Quality of life, depression and anxiety in living donor kidney transplantation

Pawłowski, Marcin; Fila-Witecka, Karolina; Rymaszewska, J.; Łuc, Mateusz; Kamińska, Dorota; Rymaszewska, Joanna

doi:10.1016/j.trre.2020.100572

Cited by 14 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, as the donor suddenly becomes a patient despite former good health, donor wellbeing and quality of life have to be taken into account when promoting living kidney transplantation. 16 This concern for donor wellbeing motivated us to produce the first ever report regarding living donor follow up and quality of life in New Caledonia. Around three out of four donors answered our questions (77%) which shows a good response rate and therefore good representativeness.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kidney transplantation using living donors remains a necessity to increase the opportunity for transplantation for Caledonian's patients with ESKD. However, as the donor suddenly becomes a patient despite former good health, donor wellbeing and quality of life have to be taken into account when promoting living kidney transplantation 16 . This concern for donor wellbeing motivated us to produce the first ever report regarding living donor follow up and quality of life in New Caledonia.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Risk factors for loss to follow‐up and outcomes after kidney donation in New Caledonian living donors

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: For patients with end-stage kidney disease, living-donor kidney transplantation is the best therapy. There is a duty to ensure that the donor is followed-up after donation on a regular and long-term basis. Conditions may arise, such as hypertension, chronic kidney disease, metabolic conditions, and these should be identified and treated as soon as possible for the donor's own longer term wellbeing. In this retrospective cohort study, we investigated the risk of loss to follow-up after kidney donation for living donors.Methods: Data were collected from the unique Caledonian nephrology medical record software and a phone survey. We evaluated the association between being lost to follow up and donor recipient relationship, donor socio-demographic characteristics, donation characteristics and care access. We performed a multivariate analysis to identify risk factors of loss to follow-up.Results: Among the the 86 donors included, 38 (44%) had no nephrology consultation for more than 16 months. The rate of donor follow up decreased from 81% at 2 years to 49% at 10 years after donation. In the multivariate analysis, age less than 45 years old at donation increased the risk of loss to follow up to 4.5 (95% CI 2.0-10.3) and not being a spouse increased the risk to 3.9 (95% CI 1.5-11.1). Conclusion:To conclude, efforts should be made to improve the rate at which donors are followed up in New Caledonia with special attention to younger donors and donors without a marital link with the recipient.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk factors for loss to follow‐up and outcomes after kidney donation in New Caledonian living donors

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although both groups are undoubtedly highly burdened, patients who underwent a kidney transplant from a living donor face a variety of restrictions and inconveniences, however the transplant procedure offers them a chance to live with a higher quality of life than before the operation. 30 In the study conducted by Petrie et al, in New Zealand, the researchers examined dialysis, kidney transplant and general practice (GP) groups of patients using GHQ-30, with a cut-off point of 13 or above for psychological distress. The results showed that 43% dialysis patients, 27% transplant patients and 30% GP achieved a total score above cutoff.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychopathological Symptoms Among Chronically Ill Patients During SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic in Poland

Pawłowski¹,

Fila-Witecka²,

Rymaszewska³

et al. 2022

PRBM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The global severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic had a drastic psychological and economic impact on the global population. Having a chronic disease during the pandemic is associated with numerous limitations and challenges like regular hospital visits, access to health-care units and getting specialized treatment. In addition, chronically ill patients are at great risk of acquiring the SARS-CoV-2 virus and at experiencing a more severe course of illness, due to comorbid conditions as well as more frequent encounters with health-care workers and other patients in medical facilities. The aim of this study was to examine the psychological disturbances, during the pandemic in chronically ill patients. Methods During the cross-sectional survey conducted between May and October 2020, 398 patients with four different chronic conditions (psoriasis, multiple sclerosis and patients who have undergone a kidney transplant or received dialysis). Study sample was examined regarding the occurrence of psychopathological symptoms (General Health Questionnaire 28) and their perceived stress levels (Perceived Stress Scale). Results The highest scores were found in the MS group and the lowest scores were found in the kidney transplantation group in every subscale of the GHQ-28. Close to half of the studied population (48.74%, n = 193) patients scored above the cut-off for psychopathology. Conclusion As the study was conducted during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Poland, it stands to reason that the pandemic affected the psychological wellbeing of chronically ill patients. A COVID-19 infection, being quarantined and having had contact with a person who was infected, did not significantly affect the outcome measures; however, further research is needed to explore this topic.

show abstract

“…Donor candidates need to know how donation might affect their future health, and health professionals need to know what to expect when they monitor donors after nephrectomy to maintain long-term good health. 26 Furthermore, while most donors report feelings of well-being after donation (studies summarized in eTable 2), [27][28][29][30][31] some may experience negative psychological effects. 32 Whether these effects are sustained over time remains unknown.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Living Kidney Donor Safety Study: Protocol of a Prospective Cohort Study

Garg

Arnold

Cuerden

et al. 2022

Can J Kidney Health Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Living kidney donation is considered generally safe in healthy individuals; however, there is a need to better understand the long-term effects of donation on blood pressure and kidney function. Objectives: To determine the risk of hypertension in healthy, normotensive adults who donate a kidney compared with healthy, normotensive non-donors with similar indicators of baseline health. We will also compare the 2 groups on the rate of decline in kidney function, the risk of albuminuria, and changes in health-related quality of life. Design, Participants, and Setting: Prospective cohort study of 1042 living kidney donors recruited before surgery from 17 transplant centers (12 in Canada and 5 in Australia) between 2004 and 2014. Non-donor participants (n = 396) included relatives or friends of the donor, or donor candidates who were ineligible to donate due to blood group or cross-match incompatibility. Follow-up will continue until 2021, and the main analysis will be performed in 2022. The anticipated median (25th, 75th percentile, maximum) follow-up time after donation is 7 years (6, 8, 15). Measurements: Donors and non-donors completed the same schedule of measurements at baseline and follow-up (non-donors were assigned a simulated nephrectomy date). Annual measurements were obtained for blood pressure, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), albuminuria, patient-reported health-related quality of life, and general health. Outcomes: Incident hypertension (a systolic/diastolic blood pressure ≥ 140/90 mm Hg or receipt of anti-hypertensive medication) will be adjudicated by a physician blinded to the participant’s donation status. We will assess the rate of change in eGFR starting from 12 months after the nephrectomy date and the proportion who develop an albumin-to-creatinine ratio ≥3 mg/mmol (≥30 mg/g) in follow-up. Health-related quality of life will be assessed using the 36-item RAND health survey and the Beck Anxiety and Depression inventories. Limitations: Donation-attributable hypertension may not manifest until decades after donation. Conclusion: This prospective cohort study will estimate the attributable risk of hypertension and other health outcomes after living kidney donation.

show abstract

Quality of life, depression and anxiety in living donor kidney transplantation

Cited by 14 publications

References 24 publications

Risk factors for loss to follow‐up and outcomes after kidney donation in New Caledonian living donors

Risk factors for loss to follow‐up and outcomes after kidney donation in New Caledonian living donors

Psychopathological Symptoms Among Chronically Ill Patients During SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic in Poland

The Living Kidney Donor Safety Study: Protocol of a Prospective Cohort Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About