Living donor kidney transplantation: chance for the recipient--financial risk for the donor?

Ethical Issues Surrounding High-Risk Kidney Recipients: Implications for the Living Donor

Evaulating patients for living kidney donor transplantation involving a recipient with significant medical issues can create an ethical debate about whether to proceed with surgery. Donors must be informed of the surgical risk to proceed with donating a kidney and their decision must be a voluntary one. A detailed informed consent should be obtained from high-risk living kidney donor transplant recipients as well as donors and family members after the high perioperative risk potential has been explained to them. In addition, family members need to be informed of and acknowledge that a living kidney donor transplant recipient with pretransplant extrarenal morbidity has a higher risk of a serious adverse outcome event such as graft failure or recipient death. We review 2 cases involving living kidney donor transplant recipients with significant comorbidity and discuss ethical considerations, donor risk, and the need for an extended informed consent.

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.

The providing resources to enhance African American patients' readiness to make decisions about kidney disease (PREPARED) study: protocol of a randomized controlled trial

Background

Living related kidney transplantation (LRT) is underutilized, particularly among African Americans. The effectiveness of informational and financial interventions to enhance informed decision-making among African Americans with end stage renal disease (ESRD) and improve rates of LRT is unknown.

Methods/design

We report the protocol of the Providing Resources to Enhance African American Patients’ Readiness to Make Decisions about Kidney Disease (PREPARED) Study, a two-phase study utilizing qualitative and quantitative research methods to design and test the effectiveness of informational (focused on shared decision-making) and financial interventions to overcome barriers to pursuit of LRT among African American patients and their families. Study Phase I involved the evidence-based development of informational materials as well as a financial intervention to enhance African American patients’ and families’ proficiency in shared decision-making regarding LRT. In Study Phase 2, we are currently conducting a randomized controlled trial in which patients with new-onset ESRD receive 1) usual dialysis care by their nephrologists, 2) the informational intervention (educational video and handbook), or 3) the informational intervention in addition to the option of participating in a live kidney donor financial assistance program. The primary outcome of the randomized controlled trial will include patients’ self-reported rates of consideration of LRT (including family discussions of LRT, patient-physician discussions of LRT, and identification of a LRT donor).

Discussion

Results from the PREPARED study will provide needed evidence on ways to enhance the decision to pursue LRT among African American patients with ESRD.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01439516

Current Canadian initiatives to reimburse live organ donors for their non-medical expenses

Living organ donors frequently incur non-medical expenses for travel, accommodation, prescription drugs, loss of income, and child care in conjunction with organ donation. Despite international precedent and widespread public support, Canada currently lacks a unified strategy to reimburse donors for these expenses. In 2005, we communicated with 78 individuals within the field of Canadian transplantation to identify which initiatives for reimbursement of living donors existed in each province. Saskatchewan was the only province in which public employees were granted paid leave for organ donation. Six provincial governments partially reimbursed travel and accommodation. At the federal level, other expenses could be partially reimbursed through an income tax credit, while the Employment Insurance program and the Canada Pension Plan provided funding for donors who become unemployed or develop long-term disability as a result of donation. Charities helped a limited number of patients in financial need through grants and no-interest loans, but funding was generally limited by contributions received. While reimbursing living donors for their non-medical expenses is considered just, existing programs only partially reimburse expenses and are not available in all provinces. Developing future reimbursement policies will remove a disincentive faced by some potential donors, and may increase rates of transplantation in Canada.

Improving institutional fairness to live kidney donors: donor needs must be addressed by safeguarding donation risks and compensating donation costs

The number of kidney transplants from live donors is increasing worldwide, yet donor needs have not been satisfactorily addressed in either developed or developing countries. This paper argues that unmet donor needs are unfair to live kidney donors in two ways. First, when safeguards against the risks of donation are insufficient, live donation can impair the donor's health and thus his or her fair opportunities to access jobs and offices and to function as a free and equal citizen more generally. Secondly, when the financial costs of donation are not fully compensated, operational fairness (associated with the nephrectomy event) is compromised for the donor. The donor assumes the risks of a nontherapeutic intervention--for the good of the recipient and society--and should not have to incur costs for donating. Based on a systematic analysis of unmet donor needs in developed and developing countries, context-relative measures to improve institutional fairness to live kidney donors are delineated in this paper. The identified ways of safeguarding donation risks and compensating donation costs are not merely means to removing disincentives for donation and increasing donation rates. They are essential for preserving institutional fairness in the health care of the live kidney donor.

Insurability of living organ donors: a systematic review

Being an organ donor may affect one's ability to obtain life, disability and health insurance. We conducted a systematic review to determine if insurability is affected by living organ donation, and if concern about insurability affects donor decision making. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCI, EconLit and Cochrane databases for articles in any language, and reviewed reference lists from 1966 until June 2006. All studies discussing the insurability of living organ donors or its impact on donor decision making were included. Data were independently abstracted by two authors, and the methodological quality appraised. Twenty-three studies, from 1972 to 2006, provided data on 2067 living organ donors, 385 potential donors and 239 responses from insurance companies. Almost all companies would provide life and health insurance to living organ donors, usually with no higher premiums. However, concern about insurability was still expressed by 2%-14% of living organ donors in follow-up studies, and 3%-11% of donors actually encountered difficulties with their insurance. In one study, donors whose insurance premiums increased were less likely to reaffirm their decision to donate. Based on available evidence, some living organ donors had difficulties with insurance despite companies reporting otherwise. If better understood, this potential barrier to donation could be corrected through fair health and underwriting policies.

Payment for living organ donation should be legalised

Governments seem resistant to allowing live donors to benefit from their gift. But a legalised system could solve organ shortages and be both safer and fairer

The direct and indirect economic costs incurred by living kidney donors-a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Despite the many benefits of living donor kidney transplantation, economic consequences can result for donors. We reviewed studies which quantified the direct and indirect costs incurred by living kidney donors, in order to understand the strengths and limitations of existing literature.

METHODS

We identified relevant studies in MEDLINE, EMBASE and ECONOLIT bibliographic databases, in the Science Citation Index and study reference lists. Any study which reported at least one cost relevant to donors was included. The accuracy of abstracted data was verified by two reviewers and reported in year 2004 US dollars.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies from 12 countries described costs incurred by individuals who donated between the years 1964 and 2003. No study comprehensively quantified all relevant expenses-the sum of select costs considered in one US study averaged Dollars 837 per donor and ranged from Dollars 0 to 28,906. Travel and/or accommodation costs were incurred by 9-99% of donors, and were higher in countries with a larger land mass. Post-discharge analgesics were required by 4-24% of donors, but prescription costs were not reported. Between 14 and 30% of donors incurred costs for lost income, with an average loss of Dollars 3386 in one study from the UK and Dollars 682 in another study from the Netherlands. Costs for dependent care were incurred by 9-44% of donors, while costs for domestic help were incurred by 8% of donors.

CONCLUSIONS

Donors incur many types of costs attributable to kidney donation and the total costs are certainly higher than previously reported. To guide informed consent and fair reimbursement policies, further data on all relevant costs, preferably from a detailed prospective multi-centre cohort study, are required.

Rewarded gift for living renal donors

Although the waiting list for renal transplantation is growing from year to year, the participation of unrelated living donors in kidney transplantation remains controversial. Patients want to be transplanted as soon as possible, not years later. Nevertheless, cadaveric organ donation has not been able to meet the requirements for all patients in need. With a continuous shortage of organs, the use of living unrelated donors is likely to decrease patient suffering and waiting list mortality. The excellent short- and long-term results of living unrelated transplantation have stimulated physicians toward a wider use of this donor pool. Therefore, transplants from living donors, whether related or unrelated, may be proposed as a therapeutic option for end-stage renal disease patients. In this article we explain the necessity of compensating altruistic living donors as an incentive. It is concluded that living unrelated renal transplantation programs should be legalized and controlled by international and national transplant societies to prevent illegal trade and to provide better care for donors.