Analysis of the factors influencing living kidney donation: the experience in National Taiwan University Hospital

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.

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

Supplemental digital content is available in the text.

Introduction

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

From potential donor to actual donation: does socioeconomic position affect living kidney donation? A systematic review of the evidence

Evidence from Europe, Australia and the United States demonstrates that socioeconomically deprived individuals with advanced chronic kidney disease are less likely to receive a living kidney transplant compared with less deprived individuals. This systematic review focuses on how socioeconomic position (SEP) may influence hypothetical and actual living kidney donors and where appropriate, summarizes the quantitative evidence.In the general population, a higher SEP appears to be associated with an increased 'hypothetical' willingness to be a living kidney donor but with marked heterogeneity in the absolute differences (I = 95.9%, P < 0.001). In a commercial setting, lower SEP motivates people to donate. Outside of this setting, there is no evidence of discordance in the SEP of donors and recipients that would suggest undisclosed financial exchange. There is evidence for a complex interaction between SEP and other variables, such as ethnicity, sex, and the national economic climate. Some evidence suggests that measures to remove financial disincentives to donation are associated with an increase in living donation rates. Future research needs to study how SEP impacts the potential donor population from willingness to donate, progression through donor assessment to actual donor nephrectomy.

Barriers to living donation among low-resource Hispanics

Hispanics are disproportionately affected by renal failure. Although living donation has been heralded as a potential means for alleviating the need for transplantable kidneys, a nuanced understanding of the obstacles faced by Hispanics is necessary. In our study, we conducted focus groups with 28 first-generation Spanish-dominant Hispanic renal patients. Although some of the barriers that emerged were akin to those reported in previous research (e.g., a lack of knowledge about the process), others were unique. Rarely chronicled barriers include the disqualification of family members because of medical issues, potential donors being unable to miss work, disqualification of family members who are undocumented, concern that potential donors cannot support their family if they donate, and declining social support because of illness. The interaction among this constellation of barriers makes living donation particularly difficult among this population. Investigations focused on the unique barriers faced by these low-resource individuals are warranted.