A Mixed-Methods Approach to Understanding Variation in Social Support Requirements and Implications for Access to Transplantation in the United States

Utility and bias in psychosocial evaluations for transplant listing

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Disparities in access to transplantation are persistent and pervasive among minoritized populations, and remain incompletely explained by socioeconomic status, insurance, geography, or medical factors. Although much attention has been paid to factors contributing to disparities in organ allocation, fewer studies have focused on barriers to the transplant waitlist. Given increasing calls for equity in organ transplantation, we examine the role of nonmedical factors used in transplant listing decisions, including psychosocial factors like social support, motivation, and knowledge in improving utility in transplant listing decisions, as well as their potential for reinforcing bias.

RECENT FINDINGS

Minoritized groups are more likely to be declined from transplant listing owing to psychosocial criteria. Lack of consistent definitions, screening tools with differential subgroup validity, and insufficient evidence-base contribute to concerns about reliance on psychosocial factors in transplant listing decisions.

SUMMARY

Improving consistency and evidence-based approaches in patient evaluation and listing decisions will require greater efforts to identify which psychosocial risk factors are predictive of posttransplant outcomes. Social needs screening presents a strengths-based framework for incorporating psychosocial factors in transplant listing decisions.

Psychosocial information sharing to improve equity in kidney transplant evaluation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Increasing transplant access overall and particularly among historically underserved and marginalized patient groups is a shared goal nationwide. Patient challenges with psychosocial factors, such as social support and health literacy, are recognized as among the top reasons patients may not be referred, evaluated, or waitlisted, key steps along the pathway to transplantation. Yet referring providers' (e.g., dialysis clinics') and transplant centers' processes for measuring, communicating about, and addressing patients' psychosocial challenges are inconsistent, can emphasize measures more relevant to dialysis care than transplant care, and are highly susceptible to implicit bias.

RECENT FINDINGS

In this article, we illuminate the opportunity to standardize the patient psychosocial information that dialysis clinics and other nephrology care providers share with the transplant center when referring a patient for transplant evaluation. We highlight potential benefits and trade-offs to this approach and describe how regional coalitions comprising patients, caregivers, and community members can support developing and implementing a standardized template for this purpose, as well as the objectives that the coalition's efforts should pursue to this end.

SUMMARY

Standardized templates for psychosocial information sharing at referral represent a key opportunity to improve quality, efficiency, and equity in pretransplant care as well as transplant access outcomes broadly.

Access to Transplant for African American and Latino Patients Under the 2014 US Kidney Allocation System

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplant offers better outcomes and reduced costs compared with chronic dialysis. However, racial and ethnic disparities in access to kidney transplant persist despite efforts to expand access to transplant and improve the equity of deceased donor allocation. Our objective was to evaluate after listing the association of race and ethnicity with access to deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT) after changes to the allocation system in 2014.

METHODS

This retrospective study evaluated access to DDKT after listing since the implementation of the 2014 kidney allocation system. Waitlist status and transplant outcomes were ascertained from data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Our analysis included every adult kidney transplant candidate on the waiting list in the US from January 1, 2015, through June 30, 2023.

RESULTS

A total of 290 763 candidates were on the waiting list for DDKT during the study period. Of these, 36.4% of candidates were African American and 22.2% were Latino. Compared with White non-Latino patients, access to DDKT after listing was reduced for African American (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-0.94) and Latino individuals (unadjusted HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.87-0.90). After controlling for demographic and clinical factors, these differences in access to transplant widened substantially for African American (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.77-0.80) and Latino patients (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.72-0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

African American and Latino patients had reduced access to DDKT after listing. More effective approaches to improving access for African American and Latino individuals after listing are needed.

Ensuring equity in psychosocial risk assessment for solid organ transplantation: a review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review summarizes the different instruments for evaluating the psychosocial health of transplant candidates, the evidence demonstrating how these instruments relate to probability of transplant waitlisting and transplant outcomes, and the critical knowledge gaps that exist in the causal pathway between psychosocial health and clinical transplant trajectory.

RECENT FINDINGS

The current literature reveals that psychosocial assessments are a common reason for racial and ethnic minorities to be denied access to the transplant list. Given evidence that a lack of clinician consensus exists regarding the definition of, importance of, and reproducibility of psychosocial support evaluations, this facet of the holistic evaluation process may create a unique challenge for already vulnerable patient populations. Though recent evidence shows that psychosocial evaluation scores predict select transplant outcomes, these findings remain inconsistent.

SUMMARY

Multiple instruments for psychosocial transplant evaluation exist, though the utility of these instruments remains uncertain. As equity becomes an increasingly urgent priority for the transplant system, rigorous interrogation of the causal pathway between psychosocial health and transplant longevity is still needed.

Material economic hardships are associated with adverse 1-year outcomes after pediatric liver transplantation: Prospective cohort results from the multicenter SOCIAL-Tx Study

Pediatric liver transplant outcomes exhibit disparities, necessitating the identification of modifiable risk factors to develop targeted interventions. We characterized associations between household material economic hardship (eg, financial barriers to housing or food) and pediatric liver transplant outcomes. We recruited pediatric recipients of liver transplants <18 years at the time of transplant across 8 US centers. Our primary exposure was ≥1 household material economic hardship (ie, food insecurity, housing instability, transportation challenges, or utility concerns), measured using the Accountable Healthcare Communities screening tool. Outcomes included 90-day and 1-year (1) total inpatient bed-days, and (2) episodes of T-cell-mediated rejection. Of the 77 participants (36% female), 34% reported household material economic hardship. Such hardship was associated with increased total inpatient bed-days within 90 days (ratio estimate: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.08, 1.96); the association persisted after adjusting for health literacy, insurance, and transplant center (ratio estimate: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.84). Household material economic hardship was associated with total inpatient bed-days within 1 year after transplant (ratio estimate: 3.2, 95% CI: 1.1, 10.1); associations diminished in multivariable analyses (ratio estimate: 2.2, 95% CI: 0.7, 6.9). Household material economic hardship was associated with increased risk of T-cell-mediated rejection within 1 year of transplant (relative risk: 2.1, 95% CI: 1.1, 4.2); the association diminished in propensity-score matched analyses (relative risk: 1.4, 95% CI: 0.9, 2.3). Our findings highlight the adverse influence of household material economic hardship on pediatric liver transplant outcomes within the first year. Targeted social risk assistance and adjustment strategies offer actionable avenues to mitigate these challenges and enhance outcomes in pediatric recipients of liver transplants.

Expanding the access to kidney transplantation: Strategies for kidney transplant programs

Kidney transplantation is the most successful kidney replacement therapy available, resulting in improved recipient survival and societal cost savings. Yet, nearly 70 years after the first successful kidney transplant, there are still numerous barriers and untapped opportunities that constrain the access to transplant. The literature describing these barriers is extensive, but the practices and processes to solve them are less clear. Solutions must be multidisciplinary and be the product of strong partnerships among patients, their networks, health care providers, and transplant programs. Transparency in the referral, evaluation, and listing process as well as organ selection are paramount to build such partnerships. Providing early culturally congruent and patient-centered education as well as maximizing the use of local resources to facilitate the transplant work up should be prioritized. Every opportunity to facilitate pre-emptive kidney transplantation and living donation must be taken. Promoting the use of telemedicine and kidney paired donation as standards of care can positively impact the work up completion and maximize the chances of a living donor kidney transplant.

Assessing reliability and validity of SIPAT and opportunities for improvement: A single-center cohort study

Psychosocial assessment is a standard component of patient evaluations for transplant candidacy. The Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplant (SIPAT) is a widely used measure to assess psychosocial risk for transplant. However, there are questions regarding the SIPAT's reliability and validity. We examined the SIPAT's psychometric performance and its impact on equitable access to transplant in a diverse cohort of 2825 patients seeking liver transplantation between 2014 and 2021 at an urban transplant center. The SIPAT demonstrated good internal consistency reliability at the overall score [Cronbach's α = 0.85, 95% CI (0.83, 0.86)] and domain levels (0.80 > α > 0.70). There was mixed support for structural validity, with poor overall model fit in confirmatory factor analysis and 50% of questions achieving the 0.70-factor loadings threshold. Adjusting for sociodemographic variables, the odds of not being waitlisted for psychosocial reasons were three times higher for patients with Medicaid insurance than patients with private insurance [OR 3.24, 95% CI (2.09, 4.99)] or Medicare [OR 2.89, 95% CI (1.84, 4.53)], mediated by higher SIPAT scores. Black patients had nearly twice the odds of White patients [OR 1.88, 95% CI (1.20, 2.91)], partially mediated by higher social support domain scores. Patients with Medicaid, non-White patients, and those without a college degree scored significantly higher on collinear questions, disproportionately contributing to higher SIPAT scores. The SIPAT did not perform equally across insurance type, race/ethnicity, and education groups, with the lowest subgroup validity associated with patient readiness and psychopathology domains. The SIPAT should be interpreted with caution, especially as a composite score. Future studies should examine validity in other populations.

Artificial intelligence-based clinical decision support for liver transplant evaluation and considerations about fairness: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The use of large-scale data and artificial intelligence (AI) to support complex transplantation decisions is in its infancy. Transplant candidate decision-making, which relies heavily on subjective assessment (ie, high variability), provides a ripe opportunity for AI-based clinical decision support (CDS). However, AI-CDS for transplant applications must consider important concerns regarding fairness (ie, health equity). The objective of this study was to use human-centered design methods to elicit providers' perceptions of AI-CDS for liver transplant listing decisions.

METHODS

In this multicenter qualitative study conducted from December 2020 to July 2021, we performed semistructured interviews with 53 multidisciplinary liver transplant providers from 2 transplant centers. We used inductive coding and constant comparison analysis of interview data.

RESULTS

Analysis yielded 6 themes important for the design of fair AI-CDS for liver transplant listing decisions: (1) transparency in the creators behind the AI-CDS and their motivations; (2) understanding how the AI-CDS uses data to support recommendations (ie, interpretability); (3) acknowledgment that AI-CDS could mitigate emotions and biases; (4) AI-CDS as a member of the transplant team, not a replacement; (5) identifying patient resource needs; and (6) including the patient's role in the AI-CDS.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, providers interviewed were cautiously optimistic about the potential for AI-CDS to improve clinical and equitable outcomes for patients. These findings can guide multidisciplinary developers in the design and implementation of AI-CDS that deliberately considers health equity.

Liver transplantation in alcohol-associated liver disease: ensuring equity through new processes

Worsened by the COVID-19 pandemic, alcohol use is one of the leading causes of preventable death in the US, in large part due to alcohol-associated liver disease. Throughout history, liver transplantation for this population has been controversial, and many policies and regulations have existed to limit access to lifesaving transplant for patients who use alcohol. In recent years, the rates of liver transplantation for patients with alcohol-associated liver disease have increased dramatically; however, disparities persist. For instance, many criteria used in evaluation for transplant listing, such as social support and prior knowledge of the harms of alcohol use, are not evidence based and may selectively disadvantage patients with alcohol use disorder. In addition, few transplant providers have adequate training in the treatment of alcohol use disorder, and few transplant centers offer specialized addiction treatment. Finally, current approaches to liver transplantation would benefit from adopting principles of harm reduction, which have demonstrated efficacy in the realm of addiction medicine for years. As we look toward the future, we must emphasize the use of evidence-based measures in selecting patients for listing, ensure access to high-quality addiction care for all patients pretransplant and posttransplant, and adopt harm reduction beliefs to better address relapse when it inevitably occurs. We believe that only by addressing each of these issues will we be able to ensure a more equitable distribution of resources in liver transplantation for all patients.

Psychosocial and bioethical challenges and developments for the future of vascularized composite allotransplantation: A scoping review and viewpoint of recent developments and clinical experiences in the field of vascularized composite allotransplantation

Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation (VCA) has evolved in recent years, encompassing hand, face, uterus, penile, and lower extremity transplantation. Accordingly, without centralized oversight by United States Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) or European Programs, centers have developed their own practices and procedures that likely vary, and accordingly, present different levels of rigor to the evaluation process, internationally. The importance of psychosocial factors in the selection process and treatment course has been widely recognized, and therefore, several approaches have been developed to standardize and guide care of VCA candidates and recipients. We propose to develop an international multidisciplinary platform for the exchange of expertise that includes clinical, patient, and research perspectives. Patient perspectives would derive from peer education and the assessment of patient-reported outcomes. To establish a foundation for such a platform, future research should review and combine current VCA protocols, to develop the ethical framework for a standardized psychosocial evaluation and follow-up of VCA candidates and recipients. This review presents a comprehensive overview of recent results in the field of VCA, developments in structural aspects of VCA, and provides viewpoints driven from clinical experience.

Multicenter study of racial and ethnic inequities in liver transplantation evaluation: Understanding mechanisms and identifying solutions

Racial and ethnic disparities persist in access to the liver transplantation (LT) waiting list; however, there is limited knowledge about underlying system-level factors that may be responsible for these disparities. Given the complex nature of LT candidate evaluation, a human factors and systems engineering approach may provide insights. We recruited participants from the LT teams (coordinators, advanced practice providers, physicians, social workers, dieticians, pharmacists, leadership) at two major LT centers. From December 2020 to July 2021, we performed ethnographic observations (participant-patient appointments, committee meetings) and semistructured interviews (N = 54 interviews, 49 observation hours). Based on findings from this multicenter, multimethod qualitative study combined with the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety 2.0 (a human factors and systems engineering model for health care), we created a conceptual framework describing how transplant work system characteristics and other external factors may improve equity in the LT evaluation process. Participant perceptions about listing disparities described external factors (e.g., structural racism, ambiguous national guidelines, national quality metrics) that permeate the LT evaluation process. Mechanisms identified included minimal transplant team diversity, implicit bias, and interpersonal racism. A lack of resources was a common theme, such as social workers, transportation assistance, non-English-language materials, and time (e.g., more time for education for patients with health literacy concerns). Because of the minimal data collection or center feedback about disparities, participants felt uncomfortable with and unadaptable to unwanted outcomes, which perpetuate disparities. We proposed transplant center-level solutions (i.e., including but not limited to training of staff on health equity) to modifiable barriers in the clinical work system that could help patient navigation, reduce disparities, and improve access to care. Our findings call for an urgent need for transplant centers, national societies, and policy makers to focus efforts on improving equity (tailored, patient-centered resources) using the science of human factors and systems engineering.

Social support criteria in vascularized composite allotransplantation versus solid organ transplantation: Should the same ethical considerations apply?

The field of vascularized composite allotransplantation (VCA) is evolving, with some procedures poised to transition from highly experimental research toward standard of care. At present, the use of social support as an eligibility criterion for VCA candidacy is at the discretion of individual VCA programs, allowing VCA teams to consider the unique needs of each potential candidate. Yet this flexibility also creates potential for bias during the evaluation process which may disproportionately impact members of certain communities where social configurations may not resemble the model considered "optimal." We examine the extent to which ethical considerations for social support in solid organ transplantation (SOT) may be applied to or adapted for VCA, and the ethically meaningful ways in which VCA procedures differ from SOT. We conclude that VCA programs must retain some flexibility in determining criteria for candidacy at present; however, considerations of equity will become more pressing as VCA procedures evolve toward standard of care, and further empirical evidence will be needed to demonstrate the association between social support and post-operative success. The field of VCA has an opportunity to proactively address considerations of equity and justice and incorporate fair, inclusive practices into this innovative area of transplantation.

Reevaluating the Ethical Issues in Porcine-to-Human Heart Xenotransplantation

A major limiting factor with heart allotransplantation remains the availability of organs from deceased donors. Porcine heart xenotransplantation could serve as an alternative source of organs for patients with terminal heart failure. A first-in-human porcine xenotransplantation that occurred in January 2022 at the University of Maryland Medical Center provided an opportunity to examine several ethical issues to guide selection criteria for future xenotransplantation clinical trials. In this article, the authors, who are clinicians at UMMC, discuss the appropriate balancing of risks and benefits and the significance, if any, of clinical equipoise. The authors also review the alleged role of the psychosocial evaluation in identifying patients at an elevated risk of posttransplant noncompliance, and they consider how the evaluation's implementation might enhance inequities among diverse populations. The authors argue that, based on the principle of reciprocity, psychosocial criteria should be used, not to exclude patients, but instead to identify patients who need additional support. Finally, the authors discuss the requirements for and the proper assessment of informed and voluntary consent from patients being considered for xenotransplantation.

Mediating Role of Hope Between Social Support and Self-Management Among Chinese Liver Transplant Recipients: A Multi-Center Cross-Sectional Study

This study aimed to investigate the common status of self-management in liver transplant recipients and to explore the mediating role of hope in the relationship between social support and self-management. Two hundred and ten liver transplant recipients from two tertiary hospitals were included. Questionnaires were used for general demographic information, the Perceived Social Support Scale, the Herth Hope Index, and the Self-Management Questionnaire for Liver Transplantation Recipients. Lifestyle management of liver transplant recipients was good, while the communication with physicians, cognitive symptom management, and exercise dimensions were less than satisfactory. Minimal assurance of family and education levels were significantly associated with self-management. Social support was positively correlated with self-management and hope (r = .31, p < .01; r = .40, p < .01). Hope was positively correlated with self-management (r = .39, p < .01). Additionally, the effect of social support on self-management was partially mediated (β = .17, p < .01) by hope. The proportion of mediation of hope was 40.09%. Therefore, well-designed interventions that boost both social support and hope may help improve self-management behavior in liver transplant recipients.

Liver Transplantation in the Time of a Pandemic: A Widening of the Racial and Socioeconomic Health Care Gap During COVID-19

OBJECTIVE

During the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, organ transplantation was classified a CMS Tier 3b procedure which should not be postponed. The differential impact of the pandemic on access to liver transplantation was assessed.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Disparities in organ access and transplant outcomes among vulnerable populations have served as obstacles in liver transplantation.

METHODS

Using UNOS STARfile data, adult waitlisted candidates were identified from March 1, 2020 to November 30, 2020 (n = 21,702 pandemic) and March 1, 2019 to November 30, 2019 (n = 22,797 pre-pandemic), and further categorized and analyzed by time periods: March to May (Period 1), June to August (Period 2), and September to November (Period 3). Comparisons between pandemic and pre-pandemic groups included: Minority status, demographics, diagnosis, MELD, insurance type, and transplant center characteristics. Liver transplant centers (n = 113) were divided into tertiles by volume (small, medium, large) for further analyses. Multivariable logistic regression was fitted to assess odds of transplant. Competing risk regression was used to predict probability of removal from the waitlist due to transplantation or death and sickness. Additional temporal analyses were performed to assess changes in outcomes over the course of the pandemic.

RESULTS

During Period 1 of the pandemic, Minorities showed greater reduction in both listing (-14% vs -12% Whites), and transplant (-15% vs -7% Whites), despite a higher median MELD at transplant (23 vs 20 Whites, P < 0.001). Of candidates with public insurance, Minorities demonstrated an 18.5% decrease in transplants during Period 1 (vs -8% Whites). Although large programs increased transplants during Period 1, accounting for 61.5% of liver transplants versus 53.4% pre-pandemic (P < 0.001), Minorities constituted significantly fewer transplants at these programs during this time period (27.7% pandemic vs 31.7% pre-pandemic, P = 0.04). Although improvements in disparities in candidate listings, removals, and transplants were observed during Periods 2 and 3, the adjusted odds ratio of transplant for Minorities was 0.89 (95% CI 0.83-0.96, P = 0.001) over the entire pandemic period.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19's effect on access to liver transplantation has been ubiquitous. However, Minorities, especially those with public insurance, have been disproportionately affected. Importantly, despite the uncertainty and challenges, our systems have remarkable resiliency, as demonstrated by the temporal improvements observed during Periods 2 and 3. As the pandemic persists, and the aftermath ensues, health care systems must consciously strive to identify and equitably serve vulnerable populations.

Improving adherence: It's complicated

This month’s installment of “The AJT Report” discusses effective strategies for addressing patients’ nonadherence to immunosuppression, and reports on the latest guidance concerning COVID-19 vaccination for pre- and posttransplant patients.

Identifying Needs and Barriers to Engage Family Members in Transplant Candidate Care

INTRODUCTION

Friends and family members provide critical support to patients on the waitlist for deceased donor kidney transplantation. However, little is known about how best to support and engage them effectively to improve patient outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted 5 focus groups with the family members of patients on the waitlist for a deceased donor kidney (n=23) to identify individual- and group-level targets for an intervention. Discussions encouraged participants to reflect on their support roles, experiences at the transplant evaluation, interactions with providers, knowledge of transplant options and expected outcomes. Transcripts of study sessions were coded using an iterative and inductive process.

RESULTS

The thematic analysis produced two main themes related to experiences providing care to patients on the waitlist for kidney transplantation. First, participants revealed that supporting a patient on the waitlist created challenges that reverberate through their entire social structure. Family members discussed frustrations with adapting to their patient's kidney health needs, feelings of isolation, and barriers to identifying and building effective support networks. Second, participants described multiple challenges that prevented their patient-family unit from making informed decisions about transplant care. These challenges included communication with their patient, patients resisting help, difficulty understanding the information, and feeling helpless.

CONCLUSION

Family members providing care to patients with end-stage kidney disease require targeted support to overcome the unique challenges associated with their role in helping to meet their patient's clinical needs. Interventions to engage friends and family members in the care of kidney transplant candidates need to effectively address these challenges.

Thematic Analysis of the Health Records of a National Sample of US Veterans With Advanced Kidney Disease Evaluated for Transplant

IMPORTANCE

To be considered for a kidney transplant, patients with advanced kidney disease must participate in a formal evaluation and selection process. Little is known about how this process proceeds in real-world clinical settings.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the transplant evaluation process among a representative national sample of US veterans with advanced kidney disease who were referred to a kidney transplant center.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This qualitative study was a thematic analysis of clinician notes in the electronic health records of US veterans referred for kidney transplant evaluation. In a random sample of 4000 patients with advanced kidney disease between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2014, cared for in the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system, there were 211 patients who were referred to a transplant center during the follow-up period. This group was included in the qualitative analysis and was followed up until their date of death or the end of the follow-up period on October 8, 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Dominant themes pertaining to the kidney transplant evaluation and selection process identified through thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Among 211 study patients, the mean (SD) age was 57.9 (9.5) years, and 202 patients (95.7%) were male. The following 4 dominant themes regarding the transplant evaluation process emerged: (1) far-reaching and inflexible medical evaluation, in which patients were expected to complete an extensive evaluation that could have substantial physical and emotional consequences, made little accommodation for their personal values and needs, and impacted other aspects of their care; (2) psychosocial valuation, in which the psychosocial component of the transplant assessment could be subjective and intrusive and could place substantial demands on patients' family members; (3) surveillance over compliance, in which the patients' ability and willingness to follow medical recommendations was an important criterion for transplant candidacy and their adherence to a wide range of recommendations and treatments was closely monitored; and (4) disempowerment and lack of transparency, in which patients and their local clinicians were often unsure about what to expect during the evaluation process or about the rationale for selection decisions. For the evaluation process to proceed, local clinicians had to follow transplant center requirements even when they believed the requirements did not align with best practices or the patients' needs.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this qualitative study of US veterans with advanced kidney disease evaluated for transplant, clinician documentation in the medical record indicated that, to be considered for a kidney transplant, patients were required to participate in a rigid, demanding, and opaque evaluation and selection process over which they and their local clinicians had little control. These findings highlight the need for a more evidence-based, individualized, and collaborative approach to kidney transplant evaluation.

Pediatric Deep Brain Stimulation for Dystonia: Current State and Ethical Considerations

Dystonia is a movement disorder that can have a debilitating impact on motor functions and quality of life. There are 250,000 cases in the United States, most with childhood onset. Due to the limited effectiveness and side effects of available treatments, pediatric deep brain stimulation (pDBS) has emerged as an intervention for refractory dystonia. However, there is limited clinical and neuroethics research in this area of clinical practice. This paper examines whether it is ethically justified to offer pDBS to children with refractory dystonia. Given the favorable risk-benefit profile, it is concluded that offering pDBS is ethically justified for certain etiologies of dystonia, but it is less clear for others. In addition, various ethical and policy concerns are discussed, which need to be addressed to optimize the practice of offering pDBS for dystonia. Strategies are proposed to help address these concerns as pDBS continues to expand.

Access to transplantation for persons with intellectual disability: Strategies for nondiscrimination

Disqualifying patients with intellectual disabilities (ID) from transplantation has received growing attention from the media, state legislatures, the Office of Civil Rights, and recently the National Council on Disability, as well as internationally. Compared with evidence-based criteria used to determine transplant eligibility, the ID criterion remains controversial because of its potential to be discriminatory, subjective, and because its relationship to outcomes is uncertain. Use of ID in determining transplant candidacy may stem partly from perceived worse adherence and outcomes for patients with ID, fear of penalties to transplant centers for poor outcomes, and stigma surrounding the quality of life for people with ID. However, using ID as a contraindication to solid organ transplantation is not evidence-based and reduces equitable access to transplantation, disadvantaging an already vulnerable population. Variability and lack of transparency in referral and evaluation allows for gatekeeping, threatens patient autonomy, limits access to lifesaving treatment, and may be seen as unfair. We examine the benefits and harms of using ID as a transplant eligibility criterion, review current clinical evidence and ethical considerations, and make recommendations for transplant teams and regulatory agencies to ensure fair access to transplant for individuals with ID.

Should Lack of Social Support Prevent Access to Organ Transplantation?

Transplantation programs commonly rely on clinicians' judgments about patients' social support (care from friends or family) when deciding whether to list them for organ transplantation. We examine whether using social support to make listing decisions for adults seeking transplantation is morally legitimate, drawing on recent data about the evidence-base, implementation, and potential impacts of the criterion on underserved and diverse populations. We demonstrate that the rationale for the social support criterion, based in the principle of utility, is undermined by its reliance on tenuous evidence. Moreover, social support requirements may reinforce transplant inequities, interfere in patients' personal relationships, and contribute to biased and inconsistent listing procedures. As such, accommodating the needs of patients with limited social support would better balance ethical commitments to equity, utility, and respect for persons in transplantation. We suggest steps for researchers, transplantation programs, and policymakers to improve fair use of social support in transplantation.