The non-directed living kidney donor: Why donate to strangers?


Journal

Journal of renal care
ISSN: 1755-6686
Titre abrégé: J Ren Care
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101392167

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jun 2019
Historique:
pubmed: 15 3 2019
medline: 1 10 2019
entrez: 15 3 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Kidney transplantation improves survival and quality of life for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). However, there is a shortage of donated organs, resulting in long wait times and the potential for death before a donor is found. Non-directed (also called altruistic) living kidney donation is a growing type of donation; however, few studies have examined the values and motivation of individuals evaluated to be a non-directed donor. This qualitative study explores the motivations and values of individuals evaluated for non-directed donation. Focus groups were conducted with individuals who had been evaluated for non-directed living kidney donation. Grounded theory method guided the data analysis. Participants (N = 11) were individuals who completed the evaluation for a non-directed living kidney donation. Qualitative analyses revealed eight major themes participants considered in making their decision to donate to a non-related person: (i) motivation to donate; (ii) minimise perceived risk; (iii) ideal selected recipient; (iv) change in lifestyle; (v) source of donation knowledge; (vi) history of altruistic acts; (vii) donation chain and (viii) others' response. Results suggest that non-directed living kidney donors think deeply about their decision and have a resolve to help others that is aligned with their values. As organ availability remains at a critical shortage, unwillingness to consider non-directed living donors (NDD) due to beliefs of ill motivations appears unsupported. Future directions call for the need of standard practice of care in kidney donation evaluations across transplant centers.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Kidney transplantation improves survival and quality of life for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). However, there is a shortage of donated organs, resulting in long wait times and the potential for death before a donor is found. Non-directed (also called altruistic) living kidney donation is a growing type of donation; however, few studies have examined the values and motivation of individuals evaluated to be a non-directed donor.
OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVE
This qualitative study explores the motivations and values of individuals evaluated for non-directed donation.
DESIGN METHODS
Focus groups were conducted with individuals who had been evaluated for non-directed living kidney donation. Grounded theory method guided the data analysis.
PARTICIPANTS METHODS
Participants (N = 11) were individuals who completed the evaluation for a non-directed living kidney donation.
FINDINGS RESULTS
Qualitative analyses revealed eight major themes participants considered in making their decision to donate to a non-related person: (i) motivation to donate; (ii) minimise perceived risk; (iii) ideal selected recipient; (iv) change in lifestyle; (v) source of donation knowledge; (vi) history of altruistic acts; (vii) donation chain and (viii) others' response.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Results suggest that non-directed living kidney donors think deeply about their decision and have a resolve to help others that is aligned with their values. As organ availability remains at a critical shortage, unwillingness to consider non-directed living donors (NDD) due to beliefs of ill motivations appears unsupported. Future directions call for the need of standard practice of care in kidney donation evaluations across transplant centers.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30868762
doi: 10.1111/jorc.12267
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

102-110

Informations de copyright

© 2019 European Dialysis and Transplant Nurses Association/European Renal Care Association.

Auteurs

Wendy Balliet (W)

Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.

Abby S Kazley (AS)

Department of Health Care Leadership and Management, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.

Emily Johnson (E)

Department of Health Care Leadership and Management, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.

Lauren Holland-Carter (L)

Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.

Stacey Maurer (S)

Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.

Jennifer Correll (J)

Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.

Nicole Marlow (N)

Department of Health Services Research, Management, and Policy, University of Florida Health Science Center, Gainesville, Florida, USA.

Kenneth Chavin (K)

Department of Surgery-Transplant, UH Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.

Prabhakar Baliga (P)

Department of Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH