Decision Making Around Living and Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation: a Qualitative Study Exploring the Importance of Expected Relationship Changes

Overview

Journal BMC Nephrol

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Nephrology

Date 2012 Sep 11

PMID 22958636

Citations 12

Authors

Ingrid B de Groot

Karen Schipper

Sandra van Dijk

Paul J M van der Boog

Anne M Stiggelbout

Andrzej G Baranski

Perla J Marang-van de Mheen

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Limited data exist on the impact of living kidney donation on the donor-recipient relationship. Purpose of this study was to explore motivations to donate or accept a (living donor) kidney, whether expected relationship changes influence decision making and whether relationship changes are actually experienced.

Methods: We conducted 6 focus groups in 47 of 114 invited individuals (41%), asking retrospectively about motivations and decision making around transplantation. We used qualitative and quantitative methods to analyze the focus group transcripts.

Results: Most deceased donor kidney recipients had a potential living donor available which they refused or did not want. They mostly waited for a deceased donor because of concern for the donor's health (75%). They more often expected negative relationship changes than living donor kidney recipients (75% vs. 27%, p = 0.01) who also expected positive changes. Living donor kidney recipients mostly accepted the kidney to improve their own quality of life (47%). Donors mostly donated a kidney because transplantation would make the recipient less dependent (25%). After transplantation both positive and negative relationship changes are experienced.

Conclusion: Expected relationship changes and concerns about the donor's health lead some kidney patients to wait for a deceased donor, despite having a potential living donor available. Further research is needed to assess whether this concerns a selected group.

Citing Articles

Attitudes toward uterus transplantation. An option for motherhood?.

Rius M, Camacho M, Tomas N, Diaz-Feijoo B, Castelo-Branco C, Borras A Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2024; 104(3):494-501.

PMID: 38778575 PMC: 11871107. DOI: 10.1111/aogs.14849.

Understanding people's decisions when choosing or declining a kidney transplant: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

Jones E, Shakespeare K, Mclaughlin L, Noyes J BMJ Open. 2023; 13(8):e071348.

PMID: 37562929 PMC: 10423837. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-071348.

A distance-based living donor kidney education program for Black wait-list candidates: A feasibility randomized trial.

Sieverdes J, Mueller M, Nemeth L, Patel S, Baliga P, Treiber F Clin Transplant. 2021; 35(9):e14426.

PMID: 34269480 PMC: 9888645. DOI: 10.1111/ctr.14426.

May I have your uterus? The contribution of considering complexities preceding live uterus transplantation.

Guntram L Med Humanit. 2021; 47(4):425-437.

PMID: 33627444 PMC: 8639951. DOI: 10.1136/medhum-2020-011864.

An intersectional gender analysis in kidney transplantation: women who donate a kidney.

Rota-Musoll L, Brigidi S, Molina-Robles E, Oriol-Vila E, Perez-Oller L, Subirana-Casacuberta M BMC Nephrol. 2021; 22(1):59.

PMID: 33593306 PMC: 7885450. DOI: 10.1186/s12882-021-02262-9.

References

Binet I, Bock A, Vogelbach P, Gasser T, Kiss A, Brunner F . Outcome in emotionally related living kidney donor transplantation. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1997; 12(9):1940-8. DOI: 10.1093/ndt/12.9.1940. View

de Vries H, Mudde A, Leijs I, Charlton A, Vartiainen E, Buijs G . The European Smoking Prevention Framework Approach (EFSA): an example of integral prevention. Health Educ Res. 2003; 18(5):611-26. DOI: 10.1093/her/cyg031. View

Reimer J, Rensing A, Haasen C, Philipp T, Pietruck F, Franke G . The impact of living-related kidney transplantation on the donor's life. Transplantation. 2006; 81(9):1268-73. DOI: 10.1097/01.tp.0000210009.96816.db. View

Malterud K . Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet. 2001; 358(9280):483-8. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05627-6. View

Schostak M, Wloch H, Muller M, Schrader M, Christoph F, Offermann G . Living donor nephrectomy in an open technique; a long-term analysis of donor outcome. Transplant Proc. 2003; 35(6):2096-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0041-1345(03)00677-8. View

Martinez-Alarcon L, Rios A, Conesa C, Ramirez P . Postmortal or living related donor: preferences of kidney patients. Transpl Int. 2006; 19(7):598-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1432-2277.2006.00290.x. View

Clemens K, Thiessen-Philbrook H, Parikh C, Yang R, Karley M, Boudville N . Psychosocial health of living kidney donors: a systematic review. Am J Transplant. 2007; 6(12):2965-77. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2006.01567.x. View

Dahm F, Weber M, Muller B, Pradel F, Laube G, Neuhaus T . Open and laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy in Switzerland: a retrospective assessment of clinical outcomes and the motivation to donate. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2006; 21(9):2563-8. DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfl207. View

Ummel D, Achille M, Mekkelholt J . Donors and recipients of living kidney donation: a qualitative metasummary of their experiences. J Transplant. 2011; 2011:626501. PMC: 3134215. DOI: 10.1155/2011/626501. View

10.

Roodnat J, van Riemsdijk I, Mulder P, Doxiadis I, Claas F, IJzermans J . The superior results of living-donor renal transplantation are not completely caused by selection or short cold ischemia time: a single-center, multivariate analysis. Transplantation. 2003; 75(12):2014-8. DOI: 10.1097/01.TP.0000065176.06275.42. View

11.

Mays N, Pope C . Qualitative research in health care. Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ. 2000; 320(7226):50-2. PMC: 1117321. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50. View

12.

Lumsdaine J, Wray A, Power M, Jamieson N, Akyol M, Bradley J . Higher quality of life in living donor kidney transplantation: prospective cohort study. Transpl Int. 2005; 18(8):975-80. DOI: 10.1111/j.1432-2277.2005.00175.x. View

13.

Sajjad I, Baines L, Salifu M, Jindal R . The dynamics of recipient-donor relationships in living kidney transplantation. Am J Kidney Dis. 2007; 50(5):834-54. DOI: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2007.07.029. View

14.

Duque J, Loughlin K, Kumar S . Morbidity of flank incision for renal donors. Urology. 1999; 54(5):796-801. DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(99)00274-5. View

15.

Ku J . Health-related quality of life of living kidney donors: review of the short form 36-health questionnaire survey. Transpl Int. 2005; 18(12):1309-17. DOI: 10.1111/j.1432-2277.2005.00231.x. View

16.

Pradel F, Daniel Mullins C, Bartlett S . Exploring donors' and recipients' attitudes about living donor kidney transplantation. Prog Transplant. 2003; 13(3):203-10. DOI: 10.1177/152692480301300307. View

17.

Giessing M, Reuter S, Schonberger B, Deger S, Tuerk I, Hirte I . Quality of life of living kidney donors in Germany: a survey with the Validated Short Form-36 and Giessen Subjective Complaints List-24 questionnaires. Transplantation. 2004; 78(6):864-72. DOI: 10.1097/01.tp.0000133307.00604.86. View

18.

Minz M, Udgiri N, Sharma A, Heer M, Kashyap R, Nehra R . Prospective psychosocial evaluation of related kidney donors: Indian perspective. Transplant Proc. 2005; 37(5):2001-3. DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2005.03.110. View

19.

Van Hardeveld E, Tong A . The CARI guidelines. Psychosocial care of living kidney donors. Nephrology (Carlton). 2010; 15 Suppl 1:S80-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1797.2009.01213.x. View

20.

Neuhaus T, Wartmann M, Weber M, Landolt M, Laube G, Kemper M . Psychosocial impact of living-related kidney transplantation on donors and partners. Pediatr Nephrol. 2005; 20(2):205-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00467-004-1749-9. View