Living Kidney Donation: A Narrative Review of Mid- and Long-term Psychosocial Outcomes

Living kidney donors make a significant contribution to alleviating the organ shortage. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of mid- and long-term (≥12 mo) living donor psychosocial outcomes and highlight areas that have been understudied and should be immediately addressed in both research and clinical practice. We conducted a narrative review by searching 3 databases. A total of 206 articles were included. Living donors can be divided into those who donate to an emotionally or genetically related person, the so-called directed donors, or to an emotionally or genetically unrelated recipient, the so-called nondirected donors. The most commonly investigated (bio)psychosocial outcome after living donation was health-related quality of life. Other generic (bio)psychological outcomes include specific aspects of mental health such as depression, and fatigue and pain. Social outcomes include financial and employment burdens and problems with insurance. Donation-specific psychosocial outcomes include regret, satisfaction, feelings of abandonment and unmet needs, and benefits of living kidney donation. The experience of living donation is complex and multifaceted, reflected in the co-occurrence of both benefits and burden after donation. Noticeably, no interventions have been developed to improve mid- or long-term psychosocial outcomes among living donors. We highlight areas for methodological improvement and identified 3 areas requiring immediate attention from the transplant community in both research and clinical care: (1) recognizing and providing care for the minority of donors who have poorer long-term psychosocial outcomes after donation, (2) minimizing donation-related financial burden, and (3) studying interventions to minimize long-term psychosocial problems.

The general public's attitude towards accepting payment for kidney donation

Introduction

Kidney transplantation has become the most cost-effective treatment for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and offers them the highest quality of life. Yet, kidney donation is often inaccessible due to cultural and traditional beliefs about organ donation. The goal of our study is to assess the value of kidney donation using the Willingness to Accept (WTA) technique. We also aim to understand the factors influencing an individual's willingness to donate an organ.

Methods

A self-administered survey was completed by 985 participants from the general public. The quantitative method and survey design that were chosen used descriptive, correlational, nonparametric, and multivariate statistical tests.

Results

Most of the respondents, 895 (90.9%) are not willing to donate a kidney while alive. Four hundred and five (41.1%) of the respondents are not willing to donate a kidney after their death, while the rest are willing to donate their kidney after their death without financial compensation. The same attitude applies to the donation of a kidney from their relatives. Significant predictors from the results of the logistic regression model in predicting the lowest (minimal) amount that will encourage donation of one kidney after death were: Marital status; Nationality; Adi card holder; Knowing people who need a kidney donation; confidence in the medical staff; and consideration of the family's opinions regarding organ donation.

Discussion

Using cost benefit analysis (CBA), with the aim of evaluating the willingness of individuals to accept payment for innovative medical procedures, such as kidney donation, allows an assessment of the perceived value of the medical procedure and enables policymakers to decide whether to allocate funds or offer subsidies for kidney donation, given the limited healthcare resources available. During our research, we found that most participants did not support the commercialization of organs. Our recommendation for policymakers and health professionals is to continue providing adequate funding for kidney donations and to implement educational programs aimed at improving attitudes towards organ donation.

Sociodemographic Variables in Canadian Organ Donation Organizations: A Health Information Survey

Health systems must collect equity-relevant sociodemographic variables to measure and mitigate health inequities. The specific variables collected by organ donation organizations (ODOs) across Canada, variable definitions, and processes of the collection are not defined. We undertook a national health information survey of all ODOs in Canada. These results will inform the development of a standard national dataset of equity-relevant sociodemographic variables.

Methods

We conducted an electronic, self-administered cross-sectional survey of all ODOs in Canada from November 2021 to January 2022. We targeted key knowledge holders familiar with the data collection processes within each Canadian ODO known to Canadian Blood Services. Categorical item responses are presented as numbers and proportions.

Results

We achieved a 100% response rate from 10 Canadian ODOs. Most data were collected by organ donation coordinators. Only 2 of 10 ODOs reported using scripts explaining why sociodemographic data are being collected or incorporated training in cultural sensitivity for any given variable. A lack of cultural sensitivity training was endorsed by 50% of respondents as a barrier to the collection of sociodemographic variables by ODOs, whereas 40% of respondents identified a lack of training in sociodemographic variable collection as a significant barrier.

Conclusions

Few programs routinely collect sufficient data to examine health inequities with an intersectional lens. Most data collection occurs midway through the ODO interaction, creating a missed opportunity to better understand differences in social identities of patients who register their intention to donate in advance or who decline the donation. National standardization of equity-relevant data collection definitions and processes of the collection is needed.

Living kidney donation in a developing country

Background

Living kidney donation has been advocated as a means to ameliorate the chronic shortage of organs for transplantation. Significant rates of comorbidity and familial risk for kidney disease may limit this approach in the local context; there is currently limited data describing living donation in Africa.

Methods

We assessed reasons for non-donation and outcomes following donation in a cohort of 1208 ethnically diverse potential living donors evaluated over a 32-year period at a single transplant centre in South Africa.

Results

Medical contraindications were the commonest reason for donor exclusion. Black donors were more frequently excluded (52.1% vs. 39.3%; p<0.001), particularly for medical contraindications (44% vs. 35%; p<0.001); 298 donors proceeded to donor nephrectomy (24.7%). Although no donor required kidney replacement therapy, an estimated glomerular filtration rate below 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 was recorded in 27% of donors at a median follow-up of 3.7 years, new onset albuminuria >300 mg/day was observed in 4%, and 12.8% developed new-onset hypertension. Black ethnicity was not associated with an increased risk of adverse post-donation outcomes.

Conclusion

This study highlights the difficulties of pursuing live donation in a population with significant medical comorbidity, but provides reassurance of the safety of the procedure in carefully selected donors in the developing world.

Differential Willingness to Pay for Kidney Transplantation From Living and Deceased Donors: Empirical Study Among End-Stage Kidney Disease (ESKD) Patients

Kidney transplantation has developed to the stage where it is currently the most cost-effective treatment for patients suffering from end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and, when available, offers them the highest quality of life. Yet, kidney transplantation is challenged by cultural and traditional beliefs; thus, this study sought to evaluate the willingness to pay for a kidney transplant in a culturally sensitive population. A self-administered survey was completed by 734 end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients. A quantitative method and survey design were chosen and employed descriptive, correlational, nonparametric, and multivariate statistical tests. Participants were willing to pay a mean amount of $40 751.36 for a living donor kidney transplant, whereas the mean is considerably lower, $18 350.51, for a deceased donor kidney. Significant predictors of the willingness to pay (WTP) for a kidney transplant from a living donor and a deceased donor were found, among them: religiosity and ethnicity. The participants' willingness to pay for a kidney transplant could attest to significant benefits in enhancing patient well-being. The willingness to pay differentially for a donation from a deceased or a living donor stems from the higher chances of success with a living-donor organ as well as from moral and religious motives. In Israel kidney transplantation is not tradable in the free market and is fully funded by the state. The average cost of kidney transplantation in Israel is $61 714.50. Since the cost exceeds the utility and since the economic literature suggests that the funding of healthcare interventions should be provided up to the point where the costs of that funding equal the benefits that society derives from it, crucial revisions in public health policy should be made. Education may have a significant impact on the approach to kidney donation and organ donation in general.

Elucidating measures of systemic racism to mitigate racial disparities in kidney transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Given recent national attention to the role of racism in perpetuating racial inequities in society and health, this review provides a timely and relevant summary of key measures of systemic racism in kidney transplantation. More specifically, the review identifies current and promising interventions, whereas highlighting the need for more sustainable and impactful interventions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Racial disparities persist in kidney transplantation. Black and Hispanic individuals are less likely to receive a kidney transplant than non-Hispanic Whites despite disproportionately higher rates of kidney failure. Studies demonstrate that socioeconomic factors do not fully explain existing racial disparities in transplantation. Systemic racism at all levels, individual, interpersonal, institutional, and structural, is at the core of racial disparities, and current interventions are insufficient in mitigating their effects. Thus, targeted and sustainable interventions must be implemented to mitigate systemic racism in kidney transplantation.

SUMMARY

Systemic racism in all its forms continues to influence disparities at all stages of kidney transplantation. This paper highlights recent findings that shed light on how racism contributes to racial disparities in kidney transplantation. Using these findings to identify targets and strategies for mitigation, relevant interventions and policies that show promise are detailed.

Development and Preliminary Evaluation of a Patient-facing Educational Video About Live Kidney Donor Surgical Complications

Background.

Living kidney donation (LKD) improves transplant access; however, its use is compromised, in part, by individuals’ unaddressed concerns about perioperative complications.

Methods.

We developed an animated, patient-centered educational video about LKD surgical complications, with input from experts in transplantation, communication, and anthropology, 35 patients/care partners (5 LKD candidates, 5 prior LKDs, 10 kidney transplant recipients, 10 kidney transplant candidates, 5 care partners), and 1 community advocate. We then conducted an online pre-post study with 24 potential kidney donors and recipients to measure the video’s acceptability and feasibility to improve donation complication knowledge and concerns.

Results.

Knowledge of LKD surgical complications increased 23% (mean 5.7 to 7.0, P < 0.01) from pre- to post- animation viewing. Large knowledge effect size increases were observed for different levels of age, race, health literacy, and technology access. The frequency of positive responses about donation safety increased from 88% preanimation to 96% postanimation. Concerns about surgical complications remained at 17% before and after exposure. After viewing the animation, over 90% indicated positive ratings on ease of watching, understanding, and engaging.

Conclusions.

An animated educational video about LKD surgical complications was developed in collaboration with multiple stakeholders. The video was well received and promised to positively impact individuals’ knowledge and concerns.

Addressing Racial Disparities in Live Donor Kidney Transplantation Through Education and Advocacy Training

Background.

The Live Donor Champion (LDC) program trains kidney transplant (KT) candidates and their family/friends (“champions”) as educator-advocates for live donor KT (LDKT). This program was created to empower patients and champions, particularly African American (AA) waitlist candidates that historically had lower access to LDKT. We assessed changes in knowledge about and comfort discussing live donation and donor referral associated with LDC participation, both overall and by participant race.

Methods.

We compared 163 adult KT candidates who were LDC participants from October 2013 to May 2016 with 489 matched controls, both overall and by race. We compared changes in comfort and knowledge post-LDC using rank-sum tests among participants by race. We compared time to first live donor referral for participants versus controls, by race, using Cox regression.

Results.

Post-LDC versus pre-LDC, participants had higher median knowledge (83% versus 63% on 12-question quiz; P < 0.001) and comfort (1.8 versus 1 on 4-point Likert scale; P < 0.001). Among participants, AAs had similar baseline and final knowledge (P = 0.9 and P = 0.1, respectively) and baseline comfort (P > 0.9) as non-AAs but higher final comfort (2 versus 1.4; P = 0.005) than non-AAs. LDC participants were 5.8 times as likely as controls to have a live donor referral (aHR _3.765.78_8.89; P < 0.001); the impact of LDC participation was similar among non-AAs and AAs (p-interaction = 0.6).

Conclusions.

The LDC program increased knowledge, comfort, and live donor referral for non-AA and AA participants, underscoring the effectiveness in the program in promoting LDKT in a population with historically lower access to LDKT.

Interviews of living kidney donors to assess donation-related concerns and information-gathering practices

Background

Efforts are underway to improve living kidney donor (LKD) education, but current LKD concerns and information-gathering preferences have not been ascertained to inform evidence-based resource development. As a result, prior studies have found that donors desire information that is not included in current informed consent and/or educational materials.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 50 LKDs who donated at our center to assess (1) concerns about donation that they either had personally before or after donation or heard from family members or friends, (2) information that they had desired before donation, and (3) where they sought information about donation. We used thematic analysis of verbatim interview transcriptions to identify donation-related concerns. We compared the demographic characteristics of participants reporting specific concerns using Fisher’s exact test.

Results

We identified 19 unique concerns that participants had or heard about living kidney donation. 20% of participants reported having had no pre-donation concerns; 38% reported no post-donation concerns. The most common concern pre-donation was future kidney failure (22%), post-donation was the recovery process (24%), and from family was endangering their family unit (16%). 44% of participants reported being less concerned than family. 26% of participants wished they had had additional information prior to donating, including practical advice for recovery (10%) and information about specific complications (14%). Caucasian participants were more likely to hear at least one concern from family (76% vs. 33%, p = 0.02). The most commonly consulted educational resources were health care providers (100%) and websites (79% of donors since 2000). 26% of participants had had contact with other donors; an additional 20% desired contact with other LKDs.

Conclusions

Potential donors not only have personal donation-related concerns but frequently hear donation-related concerns from family members and friends. Current gaps in donor education include an absence of practical, peer-to-peer advice about donation from other prior donors and materials directed and potential donors’ family members and friends. These findings can inform the development of new educational practices and resources targeted not only at LKDs but at their social networks.

Effectiveness of informational decision aids and a live donor financial assistance program on pursuit of live kidney transplants in African American hemodialysis patients

BACKGROUND

African Americans have persistently poor access to living donor kidney transplants (LDKT). We conducted a small randomized trial to provide preliminary evidence of the effect of informational decision support and donor financial assistance interventions on African American hemodialysis patients' pursuit of LDKT.

METHODS

Study participants were randomly assigned to receive (1) Usual Care; (2) the Providing Resources to Enhance African American Patients' Readiness to Make Decisions about Kidney Disease (PREPARED); or (3) PREPARED plus a living kidney donor financial assistance program. Our primary outcome was patients' actions to pursue LDKT (discussions with family, friends, or doctor; initiation or completion of the recipient LDKT medical evaluation; or identification of a donor). We also measured participants' attitudes, concerns, and perceptions of interventions' usefulness.

RESULTS

Of 329 screened, 92 patients were eligible and randomized to Usual Care (n = 31), PREPARED (n = 30), or PREPARED plus financial assistance (n = 31). Most participants reported interventions helped their decision making about renal replacement treatments (62%). However there were no statistically significant improvements in LDKT actions among groups over 6 months. Further, no participants utilized the living donor financial assistance benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest these interventions may need to be paired with personal support or navigation services to overcome key communication, logistical, and financial barriers to LDKT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov [ NCT01439516 ] [August 31, 2011].

Design and approach of the Living Organ Video Educated Donors (LOVED) program to promote living kidney donation in African Americans

PURPOSE

To describe the rationale, methodology, design, and interventional approach of a mobile health education program designed for African Americans with end stage renal disease (ESRD) to increase knowledge and self-efficacy to approach others about their need for a living donor kidney transplant (LDKT).

METHODS

The Living Organ Video Educated Donors (LOVED) program is a theory-guided iterative designed, mixed methods study incorporating three phases: 1) a formative evaluation using focus groups to develop program content and approach; 2) a 2-month proof of concept trial (n=27) to primarily investigate acceptability, tolerability and investigate increases of LDKT knowledge and self-efficacy; and 3) a 6-month, 2-arm, 60-person feasibility randomized control trial (RCT) to primarily investigate increases in LDKT knowledge and self-efficacy, and secondarily, to increase the number of living donor inquiries, medical evaluations, and LDKTs. The 8-week LOVED program includes an interactive web-based app delivered on 10″ tablet computer incorporating weekly interactive video education modules, weekly group video chat sessions with an African American navigator who has had LDKT and other group interactions for support and improve strategies to promote their need for a kidney.

RESULTS

Phase 1 and 2 have been completed and the program is currently enrolling for the feasibility RCT. Phase 2 experienced 100% retention rates with 91% adherence completing the video modules and 88% minimum adherence to the video chat sessions.

CONCLUSIONS

We are in the early stages of an RCT to evaluate the LOVED program; to date, we have found high tolerability reported from Phase 2.

Opportunities for Engaging Patients in Kidney Research

Purpose:

The purpose of this review is to provide a summary of the rationale for engaging patients in research as well as to review the established and envisioned advantages and strategies for patient-researcher partnerships. The authors of this article, which include a patient and 4 researchers in kidney disease, discuss the expected benefits and opportunities for patient engagement in their respective research programs. The 4 research programs span the spectrum of kidney disease and focus on enhancing bone health, increasing living donor kidney transplants, improving medication adherence, and preventing kidney transplant rejection.

Sources of Information:

The sources of information for this review include published studies on the topics of patient engagement and the 4 research programs of the new investigators.

Key Findings:

(1) Patient, health care provider, and researcher partnerships can contribute useful insights capable of enhancing research in kidney disease. (2) Regardless of the research program, there are various strategies and opportunities for engagement of patients with lived experience across the various stages of research in kidney disease. (3) Envisioned advantages of patient-researcher partnerships include: targeting patient-identified research priorities, integrating patients’ experiential knowledge, improving study design and feasibility through patient-researcher input, facilitating dissemination of research findings to other patients, effectively responding to patient concerns about studies, and inspiring researchers to conduct their research.

Limitations:

The limitations of the current review include the relative scarcity of literature on patient engagement within the field of kidney disease.

Implications:

The findings of the current review suggest that it will be important for future studies to identify optimal strategies for patient engagement in setting research priorities, study design, participant recruitment, execution of research projects, and knowledge dissemination and translation.

Barriers to live donor kidney transplants in the pediatric population: A single-center experience

A decrease in live donor pediatric kidney transplants has occurred in the United States. This study investigates barriers that may influence access to live donor kidney transplants in children. Retrospective chart review was conducted for 91 children (69% male, mean age 11.9 years) who underwent pretransplant workup from 2005 to 2015 at an urban pediatric hospital. Fifty-four percent were African American, 32% Caucasian, 8% Arabic, 3% Hispanic, and 3% Others. Government-sponsored insurance (Medicaid/Medicare) was utilized by 73%, and 54% had dual caregivers. Only nine of 68 kidney transplants were live donor transplants. Live donor transplants (11%) were significantly (P=.008) lower than deceased donor transplants (59%) in African Americans. Private insurance was reported by 56% of live donor recipients and 25% of deceased donor recipients. Among live donor recipients, 78% were from dual caregiver families. Caregiver, health-related, financial, and religious/cultural barriers to live donor transplants were reported, several of which may be amenable to positive intervention.

Inter- and Intrapersonal Barriers to Living Donor Kidney Transplant among Black Recipients and Donors

CONTEXT

End-stage renal disease (ESRD) is more common among Blacks, but Blacks are less likely to receive a live donor kidney transplant (LDKT).

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to identify barriers and coping mechanisms that Black LDKT recipients and donors experienced while receiving or donating a kidney.

DESIGN

A qualitative study was conducted using structured interviews. Thematic analysis was used for data interpretation.

PARTICIPANTS

All 20 participants identified as Black, with two participants identifying themselves as multiracial. The mean age for the 14 recipients was 60, and the average age for the 6 living donors was 47.

RESULTS

Themes emerging from the data suggest both recipients and donors faced barriers in the LDKT experience. Recipients faced barriers associated with their denial and avoidance of the severity of their ESRD, their desire to maintain the privacy of their health status, and their refusal to approach potential donors. Donors encountered negative responses from others about the donors' desire to donate and the initial refusal of recipients to accept a LDKT offer. Recipients identified faith as a coping mechanism, while donors identified normalization of donation as their method of coping. Various types of social support helped donors and recipients navigate the transplant process.

CONCLUSION

Black LDKT recipients and donors must overcome barriers prior to receiving or donating a kidney. Most of these barriers arise from communication and interactions with others that are either lacking or undesirable. Future interventions to promote LDKT among Blacks may benefit by specifically targeting these barriers.

African American kidney transplant patients' perspectives on challenges in the living donation process

CONTEXT

The increasing shortage of deceased donor kidneys suitable for African Americans highlights the critical need to increase living donations among African Americans. Little research has addressed African American transplant recipients' perspectives on challenges and barriers related to the living donation process.

OBJECTIVE

To understand the perspectives of African American recipients of deceased and living donor kidney transplants on challenges, barriers, and educational needs related to pursuing such transplants.

PARTICIPANTS AND DESIGN

A mixed-method design involved 27 African American kidney recipients (13 male) in 4 focus groups (2 per recipient type: 16 African American deceased donor and 11 living donor recipients) and questionnaires. Focus group transcripts were evaluated with NVivo 10.0 (QSR, International) by using inductive and deductive qualitative methods along with crystallization to develop themes of underlying barriers to the living donor kidney transplant process and were compared with the questionnaires.

RESULTS

Four main themes were identified from groups: concerns, knowledge and learning, expectations of support, and communication. Many concerns for the donor were identified (eg, process too difficult, financial burden, effect on relationships). A general lack of knowledge about the donor process and lack of behavioral skills on how to approach others was noted. The latter was especially evident among deceased donor recipients. Findings from the questionnaires on myths and perceptions supported the lack of knowledge in a variety of domains, including donors' surgical outcomes risks, costs of surgery, and impact on future health. Participants thought that an educational program led by an African American recipient of a living donor kidney transplant, including practice in approaching others, would increase the likelihood of transplant-eligible patients pursuing living donor kidney transplant.

Living kidney donors' experiences while undergoing evaluation for donation: a qualitative study

AIM AND OBJECTIVE

To explore living kidney donors' experiences during the donor evaluation process.

BACKGROUND

Due to a shortage of organs for kidney transplantation from deceased donors, the living kidney donation rate has increased. The time period until transplantation is often shorter when using living donors compared to deceased donors. Although technological developments in immunology have made it possible to perform successful kidney transplants between donors and recipients, a large disparity still exists between the number of patients needing a kidney transplant and the supply of kidneys from living donors. This need has promoted donation from living kidney donors. The evaluation phase prior to donation is a crucial period in the recruitment of living kidney donors, as it ensures that donors are physically and mentally suitable for donation.

DESIGN

A qualitative study taking a phenomenological-hermeneutic approach.

METHODS

Data were generated using participant observation during the evaluation period and semi-structured interviews after conclusion of the evaluation. In total, 18 potential donors were included. Data were interpreted and discussed in accordance with Ricoeur's theory of interpretation: naïve reading, structural analysis, critical interpretation and discussion.

RESULTS

Feelings of hope concerning acceptance as a donor and concerns for the recipient's illness and everyday life were evident during evaluation. Donors' experiences largely depended on the quality of their communication and interaction with the healthcare professionals. In some cases, donors were supported and cared for, while in other cases, frustrations and vulnerability were evident and emotional support and attention to donors' needs were not present.

CONCLUSION

The evaluation period for living kidney donation involves hope, vulnerability and concern. Interaction, communication and support from healthcare professionals to help donors manage this crucial phase are essential. Accordingly, the identification of donors' specific care and support needs, including physical, mental and ethical factors, is key to a positive experience.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The attention, commitment and engagement of healthcare professionals are essential elements in the identification of donors' individual needs.

Variations in coping stages for individuals with chronic kidney disease: Results from an exploratory study with patient navigators

Using a cross-sectional design, we examined coping stages (Kübler-Ross) among patients with end-stage renal disease at nephrology practices incorporating professional social workers as patient navigators, providing person-centered education and support (N = 420). We evaluated associations with behavioral counseling constructs (assess-advise-agree-assist-arrange). Coping stages comprised denial = 35.24 percent, acceptance = 24.05 percent, depression = 21.43 percent, bargaining = 12.86 percent, and anger = 6.43 percent. Compared to denial, other coping stages showed increased odds ratios for transplant referral agreement, transplant referral evaluations, understanding treatments, understanding donation procedures, plans to recruit donors, active donor recruitment, and potential living donor(s). Assessment of coping stages, and strategies to influence these, may be key factors in guiding patients to living donor kidney transplantation.

Measuring and explaining racial and ethnic differences in willingness to donate live kidneys in the United States

BACKGROUND

Reasons for US racial-ethnic minority ESRD patients' reported difficulties identifying live kidney donors are poorly understood.

METHODS

We conducted a national study to develop scales measuring willingness to donate live kidneys among US adults (scores ranged from 0 [not willing] to 10 [extremely willing]), and we tested whether racial-ethnic differences exist in willingness to donate. We also examined whether clinical, sociodemographic, and attitudinal factors mediated potential racial-ethnic differences in willingness.

RESULTS

Among 845 participants, the majority were extremely willing to donate to relatives (77%) while fewer than half were extremely willing to donate to non-relatives (18%). In multivariable linear regression analyses, willingness to donate varied by race-ethnicity and recipient relationship to the donor. African Americans were less willing to donate to relatives than whites (β: -0.48; 95% CI [Confidence Interval]: -0.94 to -0.17; p = 0.04), but these differences were eliminated after accounting for socioeconomic factors, medical trust, and concerns about burial after death. There were no differences in willingness to donate between Hispanics and whites.

CONCLUSIONS

African Americans' burial concerns, medical trust, and socioeconomic factors explained differences in their willingness to donate to relatives, suggesting efforts to address these barriers may enhance rates of live kidney donation in this group.

Evaluation of living kidney donors: variables that affect donation

Approximately 10000 deceased donor organs are available yearly for 85 000 US patients awaiting kidney transplant. Living kidney donation is essential to close this gap and offers better survival rates. However, nationally, 80% of potential donors evaluated fail to donate. Nurse coordinators who perform predonation screening and education need additional insight into the large number of potential donors who fail to complete the donation process. Reasons for nondonation in donor candidates undergoing medical evaluation, and variables affecting nondonation at Vanderbilt University Medical Center between 2004 and 2009 are examined. Multivariable logistic regression models are used to test the effects of age and race on donation status and reasons for nondonation. Summary data are frequencies, percentages, and means (SD). The sample included 706 candidates (63% female, 80% white; mean age, 40 [SD, 12] years). Almost half (46%) received clearance to donate. Undiagnosed hypertension (14%), abnormal glucose tolerance (10%), and protein-urea (9%) were the most prevalent medical reasons for nondonation. About 13% of candidates changed their minds during evaluation. Analyses demonstrated an increased likelihood of older candidates (P < .001) and a decreased likelihood of white candidates (P = .007) being excluded from donation. Within the nondonation group, increased age was associated with undiagnosed hypertension and abnormal glucose tolerance (both race-adjusted, P = .01). Younger candidates (race-adjusted, P = .003) and African Americans (age-adjusted, P = .04) were more likely to decide against donation. The most prevalent medical reasons for nondonation could be identified through enhanced prescreening, and improved preevaluation education could decrease nondonation rates.

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.

Live donor champion: finding live kidney donors by separating the advocate from the patient

BACKGROUND

Lack of education and reluctance to initiate a conversation about live donor kidney transplantation is a common barrier to finding a donor. Although transplant candidates are often hesitant to discuss their illness, friends or family members are often eager to spread awareness and are empowered by advocating for the candidates. We hypothesized that separating the advocate from the patient is important in identifying live donors.

METHODS

We developed an intervention to train a live donor champion (LDC; a friend, family member, or community member willing to advocate for the candidate) for this advocacy role. We compared outcomes of 15 adult kidney transplant candidates who had no prospective donors and underwent the LDC intervention with 15 matched controls from our waiting list.

RESULTS

Comfort in initiating a conversation about transplantation increased over time for LDCs. Twenty-five potential donors contacted our center on behalf of LDC participants; four participants achieved live donor kidney transplantation and three additional participants have donors in evaluation, compared with zero among matched controls (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Transplant candidates are ill equipped to seek live donors; by separating the advocate from the patient, understandable concerns about initiating conversations are reduced.

Correlates of Support for Living Donation among African American Adults

Context

Living donation is studied with much less intensity among African Americans than among the general population. Examination of barriers to living donation can lead to effective strategies to educate dialysis patients and their families about this alternative.

Objective

To explore the correlates of likelihood of becoming a living donor among community-recruited African American adults.

Design/Participants

Cross-sectional data were gathered via self-administered questionnaire from 425 African American adults, age 18 years and older, who were recruited from 9 churches in Atlanta.

Main Outcome Measures

Self-reported likelihood of becoming a living donor to a close family member, an extended family member or friend, or a stranger.

Results

More than three-quarters of participants were willing to act as living donors to a close family member or spouse and two-thirds to friends or extended family. For likelihood of donating to a friend or extended family member, only willingness to engage in deceased donation was significantly associated; to a stranger, both willingness to engage in deceased donation and attitudes toward donation were significantly associated. Knowledge of and personal experiences with donation and/or transplantation were not significantly associated with likelihood of any type of living donation.

Conclusions

Findings indicate widespread support for living donation to a close family member or spouse. These findings have important implications for dialysis patients who must decide whether to approach friends and/or family about the possibility of serving as a living donor and emphasize the need for interventions to help facilitate this process.

Living-Related Donors' Quest for Information before Donation

Context

Providing potential living-related liver donors with all the necessary information before donation can be challenging. What information donors need and are not getting during the evaluation phase has not been defined.

Objective

To increase understanding of the everyday life of living-related liver donors and to suggest educational strategies that could be used by transplant centers during the evaluation process.

Design

An interpretive ethnographic study based on a symbolic interactionism approach. All participants were interviewed; some were reinterviewed in order to better understand their experience as a donor.

Setting

Interviews took place in the clinic, the donor's home, the donor's workplace, and in coffee shops depending on each donor's preference.

Participants

A total of 13 parents who had donated the left lower lobe of their liver to their son or daughter at least 1 year ago.

Main Outcome Measures

Interviews were analyzed by using qualitative research methods of coding, summarizing, and discussing concepts.

Results

The donors viewed the donation as a life-changing event, and 11 of 13 donors described seeking further information in addition to the information given to them by the transplant center. Searching the Internet, reading research articles, and speaking to other donors were activities demonstrated by the participants.

Short-Term Impact of an Educational Program Promoting Live Donor Kidney Transplantation in Dialysis Centers

Context

Given the shortage of kidneys available for transplantation, a community-based intervention trial was implemented to assess the impact of an educational program on patients' access to live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT).

Objective

To compare the short-term impact of a basic intervention and an enhanced intervention on patients' readiness to pursue LDKT.

Design

Baseline data and data from 1 week after interventions were analyzed.

Participants

214 transplant-eligible hemodialysis patients attending 14 dialysis facilities in Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania.

Interventions

In the basic intervention, 107 patients watched a 10-minute videotape on the experience of recipients and live donors of a kidney. In the enhanced intervention, 107 patients watched the same videotape and had a discussion with a health educator on the risks and benefits of LDKT, who could be a donor, and how to address the barriers they were encountering when seeking a live kidney donor.

Main outcome measure

Patient reported whether they were considering LDKT, had talked with family or friends about LDKT, and had asked someone for a kidney.

Results

Over half of transplant-eligible patients were not pursuing LDKT at baseline (64% in the basic intervention group, 61% in the enhanced intervention group). One week after the intervention, the odds of considering LDKT were higher among African Americans (odds ratio [OR], 2.28; confidence interval [CI], 1.22–4.25), younger patients (OR, 0.94; CI, 0.91–0.97), and patients who spent less time on dialysis (OR, 0.90; CI, 0.83–0.97). The odds of asking for a kidney were higher among African Americans (OR, 4.94; CI, 2.54–9.60) and patients who perceived they were in poor to fair health (OR, 3.30; CI, 1.12–9.67).

Conclusions

Although both interventions helped patients consider LDKT and ask for a kidney, more time and expanded educational content might be needed to facilitate patients' discussion about LDKT with their loved ones.

Living Kidney Donation among Hispanics: A Qualitative Examination of Barriers and Opportunities

Context

Despite their increasing need for kidneys and low nonliving donation rates, minimal research has been conducted to ascertain the perceptions of Hispanic Americans about living organ donation and the process of asking for such a donation.

Objective

To examine perceptions of Hispanics regarding barriers to and benefits of living donation as well as the process of asking someone to be a living donor.

Design

A qualitative study consisting of 10 focus groups conducted in 2 series.

Participants

Adult Spanish-language-dominant Hispanic members of the general population of Tucson, Arizona.

Results

The main barriers to living organ donation were a lack of knowledge or information and fear of the donation process. Knowing that one has helped save or improve another's life was the central benefit. Most participants reported being willing to ask a relative to be a living donor if they were ever in need. Two main responses typified these individuals: no concern about asking because of a strong desire to fight for one's health and for one's family, or asking despite difficulties and concerns about the process. A significant minority of participants indicated they would not ask for a donation, because of either a desire to avoid harming others or the expectation that a relative would initiate an offer.