An increasing number of transplant centers are performing adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). We evaluated peoples' perspectives on possible outcomes of living donation, thresholds for donating, and views regarding the donation process. One hundred fifty people were surveyed; half were from a medical care group serving an indigent population and half were from a private clinic. Preferences about outcomes of adult living donation were ranked and quantified on a visual analogue scale. Thresholds for donation to a loved one were quantified. Sixty percent of the respondents suggested they would prefer to donate and die and have the transplant recipient live rather than forgo donation and have the potential transplant recipient die of liver failure. Participants' stated threshold for living donation was a median survival for themselves of only 79%. They would require that their loved one have a median survival of 55% with transplantation before they would agree to donate. Respondents from the medical care group reported higher survival thresholds for themselves and the transplant recipient, and race was the most statistically significant predictor of those thresholds. Sex was more predictive of threshold probabilities from the private clinic. Eighty-one percent of the respondents believed that the potential donor, not a physician, should have the final say regarding candidacy for living donation. In conclusion, the findings of this survey support the use of adult LDLT. Most respondents were willing to accept mortality rates that far exceed the estimated risk of donation and favored outcomes in which a loved one was saved. (Liver Transpl 2001;7:335-340.)
There was little agreement between patients' preference values about hepatitis C and their physicians' estimates of those values. Utility analysis could facilitate shared decision making about hepatitis C.
Background: Physicians' perspectives regarding hepatitis C shape their approach to patient management. We used utility analysis to evaluate physicians' perceptions of hepatitis C-related health states (HS) and their threshold to recommend treatment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.