Impact of Affect on Lung Transplant Candidate Outcomes.
affect
emotional well-being
lung transplant
positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS)
transplant waiting list
Journal
Progress in transplantation (Aliso Viejo, Calif.)
ISSN: 2164-6708
Titre abrégé: Prog Transplant
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100909380
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2020
03 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
17
12
2019
medline:
21
10
2020
entrez:
17
12
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We examined the association of adult lung transplant candidates' self-reported affect with transplant-related outcomes, evaluating whether a positive (vs negative) frame of mind might be protective. Consenting waitlisted candidates from 6 centers completed the questionnaires including the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule annually and posttransplant. Univariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the association of baseline affect with outcomes of death or delisting. Models were subsequently adjusted for age, marital status, and education. Questionnaires were completed by 169 candidates (77.9% participation). Mean positive affect, negative affect, and positive-to-negative affect ratio (positivity ratio) were similar to expected norms. The scores of the questionnaire did not change significantly over time. Fifteen (8.9%) waitlisted participants died. Candidates who died while waiting had lower positivity ratios compared to those who survived (1.82 vs 2.45; Negative affect may represent a novel risk factor for death on the waitlist. Enhancing positive affect may represent a useful target for psychological optimization in lung transplant candidates.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
We examined the association of adult lung transplant candidates' self-reported affect with transplant-related outcomes, evaluating whether a positive (vs negative) frame of mind might be protective.
METHOD
Consenting waitlisted candidates from 6 centers completed the questionnaires including the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule annually and posttransplant. Univariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the association of baseline affect with outcomes of death or delisting. Models were subsequently adjusted for age, marital status, and education.
RESULTS
Questionnaires were completed by 169 candidates (77.9% participation). Mean positive affect, negative affect, and positive-to-negative affect ratio (positivity ratio) were similar to expected norms. The scores of the questionnaire did not change significantly over time. Fifteen (8.9%) waitlisted participants died. Candidates who died while waiting had lower positivity ratios compared to those who survived (1.82 vs 2.45;
CONCLUSION
Negative affect may represent a novel risk factor for death on the waitlist. Enhancing positive affect may represent a useful target for psychological optimization in lung transplant candidates.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31838950
doi: 10.1177/1526924819892921
pmc: PMC7271895
mid: NIHMS1585084
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Pagination
13-21Subventions
Organisme : NHLBI NIH HHS
ID : K23 HL128859
Pays : United States
Organisme : NHLBI NIH HHS
ID : K24 HL138150
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : UL1 TR002377
Pays : United States
Références
J Intern Med. 2008 Feb;263(2):203-11
pubmed: 18069998
Am J Psychiatry. 1996 Dec;153(12):1607-12
pubmed: 8942458
Psychosomatics. 2012 Mar-Apr;53(2):123-32
pubmed: 22424160
Am J Transplant. 2016 Jan;16(1):271-7
pubmed: 26366639
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2015 Jan;34(1):1-15
pubmed: 25085497
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2018 Jul;37(7):803-823
pubmed: 29709440
J Psychosom Res. 2007 Jan;62(1):93-100
pubmed: 17188126
Am J Transplant. 2019 Apr;19(4):984-994
pubmed: 30506632
Chest. 2003 Nov;124(5):1682-8
pubmed: 14605035
Nestle Nutr Inst Workshop Ser. 2015;83:45-53
pubmed: 26484526
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2016 Feb;35(2):173-8
pubmed: 26679297
J Biomed Inform. 2009 Apr;42(2):377-81
pubmed: 18929686
Prog Transplant. 2016 Jun;26(2):178-82
pubmed: 27207407
J Psychosom Res. 2014 Oct;77(4):296-301
pubmed: 25201483
Clin Transplant. 2010 Sep-Oct;24(5):E201-6
pubmed: 20438580
Am Psychol. 2005 Oct;60(7):678-86
pubmed: 16221001
J Headache Pain. 2015;16:97
pubmed: 26596588
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015 Dec 1;192(11):1325-34
pubmed: 26258797
Br J Clin Psychol. 2004 Sep;43(Pt 3):245-65
pubmed: 15333231
Glob Cardiol Sci Pract. 2016 Sep 30;2016(3):e201626
pubmed: 29043272
Expert Rev Respir Med. 2012 Feb;6(1):51-61
pubmed: 22283579
Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2012 Apr;17(2):188-92
pubmed: 22277955
Patient Educ Couns. 2016 Apr;99(4):617-623
pubmed: 26632024
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988 Jun;54(6):1063-70
pubmed: 3397865
Chest. 2013 Mar;143(3):744-750
pubmed: 23188377
Zhonghua Xin Xue Guan Bing Za Zhi. 2015 May;43(5):428-31
pubmed: 26419989
Evid Based Med. 2007 Oct;12(5):149
pubmed: 17909240
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2003 Jun;9(6):389-96
pubmed: 12813447
Psychosomatics. 2016 Sep-Oct;57(5):489-97
pubmed: 27494985
Eur Heart J. 2010 May;31(9):1065-70
pubmed: 20164244
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2012 Mar-Apr;34(2):127-38
pubmed: 22245165
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2019 Jan;25(1):e5-e16
pubmed: 30308327
Respiration. 2015;90(2):89-96
pubmed: 26088151
WMJ. 2015 Jun;114(3):100-4
pubmed: 26273187
Transplant Proc. 2017 Nov;49(9):2036-2039
pubmed: 29149957
Psychosomatics. 1999 Nov-Dec;40(6):503-9
pubmed: 10581979
Am J Transplant. 2018 Jan;18 Suppl 1:363-433
pubmed: 29292602
Ann Fam Med. 2010 Jul-Aug;8(4):348-53
pubmed: 20644190
Transplant Proc. 2009 Jul-Aug;41(6):2595-8
pubmed: 19715982
Prog Transplant. 2012 Mar;22(1):49-55
pubmed: 22489443
J Clin Psychol. 2009 May;65(5):467-87
pubmed: 19301241
Nefrologia. 2014;34(5):605-10
pubmed: 25259815