No abstract

Background. Psychosocial status of donors before and after living kidney donor transplantation has been an important concern. Investigations of psychosocial issues in related recipients are not frequent. Aim. The aims of this study were to evaluate and compare psychopathologic dimensions in donors and recipients before and after transplantation. Methods. Thirty-five recipients and 45 donors completed a psychosocial evaluation before and after transplantation. We applied Pearson chi-square, McNemar, Fisher, Wilcoxon, and Mann-Whitney tests as well as linear and logistic regression statistical methods.Results. Before transplantation 100% of the recipients presented total anxiety, compared with 64.4% of donors, with higher anxiety levels in all dimensions (P Ͻ .001). Also, 38.7% of recipients and 16.3% of donors had moderate/serious depression (P ϭ .029). Men showed higher levels of cognitive anxiety before transplantation (odds ratio [OR] ϭ 4.3; P ϭ .008). After versus before transplantation central nervous system and cognitive anxiety had diminished in recipients (P ϭ .031; P ϭ .035, respectively); there were higher levels of cognitive anxiety than among the donors (P ϭ .007). Depression showed no significant changes in recipients or donors; the differences were no longer significant. There were less severely depressed recipients but an increase among severely depressed donors. Male recipients and donors showed greater cognitive anxiety (P ϭ .02; P ϭ .04, respectively) at both times. Female recipients presented with more severe depression (P ϭ .036). Conclusions. Anxiety is an important symptom. Surgery had a positive impact to lower anxiety in recipients. Most protagonists displayed little or no depression; it was more prevalent among recipients. Donors and recipients maintained some psychopathologic symptoms after surgery. We defined vulnerable groups among these cohorts.

No abstract

Background. Although donor perceptions of donation have been evaluated in several programs, evaluation of associated recipients has not been as frequent. Purpose. Our aim was to evaluate and compare after transplantation, donor and recipient perceptions of donation. Methods. After transplantation 35 recipients and 45 donors completed a sociodemographic and a donation perception questionnaire. We applied the Fisher test to descriptive (absolute and relative frequency) data. Results. 57.8% of donors were female and 62.9% of recipients male. 53.3% of donors were siblings, 44.5% parents, and 2.2% a daughter. Most recipients (71.9%) thought that the donation was the donors' initiative and 21.9% that it was suggested by medical team. 96.4% responded that it was the donor's wish that determined their decision; 51.4% had serious or some doubts about accepting the option, but for 48.6% it was an easy decision. Among the donors, 88.9% decided by themselves and 8.9% were asked for donation. For 91.1%, their wish was the main reason of the decision, but 8.9% felt a moral obligation; 77.8% thought it was an easy decision, and 17.8% hesitated a little 84.4% were not worried about their future health. Conclusions. Altruistic motivations were predominant in both groups. Most recipients thought that the motivation for donation was self-determined, a finding that agreed with donor perceptions. Perceptions about the quality of and changes in emotional relationship were the same in both groups. Donors and recipients referred to the donation process as positive, but there were some negative emotions and perceptions.

Living kidney donors’ follow-up is usually focused on the assessment of the surgical and medical outcomes. Whilst the psychosocial follow-up is advocated in literature. It is still not entirely clear which exact psychosocial factors are related to a poor psychosocial outcome of donors. The aim of our study is to prospectively assess the donors’ psychosocial risks factors to impaired health-related quality of life at 1-year post-donation and link their psychosocial profile before donation with their respective outcomes. The influence of the recipient’s medical outcomes on their donor’s psychosocial outcome was also examined. Sixty donors completed a battery of standardized psychometric instruments (quality of life, mental health, coping strategies, personality, socio-economic status), and ad hoc items regarding the donation process (e.g., motivations for donation, decision-making, risk assessment, and donor-recipient relationship). Donors’ 1-year psychosocial follow-up was favorable and comparable with the general population. So far, cluster-analysis identified a subgroup of donors (28%) with a post-donation reduction of their health-related quality of life. This subgroup expressed comparatively to the rest, the need for more pre-donation information regarding surgery risks, and elevated fear of losing the recipient and commitment to stop their suffering.