Twenty Years of Unspecified Kidney Donation: Unspecified Donors Looking Back on Their Donation Experiences.

The Netherlands was the first European country to implement unspecified kidney donation in 2000. This qualitative study aimed to evaluate the experiences of unspecified kidney donors (UKDs) in our transplant institute to improve the care for this valuable group of donors. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 106 UKDs who donated between 2000-2016 (response rate 84%). Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and independently coded by 2 researchers in NVivo using thematic analysis. The following 14 themes reflecting donor experiences were found: Satisfaction with donation; Support from social network; Interpersonal stress; Complaints about hospital care; Uncertainty about donor approval; Life on hold between approval and actual donation; Donation requires perseverance and commitment; Recovery took longer than expected; Normalization of the donation; Becoming an advocate for living kidney donation; Satisfaction with anonymity; Ongoing curiosity about outcome or recipient; Importance of anonymous communication; Anonymity is not watertight. The data reinforced that unspecified kidney donation is a positive experience for donors and that they were generally satisfied with the procedures. Most important complaints about the procedure concerned the length of the assessment procedure and the lack of acknowledgment for UKDs from both their recipients and health professionals. Suggestions are made to address the needs of UKDs.

Relinquishing Anonymity in Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: Lessons Learned From the UK Policy for Anonymous Donors.

Anonymous living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is performed in many countries and policies on anonymity differ. The UK is the only European country with a conditional policy, allowing pairs to break anonymity post-transplant. There is little evidence on how contact after anonymous LDKT is experienced. In this cross-sectional study participants who donated or received a kidney through non-directed altruistic kidney donation or within the UK living kidney sharing scheme completed a questionnaire on their experiences with and attitudes towards anonymity. Non-parametric statistics were used to analyse the data. 207 recipients and 354 donors participated. Anonymity was relinquished among 11% of recipients and 8% of donors. Non-anonymous participants were generally content with non-anonymity. They reported positive experiences with contact/meeting the other party. Participants who remained anonymous were content with anonymity, however, 38% would have liked to meet post-transplant. If the other party would like to meet, this number increased to 64%. Although participants agreed with anonymity before surgery, they believe that, if desired, a meeting should be allowed after surgery. UK donors and recipients were satisfied with conditional anonymity and experiences with breaking anonymity were positive. These results support the expansion of conditional anonymity to other countries that allow anonymous LDKT.

Positive and negative aspects of mental health after unspecified living kidney donation: A cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Unspecified donors give a kidney to a stranger with end-stage kidney failure. There has been little research on the long-term impact of unspecified donation on mental health outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess the positive and negative aspects of mental health among unspecified donors. DESIGN: We invited all unspecified donors who donated a kidney between 2000 and 2016 at our centre to participate in an interview and to complete validated questionnaires. METHODS: We measured positive mental health using the Dutch Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF), psychological complaints using the Symptoms Checklist-90 (SCL-90) and psychiatric diagnoses using the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.) Screen for all donors and the M.I.N.I. Plus on indication. RESULTS: Of the 134 eligible donors, 114 participated (54% female; median age 66 years), a median of 6 years post-donation. Scores on emotional and social well-being subscales of the MHC-SF were significantly higher than in the general population. Psychological symptoms were comparable to the general population. Thirty-two per cent of donors had a current or lifetime psychiatric diagnosis. Psychological symptoms did not significantly change between the pre-donation screening and the post-donation study. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that, with the appropriate screening, unspecified donation is a safe procedure from a psychological perspective.

"What if this is my chance to save my life?" A semistructured interview study on the motives and experiences of end-stage renal disease patients who engaged in public solicitation of a living kidney donor.

The increase in patients using public solicitation (PS) to find a living kidney donor has generated a debate about the ethical complexities of PS. To investigate why patients engaged in PS and what they experienced during PS, we conducted semistructured interviews with 20 Dutch patients with end-stage renal disease who had publicly solicited a living donor. Transcripts were thematically analyzed. We identified ten themes on patients' considerations preceding PS: cautiousness in discussing living donation within social network; reluctance to accept a kidney from loved ones; rejection/withdrawal of related donor candidates; moral objections to paid donation; the ease of social media; encouraged by others; ends justifying the means; despair and urge to take action; public disclosure of vulnerability; fear of being (perceived to be) selfish. We identified nine themes on patients' experiences: positive emotions and support generated by action; genuine and ulterior motives for donation; patients acting as educators and screeners; time- and energy-consuming process; emotionally taxing process; positive interactions with donor candidates; feeling of dependency and obligation; limited cooperation from health professionals; demands a proactive attitude and media strategy. These results can inform and complement (existing) policies on PS and provide content for education of patients who are considering PS.

Donor and Recipient Perspectives on Anonymity in Kidney Donation From Live Donors: A Multicenter Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Maintaining anonymity is a requirement in the Netherlands and Sweden for kidney donation from live donors in the context of nondirected (or unspecified) and paired exchange (or specified indirect) donation. Despite this policy, some donors and recipients express the desire to know one another. Little empirical evidence informs the debate on anonymity. This study explored the experiences, preferences, and attitudes of donors and recipients toward anonymity. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective observational multicenter study using both qualitative and quantitative methods. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 414 participants from Dutch and Swedish transplantation centers who received or donated a kidney anonymously (nondirected or paired exchange) completed a questionnaire about anonymity. Participation was a median of 31 months after surgery. FACTORS: Country of residence, donor/recipient status, transplant type, time since surgery. OUTCOMES: Experiences, preferences, and attitudes toward anonymity. RESULTS: Most participants were satisfied with their experience of anonymity before and after surgery. A minority would have liked to have met the other party before (donors, 7%; recipients, 15%) or after (donors, 22%; recipients, 31%) surgery. Significantly more recipients than donors wanted to meet the other party. Most study participants were open to meeting the other party if the desire was mutual (donors, 58%; recipients, 60%). Donors agree significantly more with the principle of anonymity before and after surgery than recipients. Donors and recipients thought that if both parties agreed, it should be permissible to meet before or after surgery. There were few associations between country or time since surgery and experiences or attitudes. The pros and cons of anonymity reported by participants were clustered into relational and emotional, ethical, and practical and logistical domains. LIMITATIONS: The relatively low response rate of recipients may have reduced generalizability. Recall bias was possible given the time lag between transplantation and data collection. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study illustrated that although donors and recipients were usually satisfied with anonymity, the majority viewed a strict policy on anonymity as unnecessary. These results may inform policy and education on anonymity.

Toward a conditional approach to anonymity? An explorative multicenter longitudinal study among anonymous living kidney donors and recipients.

Anonymity between living donors and recipients is a topic of discussion among transplant professionals. This longitudinal study explored living kidney donors' and patients' perspectives on anonymity. Prior to surgery (T0) and 3 months afterward (T1), participants in unspecified or specified indirect donation programs completed a questionnaire on their experiences with and attitudes toward anonymity as well as demographic and medical characteristics. Nonparametric tests were used to assess group differences and associations. Participants were content with anonymity at T0 and T1. Fourteen and 23% wanted to meet at T0 and T1, respectively. If the other party expressed the wish to meet, 50% (T0) and 55% (T1) would be willing to meet. Most participants agreed that meeting should be allowed if both parties agree. Attitude toward anonymity did not differ between donors/recipients, nor between T0/T1 and unspecified/specified indirect donation programs. This study showed that most donors and recipients who participated in anonymous donation schemes are in favor of a conditional approach to anonymity. Guidelines on how to revoke anonymity if both parties agree are needed and should include education about pros and cons of (non-) anonymity and a logistical plan on how, when, where, and by whom anonymity should be revoked.

Enhanced self-efficacy after a self-management programme in pituitary disease: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Patients with pituitary disease report impairments in Quality of Life (QoL) despite optimal biomedical care. Until now, the effects of a self-management intervention (SMI) addressing psychological and social issues for these patients and their partners have not been studied. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of a SMI i.e. Patient and Partner Education Programme for Pituitary disease (PPEP-Pituitary). DESIGN AND SUBJECTS: A multicentre randomized controlled trial included 174 patients with pituitary disease, and 63 partners were allocated to either PPEP-Pituitary or a control group. PPEP-Pituitary included eight weekly sessions (90 min). Self-efficacy, bother and needs for support, illness perceptions, coping and QoL were assessed before the intervention (T0), directly after (T1) and after six months (T2). Mood was assessed before and after each session. RESULTS: Patients in PPEP-Pituitary reported improved mood after each session (except for session 1). In partners, mood only improved after the last three sessions. Patients reported higher self-efficacy at T1 (P = 0.016) which persisted up to T2 (P = 0.033), and less bother by mood problems directly after PPEP-Pituitary (P = 0.01), but more bother after six months (P = 0.001), although this increase was not different from baseline (P = 0.346). Partners in PPEP-Pituitary reported more vitality (P = 0.008) which persisted up to T2 (P = 0.034). At T2, partners also reported less anxiety and depressive symptoms (P ≤ 0.014). CONCLUSION: This first study evaluating the effects of a SMI targeting psychosocial issues in patients with pituitary disease and their partners demonstrated promising positive results. Future research should focus on the refinement and implementation of this SMI into clinical practice.

Placebo effects on itch: a meta-analysis of clinical trials of patients with dermatological conditions.

Although placebo contributes to the effects of treatment for various symptoms and conditions, its effect on itch has rarely been investigated. In this meta-analysis, the magnitude of the placebo effect on itch was systematically investigated in clinical trials including patients with chronic itch due to atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, or chronic idiopathic urticaria. From searches in four databases, 34 articles were included in the quantitative analyses. Placebo treatment significantly decreased itch (1.3 out of 10, 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.61) compared with baseline itch (effect size 0.55), indicating that placebo effects have a considerable role in these patients' treatment.