Dataset Information

Living Kidney Donor Knowledge of Provided Information and Informed Consent: The PRINCE Study.

ABSTRACT: Informed consent for living kidney donation is paramount, as donors are healthy individuals undergoing surgery for the benefit of others. The informed consent process for living kidney donors is heterogenous, and the question concerns how well they are actually informed. Knowledge assessments, before and after donor education, can form the basis for a standardized informed consent procedure for live kidney donation. In this prospective, a multicenter national cohort study conducted in all eight kidney transplant centers in The Netherlands, we assessed the current status of the informed consent practice for live donor nephrectomy. All of the potential living kidney donors in the participating centers were invited to participate. They completed a pop quiz during their first outpatient appointment (Cohort A). Living kidney donors completed the same pop quiz upon admission for donor nephrectomy (Cohort B). In total, 656 pop quizzes were completed (417 in Cohort A, and 239 in Cohort B). The average donor knowledge score was 7.0/25.0 (±3.9, range 0-18) in Cohort A, and 10.5/25.0 (±2.8, range 0-17.5) in Cohort B. Cohort B scored significantly higher on overall knowledge, preparedness, and the individual item scores (p < 0.0001), except for the long-term complications (p = 0.91). Donor knowledge generally improves during the live donor workup, but it is still quite disappointing. Long-term complications, especially, deserve more attention during living kidney donor education.

SUBMITTER: Spoon EQW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8837079 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Living Kidney Donor Knowledge of Provided Information and Informed Consent: The PRINCE Study.

Spoon Emerentia Q W EQW Kortram Kirsten K Ismail Sohal Y SY Nieboer Daan D d'Ancona Frank C H FCH Christiaans Maarten H L MHL Dam Ruth E RE Hofker Hendrik Sijbrand HS Hoksbergen Arjan W J AWJ van der Pant Karlijn Ami KA Toorop Raechel J RJ van de Wetering Jacqueline J Ijzermans Jan N M JNM Dor Frank J M F FJMF On Behalf Of The Dutch Working Group Informed Consent For Live Donor Nephrectomy Prince

Journal of clinical medicine 20220128 3

<h4>Background</h4>Informed consent for living kidney donation is paramount, as donors are healthy individuals undergoing surgery for the benefit of others. The informed consent process for living kidney donors is heterogenous, and the question concerns how well they are actually informed. Knowledge assessments, before and after donor education, can form the basis for a standardized informed consent procedure for live kidney donation.<h4>Methods</h4>In this prospective, a multicenter national co ...[more]

PMID: 35160147

Similar Datasets

Project description:Informed consent is mandatory for all (surgical) procedures, but it is even more important when it comes to living kidney donors undergoing surgery for the benefit of others. Donor education, leading to informed consent, needs to be carried out according to certain standards. Informed consent procedures for live donor nephrectomy vary per centre, and even per individual healthcare professional. The basis for a standardised, uniform surgical informed consent procedure for live donor nephrectomy can be created by assessing what information donors need to hear to prepare them for the operation and convalescence.The PRINCE (Process of Informed Consent Evaluation) project is a prospective, multicentre cohort study, to be carried out in all eight Dutch kidney transplant centres. Donor knowledge of the procedure and postoperative course will be evaluated by means of pop quizzes. A baseline cohort (prior to receiving any information from a member of the transplant team in one of the transplant centres) will be compared with a control group, the members of which receive the pop quiz on the day of admission for donor nephrectomy. Donor satisfaction will be evaluated for all donors who completed the admission pop-quiz. The primary end point is donor knowledge. In addition, those elements that have to be included in the standardised format informed consent procedure will be identified. Secondary end points are donor satisfaction, current informed consent practices in the different centres (eg, how many visits, which personnel, what kind of information is disclosed, in which format, etc) and correlation of donor knowledge with surgeons' estimation thereof.Approval for this study was obtained from the medical ethical committee of the Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, on 18 February 2015. Secondary approval has been obtained from the local ethics committees in six participating centres. Approval in the last centre has been sought.Outcome will be published in a scientific journal.NTR5374; Pre-results.

Project description:Background Kidney transplantation is the treatment of choice for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESKD). Kidney paired donation (KPD) provides the chance to match an incompatible donor/recipient pair with another donor and recipient in a similar condition. We aimed to compare the outcomes of pair exchange kidney transplantation with traditional live donor kidney transplantation in our context. Method A review of medical records of 62 patients (31 pairs) who underwent two-way conventional living kidney pair exchange from July 2016 to June 2021 was done. The control group was considered those 62 patients who had undergone classic live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) during the study period. The patient's demographics, intraoperative and postoperative variables including delayed graft function, length of hospital stay, graft survival, patient survival, and rejections rates were compared between the groups (KPD and LDKT). Results The majority of recipients were male (77.4 and 80.6%) while donors were female (77.4 and 69.4%) in KPD and the LDKT groups. Mean ages were 37 years (range: 19–59) and 37 years (range: 17–65) for the recipient's in KPD and the LDKT. KPD transplantation was performed in 62 recipients to avoid blood group incompatibility. There were no significant differences in outcomes comprising delayed graft function (1.6 and 3.2%), graft survival (100% in both groups), patient survival (95.2 and 96.8%), and rejections rates (1.6 and 1.6%) between KPD and LDKT group (P > 0.005). The length of stay was similar (5.9 and 5.7 days) in KPD and LDKT groups (P > 0.005). Conclusions The outcomes of KPD were comparable with classic LDKT in terms of delayed graft function, length of hospital stay, graft survival, patient survival, and rejections rates in our study. Therefore, the kidney paired donation program should be encouraged and promoted in centers where the ABO-incompatible transplant is expensive with added risk and the rate of deceased donor transplantation is very low. Highlights • Kidney paired donation (KPD) provides the chance to match for an incompatible donor/recipient pair with another donor and recipient in a similar condition.• The outcomes of KPD were comparable with classic live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) in this study.• KPD program should be promoted in centers where the ABO incompatible transplant is expensive with added risk and the rate of deceased donor transplantation is very low. Statistical software SPSS version 25.0 (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) was used for statistical analysis.Independent t-test test was considered for all quantitative variables while the Chi-square test was applied for all categorical variables during the data analysis. A P value < 0.005 was considered statistically significant.

Dataset Information

Living Kidney Donor Knowledge of Provided Information and Informed Consent: The PRINCE Study.

Publications

Living Kidney Donor Knowledge of Provided Information and Informed Consent: The PRINCE Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets