Advertisement

Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Living Kidney Donation: A Single Center Experience

  • James R. Rodrigue
  • Tanya Vishnevsky
  • Aaron Fleishman
  • Tracy Brann
  • Amy R. Evenson
  • Martha Pavlakis
  • Didier A. Mandelbrot
Article

Abstract

This article describes the development and implementation of an initiative at one transplant center to annually assess psychosocial outcomes of living kidney donors. The current analysis focuses on a cohort of adults (n = 208) who donated a kidney at BIDMC between September 2005 and August 2012, in which two post-donation annual assessments could be examined. One and two year post-donation surveys were returned by 59 % (n = 123) and 47 % (n = 98) of LKDs, respectively. Those who did not complete any survey were more likely to be younger (p = 0.001), minority race/ethnicity (p < 0.001), and uninsured at the time of donation (p = 0.01) compared to those who returned at least one of the two annual surveys. The majority of donors reported no adverse physical or psychosocial consequences of donation, high satisfaction with the donation experience, and no donation decision regret. However, a sizable minority of donors felt more pain intensity than expected and recovery time was much slower than expected, and experienced a clinically significant decline in vitality. We describe how these outcomes are used to inform clinical practice at our transplant center as well as highlight challenges in donor surveillance over time.

Keywords

Living donation Kidney donation Psychosocial Outcomes 

Abbreviations

BIDMC

Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center

BMI

Body mass index

LKD

Living kidney donor

NLDAC

National Living Donor Assistance Center

OPTN

Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network

QAPI

Quality Assessment and Performance Improvement

RCI

Reliable Change Index

UNOS

United Network for Organ Sharing

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the following individuals for their assistance in the implementation of this initiative: Jonathan Berkman, Jodi-Ann Dattadeen, Lauren Finnigan, Betsy Gray-Chrzan, Douglas Hanto, Alexa Hiley, Linda Lentz, Maeve Moore, Matthew Paek, Denny Tsai, and Linda Walsh. Preparation of this article was supported by Award Number R01DK085185 (Rodrigue, Mandelbrot, Pavlakis) from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases or the National Institutes of Health.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center whose Institutional Review Board approved the protocol for data collection and use as “Exempt,” and so ruled that informed consent was not required. Additionally, all procedures followed were in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000.

References

  1. Bauer, S., Lambert, M. J., & Nielsen, S. L. (2004). Clinical significance methods: A comparison of statistical techniques. Journal of Personality Assessment, 82, 60–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Clarke, K. S., Klarenbach, S., Vlaicu, S., Yang, R. C., Garg, A. X., & Donor Nephrectomy Outcomes Research (DONOR) Network. (2006). The direct and indirect economic costs incurred by living kidney donors: A systematic review. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, 21, 1952–1960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clemens, K.K., Thiessen-Philbrook, H., Parikh, C.R., Yang, R.C., Karley, M.L., Boudville, N., … Donor Nephrectomy Outcomes Research (DONOR) Network.(2006). Psychosocial health of living kidney donors: A systematic review. American Journal of Transplantation, 6, 2965–2977.Google Scholar
  4. Davis, C. L. (2012). Living kidney donor follow-up: State-of-the-art and future directions. Advances in Chronic Kidney Disease, 19, 207–211.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Dew, M. A., & Jacobs, C. L. (2012). Psychosocial and socioeconomic issues facing the living kidney donor. Advances in Chronic Kidney Disease, 19, 237–243.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Dew, M. A., Jacobs, C. L., Jowsey, S. G., Hanto, R., Miller, C., & Delmonico, F. L. (2007). Guidelines for the psychosocial evaluation of living unrelated kidney donors in the United States. American Journal of Transplantation, 7, 1047–1054.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Gross, C. R., Messersmith, E. E., Hong, B. A., Jowsey, S. G., Jacobs, C., Gillespie, B. W., & RELIVE Study Group. (2013). Health-related quality of life in kidney donors from the last five decades: Results from the RELIVE study. American Journal of Transplantation, 13, 2924–2934.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Hebden, L., Balestracci, K., McGeechan, K., Denney-Wilson, E., Harris, M., Bauman, A., & Allman-Farinelli, M. (2013). ‘TXT2BFiT’ a mobile phone-based healthy lifestyle program for preventing unhealthy weight gain in young adults: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials, 14, 75–83.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Jacobson, N. S., & Truax, P. (1991). Clinical significance: A statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 12–19.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Jowsey, S.G., Jacobs, C., Gross, C.R., Hong, B.A., Messersmith, E.E., Gillespie, B.W., … the RELIVE Study Group. (2014). Emotional well-being of living kidney donors: Findings from the RELIVE Study. American Journal of Transplantation, 14, 2535–2544.Google Scholar
  11. Klarenbach, S., Gill, J. S., Knoll, G., Caulfield, T., Boudville, N., Prasad, G. V., … Donor Nephrectomy Outcomes Research (DONOR) Network. (2014). Economic consequences incurred by living kidney donors: A Canadian multi-center prospective study. American Journal of Transplantation, 14, 916–922.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Leichtman, A., Abecassis, M., Barr, M., Charlton, M., Cohen, D., … Matas, A.J. (2011). Living kidney donor follow-up: state-of-the-art and future directions, conference summary and recommendations. American Journal of Transplantation, 11, 2561–2568.Google Scholar
  13. Mandelbrot, D. A., Pavlakis, M., Danovitch, G. M., Johnson, S. R., Karp, S. J., Khwaja, K., … Rodrigue, J. R. (2007). The medical evaluation of living kidney donors: A survey of US transplant centers. American Journal of Transplantation, 7, 2333–2343.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Mandelbrot, D. A., Pavlakis, M., Karp, S. J., Johnson, S. R., Hanto, D. W., & Rodrigue, J. R. (2009). Practices and barriers in long-term living kidney donor follow-up: A survey of U.S. transplant centers. Transplantation, 88, 855–860.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Messersmith, E. E., Gross, C. R., Beil, C. A., Gillespie, B. W., Jacobs, C., Taler, S. J., … the RELIVE Study Group. (2014). Satisfaction with life among living kidney donors: A RELIVE study of long-term donor outcomes. Transplantation, 98, 1294–1300.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Mjøen, G., Hallan, S., Hartmann, A., et al. (2014). Long-term risks for kidney donors. Kidney International, 86, 162–167.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Muzaale, A. D., Massie, A. B., Wang, M. C., et al. (2014). Risk of end-stage renal disease following live kidney donation. Journal of the American Medical Association, 311, 579–586.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Ommen, E. S., LaPointe Rudow, D., Medapalli, R. K., Schröppel, B., & Murphy, B. (2011). When good intentions are not enough: Obtaining follow-up data in living kidney donors. American Journal of Transplantation, 11, 2575–2581.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN). (2013). Policy 12.0: Living donation. http://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/converge/policiesandbylaws2/policies/pdfs/policy_172.pdf. Accessed January 17, 2015.
  20. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) and Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR). (2014). OPTN/SRTR 2012 Annual Data Report. Rockville, MD: Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Healthcare Systems Bureau, Division of Transplantation.Google Scholar
  21. Papachristou, C., Walter, M., Schmid, G., Frommer, J., & Klapp, B. F. (2009). Living donor liver transplantation and its effect on the donor-recipient relationship: A qualitative interview study with donors. Clinical Transplantation, 23, 382–391.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Parekh, A. M., Gordon, E. J., Garg, A. X., Waterman, A. D., Kulkarni, S., & Parikh, C. R. (2008). Living kidney donor informed consent practices vary between US and non-US centers. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, 23, 3316–3324.PubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rodrigue, J. R., Pavlakis, M., Danovitch, G. M., Johnson, S. R., Karp, S. J., Khwaja, K., … Mandelbrot, D. A. (2007). Evaluating living kidney donors: Relationship types, psychosocial criteria, and consent processes at US transplant programs. American Journal of Transplantation, 7, 2326–2332.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Schold, J.D., Buccini, L.D., Rodrigue, J.R., Mandelbrot, D., Goldfarb, D.A., Flechner, S.M., Kayler, L.K., & Poggio, E.D. (2015). Critical factors associated with missing follow-up data for living kidney donors in the United States. Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology. doi: 10.1111/ajt.13282.
  25. Schroder, N. M., McDonald, L. A., Etringer, G., & Snyders, M. (2008). Consideration of psychosocial factors in the evaluation of living donors. Progress in Transplantation, 18, 41–48.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Thiessen, C., Kim, Y. A., Formica, R., Bia, M., & Kulkarni, S. (2013). Written informed consent for living kidney donors: Practices and compliance with CMS and OPTN requirements. American Journal of Transplantation, 13, 2713–2721.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Waits, S. A., Hilliard, P., Sheetz, K. H., Sung, R. S., & Englesbe, M. J. (2015). Building the case for enhanced recovery protocols in living kidney donors. Transplantation, 99, 405–408.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Ware, J. E., Kosinski, M., & Dewey, J. E. (2000). How to score version two of the SF-36 Health Survey. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Inc.Google Scholar
  29. Waterman, A. D., Dew, M. A., Davis, C. L., McCabe, M., Wainright, J. L., Forland, C. L., … Cooper, M. (2013). Living-donor follow-up attitudes and practices in U.S. kidney and liver donor programs. Transplantation, 95, 883–888.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Weng, F. L., Reese, P. P., Waterman, A. D., Soto, A. G., Demissie, K., & Mulgaonkar, S. (2012). Health care follow-up by live kidney donors more than three yr post-nephrectomy. Clinical Transplantation, 26, E300–E306.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • James R. Rodrigue
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tanya Vishnevsky
    • 1
  • Aaron Fleishman
    • 1
  • Tracy Brann
    • 1
  • Amy R. Evenson
    • 1
    • 2
  • Martha Pavlakis
    • 1
    • 2
  • Didier A. Mandelbrot
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Center for Transplant Outcomes and Quality Improvement, Transplant InstituteBeth Israel Deaconess Medical CenterBostonUSA
  2. 2.Harvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations