The relationship between compliance with immunosuppressive therapy and religious attitudes of kidney transplant patients.

OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to examine the relationship between adherence to immunosuppressive therapy and religious attitudes of kidney transplant patients. METHOD: The research was conducted descriptively with patients followed in the transplantation clinic of the between 2015 and 2019. The sample consisted of 142 patients who met the study criteria. Before starting the study, necessary permissions were obtained from the institution, ethics committee and patients. RESULTS: There was a significant relationship between marital status, educational status, income status and the mean score of the immunosuppressive treatment adherence scale, and between family type and the mean score of the religious attitude scale (p < 0.05). Of these results only; It was determined that there was a significant relationship between the priority order of drugs in life, duration of renal failure and time after transplantation and drug compliance scale average score (p < 0.05). Those who do not want to donate their kidneys to their relatives, those who do not want to donate organs when they die, those whose religious beliefs affect drug compliance, the duration of kidney failure is between 1 and 12 months and the period after transplantation 13- It was determined that those who had 60 months had a "more positive religious attitude" (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: It was found that the mean score of the immunosuppressive treatment compliance scale of kidney transplant patients was at a good level, while the mean score of religious attitude was below the middle level. In addition, there was no significant relationship between the mean score of the immunosuppressive treatment compliance scale and the mean score of the religious attitude scale.

Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in a cohort of renal transplant recipients following two-dose primary immunization - A Caribbean country's perspective.

This study compares the humoral immune response of a cohort of renal transplant recipients (RTRs), in Trinidad & Tobago following two-dose primary immunization with non-mRNA vaccines amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. RTRs along with healthy, age-and gender-matched controls received either the adenoviral vector vaccine, AstraZeneca-Vaxzevria (AZ) or the inactivated vaccine, Beijing CNBG-BBIBP- CorV/Sinopharm (SP). Samples were taken after completion of a two-dose primary immunization during the period November 2021 to December 2021, at a mean interval of 138 days following immunization. 38/72 RTRs (53 %) failed to generate any protective antibody responses, compared with 7/73 participants, approximately 10 % in the healthy, age and gender-matched control group. In the RTRs, there was no significant correlation of their antibody concentration with either the timing of sample collection or the interval since transplantation. The study provides necessary information about the humoral response after two- doses of non-mRNA vaccines in a group of transplant recipients.

Comparison of palonosetron and ondansetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in renal transplantation recipients: a randomized clinical trial

Abstract Background: End-stage renal diseases patients have a high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), which is multifactorial and need acute attention after renal transplantation for a successful outcome in term of an uneventful postoperative period. The study was done to compare the efficacy of palonosetron and ondansetron in preventing early and late-onset PONV in live donor renal transplantation recipients (LDRT). Methods: The prospective randomized double-blinded study was done on 112 consecutive patients planned for live donor renal transplantation. Patients of both sexes in the age group of 18-60 years were randomly divided into two groups: Group O (Ondansetron) and Group P (Palonosetron) with 56 patients in each group by computer-generated randomization. The study drug was administered intravenously (IV) slowly over 30 seconds, one hour before extubation. Postoperatively, the patients were accessed for PONV at 6, 24, and 72 hours using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) nausea score and PONV intensity scale. Results: The incidence of PONV in the study was found to be 30.35%. There was significant difference in incidence of PONV between Group P and Group O at 6 hours (12.5% vs. 32.1%, p = 0.013) and 72 hours (1.8% vs. 33.9%, p < 0.001), but insignificant difference at 24 hours (1.8% vs. 10.7%, p = 0.113). VAS-nausea score was significantly lower in Group P as compared to Group O at a time point of 24 hours (45.54 ± 12.64 vs. 51.96 ± 14.70, p = 0.015) and 72 hours (39.11 ± 10.32 vs. 45.7 ± 15.12, p = 0.015). Conclusion: Palonosetron is clinically superior to ondansetron in preventing early and delayed onset postoperative nausea and vomiting in live-related renal transplant recipients.

Comparison of palonosetron and ondansetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in renal transplantation recipients: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: End-stage renal diseases patients have a high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), which is multifactorial and need acute attention after renal transplantation for a successful outcome in term of an uneventful postoperative period. The study was done to compare the efficacy of palonosetron and ondansetron in preventing early and late-onset PONV in live donor renal transplantation recipients (LDRT). METHODS: The prospective randomized double-blinded study was done on 112 consecutive patients planned for live donor renal transplantation. Patients of both sexes in the age group of 18-60 years were randomly divided into two groups: Group O (Ondansetron) and Group P (Palonosetron) with 56 patients in each group by computer-generated randomization. The study drug was administered intravenously (IV) slowly over 30 seconds, one hour before extubation. Postoperatively, the patients were accessed for PONV at 6, 24, and 72 hours using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) nausea score and PONV intensity scale. RESULTS: The incidence of PONV in the study was found to be 30.35%. There was significant difference in incidence of PONV between Group P and Group O at 6 hours (12.5% vs. 32.1%, p = 0.013) and 72 hours (1.8% vs. 33.9%, p < 0.001), but insignificant difference at 24 hours (1.8% vs. 10.7%, p = 0.113). VAS-nausea score was significantly lower in Group P as compared to Group O at a time point of 24 hours (45.54 ± 12.64 vs. 51.96 ± 14.70, p = 0.015) and 72 hours (39.11 ± 10.32 vs. 45.7 ± 15.12, p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: Palonosetron is clinically superior to ondansetron in preventing early and delayed onset postoperative nausea and vomiting in live-related renal transplant recipients.