Health-related quality of life in living liver donors after transplantation

Quality of Life After Living Donor Hepatectomy for Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) involves healthy individuals undergoing voluntary major hepatic resection. LDLT program only started in 2012 in Pakistan and its impact on donor's quality of life (QOL) post resection is not known. The objective of this study was to determine health-related QOL in donors who underwent hepatectomy in country's first liver transplant program.

METHODS

A total of 60 donors who underwent hepatectomy between 2012 and 2014 with a minimum follow-up of 6 months were included in the study. Short form (SF-36) and Profile of mood states (POMS-65) was used to assess QOL. In addition scores were compared between patients who did and did not develop complications.

RESULT

Mean time duration between hepatectomy and administration of questionnaire was 15 ± 5.1 months. Median age was 28 (19-45) years. Mean BMI was 24.4 ± 3.7. A total of 7 (11.6%) Grade 3 and above complications were observed in donors. Donors exceeded a score of 90 in 6 out of 8 evaluated categories on SF-36. The highest mean score was recorded for emotional role limitation 95.5 ± 17.1 and lowest for energy 84.8 ± 17.5. The mean score for anger was 6.6 ± 7.5. Donors also did well on the POMS vigor score with a mean of 22.7 ± 5. No significant difference in scores was observed between donors with and without complications for any of the categories except tension. Donors who developed complications post-operatively had a significantly low mean tension score of 1.5 versus 3.8 for donors without complications.

CONCLUSION

Acceptable post donation QOL was achieved and surgical complications did not adversely affect SF-36 and POMS scores.

Self-management and self-efficacy status in liver recipients

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation (LT) is a viable treatment for patients with end-stage chronic liver diseases. The main aim of LT is to prolong life and improve life quality. However, although survival after LT continues to improve, some aspects of recipient's health-related quality of life such as self-management and self-efficacy have been largely ignored.

METHODS

A total of 124 LT recipients were included in this study. Questionnaires for general health status information and a "Self-Management Questionnaire for Liver Transplantation Recipients" modified from the Chinese version of "Chronic Disease Self-Management Program Questionnaire Code Book" were used in the survey. Data were collected by self-administered questionnaires.

RESULTS

The overall status of self-management in LT recipients was not optimistic. The major variables affecting the self-management of LT recipients were marital status, educational level and employment. The overall status of self-efficacy in LT recipients was around the medium-level. Postoperative time and self-assessment of overall health status were found as the factors impacting on self-efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

The self-management behavior of LT recipients needs to be improved. The health care professionals need to offer targeted health education to individual patients, help them to establish healthy lifestyle, enhance physical activity and improve self-efficacy. The development of the multilevel and multifaceted social support system will greatly facilitate the self-management in LT patients.

Psychosocial impact of pediatric living-donor kidney and liver transplantation on recipients, donors, and the family: a systematic review

Living-donor kidney and liver transplantation intend to improve pediatric recipients' psychosocial well-being, but psychosocial impact in recipients strongly depends upon the impact on the donor and the quality of family relations. We systematically reviewed quantitative and qualitative studies addressing the psychosocial impact of pediatric living-donor kidney and liver transplantation in recipients, donors, and the family. In accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, we systematically searched the databases Medline, Web of Knowledge, Cinahl, Embase, ERIC, and Google Scholar. We identified 23 studies that satisfied our inclusion criteria. Recipients had improved coping skills and satisfactory peer relationships, but also reported anxiety and depressive symptoms, worried about the future, and had a negative body image. Similarly, donors experienced increased self-esteem, empowerment, and community awareness, but also complained of postoperative pain and a lack of emotional support. With respect to family impact, transplantation generated a special bond between the donor and the recipient, characterized by gratitude and admiration, but also raised new expectations concerning the recipient's lifestyle. As psychological problems in recipients were sometimes induced by feelings of guilt and indebtedness toward the donor, we recommend more research on how gift exchange dynamics function within donor-recipient relationships, enrolling donors and recipients within the same study.

Donor quality of life up to two years after living donor liver transplantation: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of longer-term prospective data on living liver donors' quality of life (QOL). This is the first prospective study examining QOL up to 2 years after donation.

METHODS

A consecutive sample of living donors (n=40) was compared with a sample of potential donors (n=27) with respect to QOL, anxiety, and depression. Performing mixed-effects model analysis, both groups were assessed before transplantation, with and without simultaneous donation (T0), and at three postoperative data points: 3 months (T1), 1 year (T2), and 2 years (T3). Subsequently, both groups were compared with reference data of the general population and healthy individuals.

RESULTS

At T1, living donors' physical QOL was impaired. At T2 and T3, physical QOL was slightly lower than the preoperative level but within the range of healthy individuals in both living donors and potential donors. Neither mental QOL nor depression showed significant changes across time, while anxiety decreased in both groups. Subgroup analysis of adult-to-adult (AA) donors and adult-to-pediatric (AP) donors revealed different trajectories of mental QOL, anxiety, and depression. AP donors experienced more preoperative psychological strain, which improved after donation, whereas AA donors showed unchanged anxiety and depression, and a slight decrease in mental QOL 2 years after surgery. Two AA donors, whose recipients had died, reported persisting depressive symptoms after donation.

CONCLUSIONS

One and two years after donation, QOL is not substantially impaired in the majority of donors. Future research needs to provide an even longer prospective follow-up and should more rigorously explore risk factors for a negative donor outcome.

Health-related quality of life after liver transplantation: the experience from a single Chinese center

BACKGROUND

Few studies have been performed to assess health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in liver transplantation (LT) patients in the mainland of China. This study aimed to investigate the HRQOL of post-LT patients in a single center.

METHODS

HRQOL was evaluated by the SF-36 (Chinese version) questionnaire in 60 patients (LT group) who had received LT for benign end-stage liver disease (BELD). Fifty-five patients with BELD (BELD group) and 50 healthy volunteers from the general population (GP group) were also evaluated, and the results were compared among the three groups.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference among the three groups in terms of the scores of eight domains in the SF-36 (P<0.01). Patients in the BELD group had lower scores in each domain of the SF-36 in comparison with those in the GP group (P<0.025). The LT group had mental health scores equivalent to those of the BELD group (P>0.025), but higher scores for the remaining seven domains (P<0.025). Compared with the GP group, the LT group scored equivalently for role physical, body pain, vitality, social function and role emotion (P>0.025), but had lower scores for the remaining three domains (P<0.025). Lower family income was found to be associated with reduced physical function and mental health scores (P<0.05). Better education was associated with increased mental health scores (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

LT patients generally have a good HRQOL although some respects of their HRQOL remains to be improved. Lower family income and poor education are important factors relating to the poor HRQOL of LT patients.