Emma K. Massey

Encouraging Psychological Outcomes After Altruistic Donation to a Stranger

In a growing number of transplant centers worldwide, altruistic donors are accepted to anonymously donate a kidney to a stranger. An important hesitation to expand these transplantation programs is the fear of evoking psychological distress in the altruistic donor after donation. To what extent this fear is justified has not yet been systematically investigated. In this study, 24 altruistic donors were interviewed on average 2 years after donation. Lifetime mental health history, current psychological complaints, satisfaction with and impact of the donation on well‐being, motives for donation, communication with recipient and donation experience were assessed. Altruistic donors report a considerable positive impact of donation on psychological well‐being, whereas negative impact was limited. Satisfaction with donation was very high. Although a history of a psychiatric diagnosis was ascertained in almost half of the donors, psychological complaints before and after donation were comparable to national average norm scores. Motives for donation were genuine and the experience of donation generally conformed to their expectations. In conclusion, living kidney donation to a stranger does not appear to exacerbate psychological complaints. Moreover, altruistic donors report considerable satisfaction and personal benefit. The exceptional gift of altruistic donors can contribute toward solving the current organ shortage issue.

New Classification of ELPAT for Living Organ Donation

In the literature, varying terminology for living organ donation can be found. However, there seems to be a need for a new classification to avoid confusion. Therefore, we assessed existing terminology in the light of current living organ donation practices and suggest a more straightforward classification. We propose to concentrate on the degree of specificity with which donors identify intended recipients and to subsequently verify whether the donation to these recipients occurs directly or indirectly. According to this approach, one could distinguish between “specified” and “unspecified” donation. Within specified donation, a distinction can be made between “direct” and “indirect” donation.

Attitudes to medication after kidney transplantation and their association with medication adherence and graft survival: a 2-year follow-up study

Background. Nonadherence to medication is a common problem after kidney transplantation. The aim of this study was to explore attitudes towards medication, adherence, and the relationship with clinical outcomes. Method. Kidney recipients participated in a Q-methodological study 6 weeks after transplantation. As a measure of medication adherence, respondents completed the Basel Assessment of Adherence to Immunosuppressive Medications Scale (BAASIS©-interview). Moreover, the intrapatient variability in the pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus was calculated, which measures stability of drug intake. Data on graft survival was retrieved from patient records up to 2 years after transplantation. Results. 113 renal transplant recipients (19–75 years old) participated in the study. Results revealed three attitudes towards medication adherence—attitude 1: “confident and accurate,” attitude 2: “concerned and vigilant,” and attitude 3: “appearance oriented and assertive.” We found association of attitudes with intrapatient variability in pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus, but not with self-reported nonadherence or graft survival. However, self-reported nonadherence immediately after transplantation was associated with lower two-year graft survival. Conclusion. These preliminary findings suggest that nonadherence shortly after kidney transplantation may be a risk factor for lower graft survival in the years to follow. The attitudes to medication were not a risk factor.

Discrepancies between beliefs and behavior: A prospective study into immunosuppressive medication adherence after kidney transplantation

Background Nonadherence to immunosuppressive medication after kidney transplantation is a behavioral issue and as such it is important to understand the psychological factors that influence this behavior. The aim of this study was to investigate the extent to which goal cognitions, illness perceptions, and treatment beliefs were related to changes in self-reported immunosuppressive medication adherence up to 18 months after transplantation. Methods Interviews were conducted with patients in the outpatient clinic 6 weeks (T1; n = 113), 6 months (T2; n = 106), and 18 months (T3; n = 84) after transplantation. Self-reported adherence was measured using the Basel Assessment of Adherence to Immunosuppressive Medications Scale Interview. Psychological concepts were measured using the Brief Illness Perceptions Questionnaire, Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire, and questions on the importance of adherence as a personal goal, conflict with other goals, and self-efficacy for goal attainment. Results Nonadherence significantly increased over time to 31% at T3. Perceived necessity of medication, perceived impact of transplant on life (consequences) and emotional response to transplantation significantly decreased over time. Participants who reported low importance of medication adherence as a personal goal were more likely to become nonadherent over time. Conclusions Illness perceptions can be described as functional and supportive of adherence which is inconsistent with the pervasive and increasing nonadherence observed. There appears therefore to be a discrepancy between beliefs about adherence and actual behavior. Promoting (intrinsic) motivation for adherence goals and exploring the relative importance in comparison to other personal goals is a potential target for interventions.

Psychologic functioning of unspecified anonymous living kidney donors before and after donation.

Background There has been discussion regarding the psychologic functioning of living donors who donate their kidney to an unrelated and unknown patient (“unspecified living donors”). This is the first prospective study to investigate group- and individual-level changes in psychologic functioning among a large group of unspecified donors. Methods Forty-nine medically and psychologically screened unspecified living kidney donors completed the Symptom Checklist before and after donation. Results Group-level analysis showed that overall psychologic symptoms increased after donation (P=0.007); the means remained within the average range of the normal population. Individual-level analysis showed that 33 donors showed no statistically significant change, 3 donors showed a statistically significant decrease, and 13 donors showed a statistically significant increase in psychologic symptoms. Two of the latter donors showed a clinically significant increase. Conclusions We found more increases in psychologic symptoms than decreases, particularly if follow-up time was longer. However, for almost all donors, these increases were not clinically significant and the clinically significant changes found are comparable with natural fluctuations in psychologic symptoms in the general population. Possibly, the donors underreported their psychologic symptoms before donation to pass the screening. Due to the low level of predonation symptoms reported, regression to the mean could also explain the results. Although we found that changes were not associated with donation-related factors, it is possible that other donation-related factors or other life events not measured have an influence on psychologic functioning. Therefore, further research is needed to investigate whether the fluctuations are related to the donation process.

Accumulation of unfavorable clinical and socioeconomic factors precludes living donor kidney transplantation

Background. In the past 30 years, the number of living donor kidney transplantations has increased considerably and nowadays outnumbers the deceased donor transplantations in our center. We investigated which socioeconomic and clinical factors influence who undergoes living or deceased donor kidney transplantation. Methods. This retrospective study included all 1338 patients who received a kidney transplant between 2000 and 2011 in the Erasmus MC Rotterdam. Clinical and socioeconomic variables were combined in our study. Clinical variables were recipient age, gender, ethnicity, original disease, retransplants, ABO blood type, panel-reactive antibody, previous treatment, and transplantation year. Each recipients postcode was linked to a postcode area information data base, to extract demographic information on urbanization level, percentage non-Europeans in the area, income, and housing value. Chi-square, analysis of variance, and univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. Results. There were significant differences between the recipients of a living versus deceased donor kidney transplantation. In multivariate logistic regression analyses, 10 variables had a significant influence on the chance of receiving living donor kidney transplantation. Clinical and socioeconomic factors had an independent influence on this chance. Patients with ABO blood type O and B have smaller chances. Highly sensitized and elderly patients have smaller chances especially when combined with a collection of other unfavorable factors. Accumulation of unfavorable factors in non-Europeans prevents their participation in living donation programs. Conclusion. Both clinical and socioeconomic factors are associated with participation in living or deceased donor kidney transplantation. This study highlights the populations that would benefit from educational intervention regarding living donor transplantation.

Modifiable Factors in Access to Living-Donor Kidney Transplantation Among Diverse Populations

Background We have observed a significant inequality in the number of living-donor kidney transplants (LDKT) performed between patients of non-Western European origin and those of Western European origin. The aim of this study was to investigate modifiable factors that could be used as potential targets for an intervention in an attempt to reduce this inequality. Methods A questionnaire on knowledge, risk perception, communication, subjective norm, and willingness to accept LDKT was completed by 160 end-stage renal patients who were referred to the pretransplantation outpatient clinic (participation rate of 92%). The questionnaire was available in nine languages. Multivariate analyses of variance were conducted to explore differences between patients with and without a living donor. Results There were significantly fewer patients of non-Western descent (11 of 82) that brought a living donor to the outpatient clinic than patients of Western descent (38 of 78). After correcting for the unmodifiable sociodemographic factors non-Western descent, low knowledge, little communication about their kidney disease, and low willingness to communicate with individuals from the social network about LDKT were significantly associated with the absence of a living donor. Conclusions Knowledge and communication are identified as modifiable factors that are associated with the likelihood of identifying a potential living donor for LDKT. This observation makes knowledge and communication targets for interventions to reduce inequality in access to LDKT.

Living donor kidney transplantation among ethnic minorities in the Netherlands: A model for breaking the hurdles

OBJECTIVEnDespite living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) being the optimal treatment option for patients with end-stage renal disease, we observed a significant inequality in the number of LDKT performed between patients of Dutch versus non-Dutch descent. We conducted a focus group study to explore modifiable hurdles to LDKT.nnnMETHODSnFocus group discussions and in-depth interviews were conducted among 50 end-stage renal patients. Analyses were conducted according to grounded theory using Atlas.ti.nnnRESULTSnWe found nearly all patients to be in favor of LDKT (96%). However, multiple factors played a role in considering LDKT. Four potentially modifiable hurdles were derived: (1) inadequate patient education, (2) impeding cognitions and emotions, (3) restrictive social influences, and (4) suboptimal communication. With regard to solutions, we found that our patients were open to home-based group education on renal replacement therapy options (88% in favor).nnnCONCLUSIONnThe study highlights the need for sensitivity and awareness of the influence of cultural factors on decision-making when discussing living donation with culturally diverse populations.nnnPRACTICE IMPLICATIONSnSince the majority of our patients were open to a tailored group education in their own homes, we see this as an opportunity to address factors that influence equality in access to LDKT.

Anonymity and Live-Donor Transplantation: An ELPAT View

Anonymity of donors or recipients in living-donor transplantation is a complex issue and practice varies widely. There are compelling arguments for maintaining anonymity of both parties before unspecified donor transplantation and specified indirect transplantation. After transplantation, there are still good reasons to avoid disclosure of identities. Although anonymity could be lifted if both parties explicitly request it, there are significant, potentially negative consequences of such an approach. Both donor and recipient should be counseled regarding these, and transplant teams should consider the considerable financial and psychosocial costs if problems are encountered as a result of contact. Given the recent rise in the number of unspecified living-donor transplants and through paired exchange schemes, it is vital that data are collected regarding the effects of maintaining or revoking anonymity after transplantation.

Multisystemic engagement & nephrology based educational intervention: a randomized controlled trial protocol on the kidney team at home-study

BackgroundLiving donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the most successful form of renal replacement therapy in terms of wait time and survival rates. However, we observed a significant inequality in the number of LDKT performed between the Dutch and the non-Dutch patients. The objective of this study is to adapt, implement and test an educational home-based intervention to contribute to the reduction of this inequality. Our aim is to establish this through guided communication together with the social network of the patients in an attempt that well-informed decisions regarding renal replacement therapy can be made: Multisystemic Engagement & Nephrology. This manuscript is a detailed description of the Kidney Team At Home-study protocol.Methods and designAll patients (>18 yrs) that are referred to the pre-transplantation outpatient clinic are eligible to participate in the study. Patients will be randomly assigned to either an experimental or a control group. The control group will continue to receive standard care. The experimental group will receive standard care plus a home-based educational intervention. The intervention consists of two sessions at the patient’s home, an initial session with the patient and a second session for which individuals from their social network are invited to take part. Based on the literature and behavioural change theories we hypothesize that reducing hurdles in knowledge, risk perception, subjective norm, self-efficacy, and communication contribute to well-informed decision making and reducing inequality in accessing LDKT programs. A change in these factors is consequently our primary outcome-measure. Based on power calculations, we aim to include 160 patients over a period of two years.DiscussionIf we are able to show that this home-based group educational intervention contributes to 1) achieving well-informed decision regarding treatment and 2) reducing the inequality in LDKT, the quality of life of patients will be improved while healthcare costs are reduced. As the intervention is investigated in a random heterogeneous patient group in daily practice, the transfer to clinical practice in other kidney transplant centers should be relatively easy.Trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register, NTR2730.