Literature DB >> 17845566

Evaluating living kidney donors: relationship types, psychosocial criteria, and consent processes at US transplant programs.

J R Rodrigue1, M Pavlakis, G M Danovitch, S R Johnson, S J Karp, K Khwaja, D W Hanto, D A Mandelbrot.   

Abstract

We conducted a survey of 132 US kidney transplant programs to examine how they evaluate and select potential living kidney donors, focusing on donor-recipient relationships, psychosocial criteria, and consent processes. There is heterogeneity in donor-recipient relationships that are considered acceptable, although most programs (70%) will not consider publicly solicited donors. Most programs (75%) require a psychosocial evaluation for all potential living donors. Most programs agree that knowledge of financial reward (90%), active substance abuse (86%), and active mental health problems (76%) are absolute contraindications to donation. However, there is greater variability in how other psychosocial issues are considered in the selection process. Consent processes are highly variable across programs: donor and recipient consent for the donor evaluation is presumed in 57% and 76% of programs, respectively. The use of 13 different informed consent elements varied from 65% (alternative donation procedures) to 86% (description of evaluation, surgery and recuperative period) of programs. Forty-three percent use a 'cooling off' period. Findings demonstrate high variability in current practice regarding acceptable donor-recipient relationships, psychosocial criteria, and consent processes. Whether greater consensus should be reached on these donor evaluation practices, especially in the context of more expansive use of living donor kidney transplantation, is discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17845566     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2007.01921.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Transplant        ISSN: 1600-6135            Impact factor:   8.086


  29 in total

1.  International survey of nephrologists' perceptions and attitudes about rewards and compensations for kidney donation.

Authors:  Nasrollah Ghahramani; Zahra Karparvar; Mehrdad Ghahramani; Shahrouz Shadrou
Journal:  Nephrol Dial Transplant       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 5.992

2.  Living donor evaluation and exclusion: the Stanford experience.

Authors:  Jessica B Lapasia; Soo-yee Kong; Stephan Busque; John D Scandling; Glenn M Chertow; Jane C Tan
Journal:  Clin Transplant       Date:  2010-11-02       Impact factor: 2.863

3.  The enigmatic nature of altruism in organ transplantation: a cross-cultural study of transplant physicians' views on altruism.

Authors:  Marie-Chantal Fortin; Marianne Dion-Labrie; Marie-Josée Hébert; Hubert Doucet
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2010-07-30

Review 4.  Psychosocial and socioeconomic issues facing the living kidney donor.

Authors:  Mary Amanda Dew; Cheryl L Jacobs
Journal:  Adv Chronic Kidney Dis       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 3.620

Review 5.  Living donor practices in the United States.

Authors:  Didier A Mandelbrot; Martha Pavlakis
Journal:  Adv Chronic Kidney Dis       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 3.620

Review 6.  Understanding and Communicating Medical Risks for Living Kidney Donors: A Matter of Perspective.

Authors:  Krista L Lentine; Dorry L Segev
Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2016-09-02       Impact factor: 10.121

7.  The Mount Sinai Patient-Centered Preoperative Criteria Meant to Optimize Outcomes Are Less of a Barrier to Care Than WPATH SOC 7 Criteria Before Transgender-Specific Surgery.

Authors:  Max Lichtenstein; Laura Stein; Erin Connolly; Zil G Goldstein; Tyler Martinson; Linda Tiersten; Sangyoon J Shin; John Henry Pang; Joshua D Safer
Journal:  Transgend Health       Date:  2020-09-02

8.  The use of personalized medicine for patient selection for renal transplantation: physicians' views on the clinical and ethical implications.

Authors:  Marianne Dion-Labrie; Marie-Chantal Fortin; Marie-Josée Hébert; Hubert Doucet
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2010-04-09       Impact factor: 2.652

9.  Evaluating potential live-renal donors: Causes for rejection, deferral and planned procedure type, a single-centre experience.

Authors:  Nathan Perlis; Maureen Connelly; John R D'A Honey; Kenneth T Pace; Robert Stewart
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2013 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.862

10.  Identifying potential kidney donors using social networking web sites.

Authors:  Alexander Chang; Emily E Anderson; Hang T Turner; David Shoham; Susan H Hou; Morgan Grams
Journal:  Clin Transplant       Date:  2013-04-22       Impact factor: 2.863

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.