donor outcome studies indicate that most living donors report a positive psychosocial response to donation. However, negative psychosocial outcomes have also been reported. Evaluation guidelines have been proposed, although a standardized evaluation specific to living donors is not yet available. In an effort to determine what psychosocial factors should be considered in a comprehensive evaluation of living donors, an extensive literature review was undertaken that was focused on previously proposed guidelines for the psychosocial evaluation of living donors, research on outcomes among living donors, and other relevant psychosocial data.

Optimal Transplant Education for Recipients to Increase Pursuit of Living Donation

Context

Inadequate transplant education may stop kidney patients from beginning or completing evaluation or limit recipients from considering living donation.

Objective

To learn about recipients' decision making about living donation and preferred transplant education resources.

Design

Retrospective, cross-sectional survey. Patients—304 kidney recipients.

Main Outcome Measures

Living donation comfort, concerns, education preferences.

Results

Recipients spent 10 median hours learning about transplant, primarily by speaking to medical staff (2–3 hours) and reading transplant brochures (0–1 hour). Twelve percent had not received any education before coming to the transplant center. At least 75% wanted education discussing the evaluation, surgery, and medical tests required of recipients and donors, as well as common transplant-related fears. Recipients who received living donor transplants were more interested in information about donors' evaluation ( P< .001), surgery ( P< .001), medical tests ( P< .001), and donation concerns ( P= .004) than were other recipients. Recipients who had living donors evaluated were more comfortable accepting family members or friends who volunteered rather than asking potential donors because of concerns about pressuring donors (85%), harming their health (83%), or causing them pain or inconvenience (76%). Besides providing accurate medical information, education that addresses recipients' fears about transplantation, explains living donors' donation experiences, and teaches patients how to pursue living donation may increase recipients' pursuit of living donation.

Follow-up interviews of 12 living kidney donors one yr after open donor nephrectomy

Very few studies have prospectively followed living kidney donors the first year after donor surgery. In 2003, we in-depth interviewed living kidney donors one wk after donation to explore their immediate experiences of going through nephrectomy. The aim of the current investigation was to explore experiences regarding physical and psychosocial health during the first year after donor surgery. Twelve donors going through open donor nephrectomy were interviewed by telephone at one yr after donation. The analysis was carried out with an empirical phenomenological method. All participants expressed an overall positive experience about being a donor a year after transplantation. However, several participants experienced physical disincentives longer than expected post-donation. Emotional distress, such as mild depression and a feeling of loss, was also part of the donor experiences. Donors experiencing unsuccessful recipient outcome reported severe physical and mental reactions. This study provides insights on the physical and mental cost to living kidney donation. Awareness of how donors may experience their situations can help transplantation professionals in their efforts to understand and provide support.

The psychological evaluation of Samaritan kidney donors: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Living kidney donation to a loved one has become common practice. Another type of living donation that is becoming more acceptable to the transplant community is 'Samaritan donation'. Samaritan kidney donors are willing to donate to patients they do not know. Until recently there has been great reluctance to accept the offers of Samaritan donors because it was feared that these donors might be mentally unstable.

METHOD

The purpose of this article is to review the literature about the psychological evaluation of potential Samaritan kidney donors for donor suitability. We have performed a systematic literature search in Pubmed, ISI Web of Science and PsycINFO. We compare and discuss how each study approaches the question about Samaritan donor selection. In addition, we have also screened the studies for reports of rejections of Samaritan donors on psychological grounds.

RESULTS

We have found five articles that at least in some detail describe the evaluation of potential Samaritan donors. For all five articles found, a consultation with either a psychiatrist or a psychologist formed a standard part of the donor evaluation procedure. This evaluation consisted of an interview, and in most instances, additional psychometric testing. According to the articles found, the two major criteria for donor rejection were psychopathology/psychological instability and motivational issues. Three studies reported on the rejection of potential donors on psychological grounds.

CONCLUSIONS

The evaluation of Samaritan kidney donors is a developing field in clinical medicine. Given the relatively low incidence of these types of donations, we recommend the exchange of experience between centres that run a Samaritan donor programme, in order to improve donor evaluation criteria.

Evaluating living kidney donors: relationship types, psychosocial criteria, and consent processes at US transplant programs

We conducted a survey of 132 US kidney transplant programs to examine how they evaluate and select potential living kidney donors, focusing on donor-recipient relationships, psychosocial criteria, and consent processes. There is heterogeneity in donor-recipient relationships that are considered acceptable, although most programs (70%) will not consider publicly solicited donors. Most programs (75%) require a psychosocial evaluation for all potential living donors. Most programs agree that knowledge of financial reward (90%), active substance abuse (86%), and active mental health problems (76%) are absolute contraindications to donation. However, there is greater variability in how other psychosocial issues are considered in the selection process. Consent processes are highly variable across programs: donor and recipient consent for the donor evaluation is presumed in 57% and 76% of programs, respectively. The use of 13 different informed consent elements varied from 65% (alternative donation procedures) to 86% (description of evaluation, surgery and recuperative period) of programs. Forty-three percent use a 'cooling off' period. Findings demonstrate high variability in current practice regarding acceptable donor-recipient relationships, psychosocial criteria, and consent processes. Whether greater consensus should be reached on these donor evaluation practices, especially in the context of more expansive use of living donor kidney transplantation, is discussed.

Psychiatric Assessment of Living Organ Donors for Renal Transplantation: Utility of the Defensive Functioning Scale

The author addresses the need for clinical guidelines to assess subtle psychological characteristics of living organ donors in view of the continuing concern with issues of motivation, manipulation, and uncertain outcome. Since the traditional DSM diagnostic approach has failed to clarify these issues, the identification of the ego-defense mechanisms of six prospective donors and their utility in guiding the decision to accept or reject them is described.

Psychosocial evaluation of candidates for living related kidney donation

Living kidney donation has raised practical and ethical questions since renal transplantation became possible 50 years ago. Nevertheless, living donors are a common source for badly needed organs in the pediatric population. The safety and well being of the living donor are important concerns. Among the risks of living donation are those of a psychological and social nature. To protect these donor interests, psychosocial evaluations of donors are done at some transplant centers, but there is a lack of consistency regarding standardization of the evaluation, the content of the evaluation, and the role of the interviewer. Goals of the overall living donor evaluation for kidney transplantation at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, and the components of the psychosocial evaluation protocol in particular, are presented. The protocol's strengths are discussed, including the standardization of evaluations for all potential donors; the broad spectrum of psychosocial domains assessed; the psychometric measures administered; the systematic handling of negative results and some donors' desire to opt out; and the protection of confidentiality. Future directions with regard to long-term psychosocial outcomes and research protocols are discussed.

Prospective psychosocial monitoring of living kidney donors using the Short Form-36 health survey: results at 12 months

BACKGROUND

Lack of prospective psychosocial outcome studies on living kidney donors impedes identification of risk factors for poor outcome.

METHODS

Psychiatric assessment of living kidney donors was performed preoperatively and at 4 and 12 months postoperatively using a semistructured interview, the Short Form (SF)-36 Health Survey, and Patient Health Questionnaire psychiatric assessment. A total of 48 of 51 consecutive donors (94%) over a 5-year period were available for follow-up and completed all assessments.

RESULTS

At preoperative assessment, only 1 of the 48 donors (2%) had a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition Axis I psychiatric disorder, but 15 (31%) developed a disorder during the 12 months, a 29% incidence. Disorders were depressive (12%), anxiety (6%), and adjustment (13%). Seven donors (15%) demonstrated a disorder at 12 months (depressive 10%, anxiety 2%, adjustment 2%). There was a corresponding decline in psychosocial function as measured by the SF-36 Mental Component Summary score; it decreased at both 4 and 12 months (P<0.01, P<0.05); for 19% of donors, this was a larger decrease than would be expected for the cohort (>2 standard error of measurement units). Scores for SF-36 scales of General Health and Vitality decreased significantly (P<0.05), as did those of Bodily Pain, indicating greater impairment from pain. Psychiatric disorder at 12 months was associated with donor psychosocial function (Mental Component Summary) and psychiatric disorder at 4 months (P<0.01), physical function (SF-36 Physical Component Summary score) at 4 and 12 months (P<0.01), and recipient psychiatric disorder at 12 months (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Donors should be alerted to possible psychosocial impairment, assessed for risk factors, and monitored for at least 12 months. Treatment should be available.

Three patterns of voluntary consent in the case of adult-to-adult living related liver transplantation in Japan

To elucidate the psychosocial aspects of the donors' decisions to engage in adult-to-adult living related liver transplantation, we interviewed a total of five institutional ethics committee members who had experience with reassessing informed consent prior to surgery. Qualitative analysis revealed several nuances of voluntary consent consisting of three patterns: "unconditional consent" is consent from the bottom of one's heart to save a family member's life; "pressured consent" describes a donor who feels implicit pressure to donate despite fear; and "ulterior-motivated consent" defines a donor who has a hidden motive. This study diverges from previous work in that it employs a qualitative approach to deconstructing the psychosocial intricacies of the informed consent process in adult-to-adult LRLT. This initial study raises several questions on the meaning of voluntary informed consent in adult-to-adult living related liver transplantation.

Prospective psychosocial monitoring of living kidney donors using the SF-36 health survey

BACKGROUND

Psychosocial assessment and monitoring of living kidney donors is not yet standard practice, despite calls for it in the literature.

METHODS

Psychosocial assessment of living kidney donors was performed preoperatively and 4 months postoperatively, using the SF-36 Health Survey, the Patient Health Questionnaire psychiatric assessment, and semistructured interview.

RESULTS

Assessment was acceptable to the majority of donors; 92% (44) of 48 consecutive donors completed both assessments. Preoperatively, both physical function (SF-36 Physical Component Score [PCS]) and psychosocial function (SF-36 Mental Component Score [MCS]) were significantly higher than community (state of Victoria) norms. Postoperatively, PCS and MCS fell significantly, but not below the Victorian norm. Seven donors (16%) developed adjustment disorder or anxiety disorder; their MCS were significantly lower than those without psychiatric disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

It is concluded that routine psychosocial assessment performed by a psychiatrist, including the use of questionnaires, is acceptable to donors and identifies those impaired. Potential donors need to be well prepared for such assessment and well educated about the extent of physical and psychosocial impairment that might occur in the postoperative period.