CONTEXT: Many transplant candidates have concerns about living donation. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a structured educational session increased eligible kidney transplant candidates' pursuit of living donation. DESIGN AND INTERVENTION: Eligible transplant candidates were randomized to standard of care (n = 50) or to the educational intervention (n = 50), which included both written materials and a 2-hour education session. The primary outcome was having a living donor contact the transplant program to express interest in donation for a patient, and a secondary outcome was the candidates' preference for treatment of end-stage renal disease; both outcomes were determined at 3 months after enrollment. RESULTS: Of the 100 patients randomized, 4 in the intervention group and 2 in the standard of care group had a living donor contact the program (P = .45). Within-group changes in treatment preference from baseline were seen in the education intervention group (P = .02), but not in the standard of care group (P = .37). CONCLUSIONS: This educational intervention did not increase the likelihood of a potential donor contacting the transplant program, compared with standard care. However, patients who received the educational intervention were more likely to change their treatment preference to living donation at study completion. Research investigating other methods of increasing living transplant rates is urgently required.
CONTEXT: Many transplant candidates have concerns about living donation. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a structured educational session increased eligible kidney transplant candidates' pursuit of living donation. DESIGN AND INTERVENTION: Eligible transplant candidates were randomized to standard of care (n = 50) or to the educational intervention (n = 50), which included both written materials and a 2-hour education session. The primary outcome was having a living donor contact the transplant program to express interest in donation for a patient, and a secondary outcome was the candidates' preference for treatment of end-stage renal disease; both outcomes were determined at 3 months after enrollment. RESULTS: Of the 100 patients randomized, 4 in the intervention group and 2 in the standard of care group had a living donor contact the program (P = .45). Within-group changes in treatment preference from baseline were seen in the education intervention group (P = .02), but not in the standard of care group (P = .37). CONCLUSIONS: This educational intervention did not increase the likelihood of a potential donor contacting the transplant program, compared with standard care. However, patients who received the educational intervention were more likely to change their treatment preference to living donation at study completion. Research investigating other methods of increasing living transplant rates is urgently required.
Authors: Lianne Barnieh; David Collister; Braden Manns; Ngan N Lam; Soroush Shojai; Diane Lorenzetti; John S Gill; Scott Klarenbach Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2017-08-17 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Nathan Alhalel; Nicolas O Francone; Alice M Salazar; Sharon Primeaux; Richard Ruiz; Juan Carlos Caicedo; Elisa J Gordon Journal: Clin Transplant Date: 2019-05-23 Impact factor: 2.863
Authors: Noel Engels; Gretchen N de Graav; Paul van der Nat; Marinus van den Dorpel; Anne M Stiggelbout; Willem Jan Bos Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-09-21 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Alvin H Li; Marcus Lo; Jacob E Crawshaw; Alexie J Dunnett; Kyla L Naylor; Amit X Garg; Justin Presseau Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2021-04-04
Authors: Janet Jull; Sascha Köpke; Maureen Smith; Meg Carley; Jeanette Finderup; Anne C Rahn; Laura Boland; Sandra Dunn; Andrew A Dwyer; Jürgen Kasper; Simone Maria Kienlin; France Légaré; Krystina B Lewis; Anne Lyddiatt; Claudia Rutherford; Junqiang Zhao; Tamara Rader; Ian D Graham; Dawn Stacey Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2021-11-08
Authors: Natasha Gupta; Megan L Salter; Jacqueline M Garonzik-Wang; Peter P Reese; Corey E Wickliffe; Nabil N Dagher; Niraj M Desai; Dorry L Segev Journal: Transplantation Date: 2014-11-15 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Heather F Hunt; James R Rodrigue; Mary Amanda Dew; Randolph L Schaffer; Macey L Henderson; Randee Bloom; Patrick Kacani; Pono Shim; Lee Bolton; William Sanchez; Krista L Lentine Journal: Curr Transplant Rep Date: 2018-02-05
Authors: Elizabeth A King; Jessica M Ruck; Jacqueline Garonzik-Wang; Mary G Bowring; Komal Kumar; Tanjala Purnell; Andrew Cameron; Dorry L Segev Journal: Transplant Direct Date: 2020-08-12