Background and objectives Most kidney donors view their experience positively, but some may experience psychosocial and financial burdens. We hypothesized that certain donor characteristics, poor outcome of the recipient, negative perceptions of care, and lack of support may be associated with poor psychosocial outcomes for donors.Design, setting, participants, & measurements The Renal and Lung Living Donors Evaluation Study (RELIVE) examined long-term medical and psychosocial outcomes for kidney donors (at three U.S. transplant centers) who donated between 1963 and 2005. Standardized questionnaires evaluated donor perspectives, recovery time, social support, motivation, financial impact, insurability after donation, and current psychological status. Questionnaires were mailed to 6909 donors.Results Questionnaires were returned by 2455 donors, who had donated 17610 years earlier (range, 5-48 years), a response rate of 36%. Most (95%) rated their overall donation experience as good to excellent. Rating the overall donor experience more negatively was associated with donor complications, psychological difficulties, recipient graft failure, and longer time since donation. Nine percent (n=231) reported one or more of the following poor psychosocial outcomes: fair or poor overall donor experience, financial burden, regret or discomfort with decision to donate, or psychological difficulties since donation. Recipient graft failure was the only predictor for reporting one or more of these poor psychosocial outcomes (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.33 to 2.34). Donors with lower educational attainment experienced greater financial burden. One of five employed donors took unpaid leave; 2% reported health and life insurability concerns.Conclusions Although the majority of donors viewed their overall donation experience positively, almost 1 in 10 donors reported at least one negative consequence related to donation. Recipient graft failure was associated with poor psychosocial outcome, defined as one or more of these negative consequences. Some donors were financially disadvantaged, and some experienced insurance difficulties. Interventions to avoid negative psychosocial and financial consequences are warranted.

Following kidney donation, short-term quality of life outcomes compare favorably to US normative data but long-term effects on mood are not known. In the Renal and Lung Living Donors Evaluation Study (RELIVE), records from donations performed 1963–2005 were reviewed for depression and antidepressant use pre-donation. Post-donation, in a cross-sectional cohort design 2010–2012, donors completed the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) depression screening instrument, the Life Orientation Test-Revised, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, and donation experience questions. Of 6,909 eligible donors, 3,470 were contacted and 2,455 participated (71%). The percent with depressive symptoms (8%; PHQ-9>10) was similar to National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey participants (7%, p=0.30). Pre-donation psychiatric disorders were more common in unrelated than related donors (p=0.05). Post-donation predictors of depressive symptoms included non-white race OR=2.00, p=0.020), younger age at donation (OR=1.33 per 10 years, p-0.002), longer recovery time from donation (OR=1.74, p=0.0009), greater financial burden (OR=1.32, p=0.013), and feeling morally obligated to donate (OR=1.23, p=0.003). While cross-sectional prevalence of depression is comparable to population normative data, some factors identifiable around time of donation, including longer recovery, financial stressors, younger age, and moral obligation to donate may identify donors more likely to develop future depression, providing an opportunity for intervention.

Background Mortality, incidence of most diseases, and prevalence of adverse health behaviours follow an inverse gradient with social class. Many proxies for socioeconomic status (SES) exist; however, each bears a different relation to health outcomes, probably following a different aetiological pathway. Additionally, data on SES can be quite difficult to gather. Five measures of SES were compared, including a novel measure, the HOUSES index, in the prediction of self-rated health (SRH) in two Midwestern settings, Olmsted County, Minnesota, and Jackson County, Missouri. Methods Using a probability sampling design, a cross-sectional telephone survey was administered to a randomised sample of households. The questionnaire collected a variety of sociodemographic and personal health information. The dependent variable, SRH, was dichotomised into excellent/very good/good versus fair/ poor health. Information for the HOUSES index was collected through public property records and corroborated through the telephone questionnaire. Participants were parents/guardians of children aged 1–17 residing in Olmsted County (n=746) and Jackson County (n=704). Results The HOUSES index was associated with adverse SRH in Jackson County adults. All five SES measures were significant predictors in this group. Composite SES indices showed significant associations with SRH in Olmsted County adults. Conclusions The HOUSES index makes a unique contribution to the measurement of SES and prediction of health outcomes. Its utility is qualified by specific social contexts, and it should be used in concert with other SES indices.

Because chat room use serves as an indicator of heightened vulnerability and risk-taking, parents and others need to be aware of potential dangers posed by online contact between strangers and youth.

Importance: Identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection via antibody assays is important for monitoring natural infection rates. Most antibody assays cannot distinguish natural infection from vaccination. Objective: To assess the accuracy of a nucleocapsid-containing assay in identifying natural infection among vaccinated individuals. Design: A longitudinal cohort comprised of healthcare workers (HCW) in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area was enrolled. Two rounds of seroprevalence studies separated by one month were conducted from 11/2020-1/2021. Capillary blood from round 1 and 2 was tested for IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins with a qualitative chemiluminescent ELISA (spike-only assay). In a subsample of participants (n=82) at round 2, a second assay was performed that measured IgGs reactive to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein (nucleocapsid-containing assay). Round 1 biospecimen collections occurred prior to vaccination in all participants. Vaccination status at round 2 was determined via self-report. Setting: The Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota metropolitan area. Participants: HCW age 18-80 years. Exposures: Round 1 recent SARS-CoV-2 infection assessed via a spike-only assay and participant self-report. Outcomes: Round 2 SARS-CoV-2 infection assessed via the nucleocapsid-containing assay. Area under the curve (AUC) was computed to determine the discriminatory ability of round 2 IgG reactivity to nucleocapsid for identification of recent infection determined during round 1. Results: Participants had a mean age of 40 (range=23-66) years, 83% were female, 46% reported vaccination prior to the round 2 testing. Round 1 seroprevalence was 9.5%. Among those not recently infected, when comparing vaccinated vs. unvaccinated individuals, elevated levels of spike 1 (p<0.001) and spike 2 (p=0.01) were observed while nucleocapsid levels were not statistically significantly different (p=0.90). Among all participants, nucleocapsid response predicted recent infection with an AUC(95%CI) of 0.93(0.88,0.99). Among individuals vaccinated >10 days prior to antibody testing, the specificity of the nucleocapsid-containing assay was 92% and while the specificity of the spike-only assay was 0%. Conclusions and Relevance: An IgG assay identifying reactivity to nucleocapsid protein is an accurate predictor of natural infection among vaccinated individuals while a spike-only assay performed poorly. In the era of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, seroprevalence studies monitoring natural infection will require assays that do not rely on spike-protein response alone.