National Attitudes Toward Living Kidney Donation in the United States: Results of a Public Opinion Survey.

Rationale & Objective: Understanding national attitudes about living kidney donation will enable us to identify and address existing disincentives to living kidney donation. We performed a national survey to describe living kidney donation perceptions, perceived factors that affect the willingness to donate, and analyzed differences by demographic subgroups. Study Design: The survey items captured living kidney donation awareness, living kidney donation knowledge, willingness to donate, and barriers and facilitators to living kidney donation. Setting & Population: We surveyed 802 US adults (aged 25-65 years) in June 2021, randomly selected from an online platform with diverse representation. Analytical Approach: We developed summed, scaled indices to assess the association between the living kidney donation knowledge (9 items) and the willingness to donate (8 items) to self-reported demographic characteristics and other variables of interest using analysis of variance. All other associations for categorical questions were calculated using Pearson's χ2 and Fisher exact tests. We inductively evaluated free-text responses to identify additional barriers and facilitators to living kidney donation. Results: Most (86.6%) of the respondents reported that they might or would definitely consider donating a kidney while they were still living. Barriers to living kidney donation included concerns about the risk of the surgery, paying for medical expenses, and potential health effects. Facilitators to living kidney donation included having information on the donation surgery's safety, knowing that the donor would not have to pay for medical expenses related to the donation, and hearing living kidney donation success stories. Awareness of the ability to participate in kidney-paired donation was associated with a higher willingness to donate. Limitations: Potential for selection bias resulting from the use of survey panels and varied incentive amounts, and measurement error related to respondents' attention level. Conclusions: Most people would consider becoming a living kidney donor. Increased rates of living kidney donation may be possible with investment in culturally competent educational interventions that address risks associated with donating, policies that reduce financial disincentives, and communication campaigns that raise awareness of kidney-paired donation and living kidney donation.

Understanding what the general public thinks about living kidney donation will help to develop better education and increase the number of living kidney donors. We surveyed the public to find out: (1) how aware they are about the opportunity to donate a kidney while alive; (2) how much they know about living kidney donation; (3) whether they would be willing to donate; and (4) what would affect their willingness to donate. We found that teaching people about the risks of donating, decreasing costs related to donation, and raising awareness about it could increase the number of people willing to donate.

Patient reflections, challenges, and supports related to early liver transplant for severe alcohol-associated liver disease.

Transplant centers conventionally require at least 6 months of alcohol abstinence before offering liver transplants for alcohol-associated liver disease. However, early liver transplant (ELT)-proceeding with a transplant when clinically necessary without first meeting the conventional requirement-is increasingly gaining attention. In our study, we qualitatively assessed ELT recipients' perceived challenges and supports regarding alcohol-associated liver disease, transplant, and posttransplant survivorship. To diversify perspectives based on gender, race/ethnicity, age, time since ELT, and pretransplant abstinence duration, we purposively recruited ELT recipients and conducted semistructured interviews. Recruitment continued until data saturation. We analyzed transcripts using inductive thematic analysis. We interviewed 20 ELT recipients between June and December 2020 and identified themes within 3 participant-characterized time periods. Three themes emerged in life before severe illness: (1) alcohol as a "constant" part of life, (2) alcohol use negatively affecting relationships and work life, and (3) feeling "stuck" in the cycle of drinking. Two themes emerged during the severe illness period: (4) rapidity of health decline and (5) navigating medical care and the 6-month abstinence requirement. Finally, in life after transplant, 4 themes emerged: (6) feelings of shame or stigma and new self-worth, (7) reconnecting with others and redefining boundaries, (8) transplant as a defining point for sobriety, and (9) work-related challenges. Overall, participants expressed gratitude for receiving a gift of life and acknowledged their responsibilities to the new liver. ELT recipient experiences reveal complex psychosocial challenges related to addiction, inadequate support system, and stigma, particularly in the posttransplant period. The care of ELT recipients would be incomplete if focused solely on optimizing patient or graft survival.

The Value of Community Health Literacy Assessments: Health Literacy in Maryland.

OBJECTIVE: Community health assessments have typically not measured health literacy at the community level. We developed the Community Health Literacy Assessment (CHLA) framework to describe county and regional health literacy activities, assets, gaps, and opportunities in Maryland. METHODS: We implemented the CHLA framework in Maryland from January to August 2018. We conducted an environmental scan of Maryland's 24 counties to identify community resources, health indicators, and organizations. We targeted local health improvement coalitions and health departments for interviews in each county. We conducted qualitative interviews to understand what key community organizations throughout Maryland are doing to implement health literacy best practices and policies. We used summative content analysis to review, quantify, and interpret interview data. RESULTS: We conducted 57 interviews with participants from 56 organizations representing all 24 counties in Maryland. We captured data on multiple dimensions of health literacy and identified 3 main themes: health literacy assets and activities, health literacy gaps, and health literacy opportunities. The most cited asset was collecting data to inform health literacy practices, the most cited gap was using jargon with community members, and the most cited opportunity was increasing public awareness of existing health programs through improved outreach and teaching health information-seeking behaviors. CONCLUSION: A systematic community health literacy assessment is a feasible way to collect a large amount of health literacy data, which can inform strategic planning, determine community interventions, and ultimately lead us toward a health-literate society. We recommend that others replicate the CHLA framework to operationalize health literacy as a health indicator and include it as a community health assessment measure.

Community Health Literacy Assessment: A Systematic Framework to Assess Activities, Gaps, Assets, and Opportunities for Health Literacy Improvement.

BACKGROUND: The National Action Plan to Improve Health Literacy makes the case that a wide range of organizations and professionals must work together to improve health information and services to achieve a health literate society. The context and framework for this collaboration and action, however, have yet to be well-articulated. We report on our use of a community health needs assessment model to describe county and state health literacy activities, gaps, assets, and opportunities. This approach combines the public health best practice of learning about communities through systematic assessments and the emerging health literacy best practice of studying organizational behaviors. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITY: A community health literacy assessment was implemented from January 2018 to April 2018. The purpose was to collect information about county and state-level health literacy activities, gaps, assets, and opportunities. We used this information to characterize the status of health literacy in Maryland and establish an initial baseline for county and state strategic planning work and future collaboration. IMPLEMENTATION: An environmental scan of each county in Maryland identified health indicators, community resources, and health organizations or professionals. Organizational representatives participated in interviews about their health literacy work. Interviews were analyzed to identify themes as well as summarize and quantify perspectives by county. We convened a forum, disseminated preliminary findings, and performed member checking to assess agreement with the results. RESULTS: The team interviewed 56 individuals from 49 organizations. Themes of health literacy definitions as well as organizational ranking on the use of health literacy best practices are discussed in this article. Forty public health professionals, including 10 interview participants, attended the forum. Member checking assessed interview participants' agreement with results and interpretations, which were found to be accurate portrayals of their responses. LESSONS LEARNED: Lessons learned include being flexible with the interview approach, performing member checking, and allowing participants to self-define health literacy. Our experience shows a small team can perform a large-scale assessment that provides actionable information at state and county-levels. The results can influence future interventions, inform strategic planning and collaboration, and lead us toward a health literate society. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2019;3(4):e216-e226.]. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: A systematic community health needs assessment framework was used to collect information about health literacy activities, assets, gaps, and opportunities at the state and county level. Participant feedback showed the team accurately captured the activities, assets, gaps, and opportunities to improve health literacy practices. A needs assessment framework is feasible for describing community health literacy.