Impact of Novel Social Factors on Living Kidney Donation
L. Cholin, E. Ramos, J. Yahr, J. Schold, E. Poggio, A. Huml
Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH
Meeting: 2022 American Transplant Congress
Abstract number: 1047
Keywords: Donation, Kidney transplantation, Living donor, Psychosocial
Topic: Clinical Science » Kidney » 40 - Kidney Living Donor: Other
Session Information
Session Time: 7:00pm-8:00pm
Presentation Time: 7:00pm-8:00pm
Location: Hynes Halls C & D
*Purpose: General demographic information including age, gender, race, and socioeconomic status are often used to describe living kidney donors (LKDs). Little is known about more novel psychosocial factors and their effect on the donation process. Our study aimed to collect non-codified characteristics of LKD candidates to better understand differences between donors and non-donors.
*Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on LKD candidates that initiated the evaluation process between 2016 and 2019 and had a social work (SW) visit. SW notes were reviewed for the frequency of novel characteristics that may impact the success of donation between donor and non-donor groups.
*Results: Compared to non-donors, donors were more often female (64.7% v. 60.0, p=0.62), white (96.1% v. 80.0%, p=0.01), and younger (median 41 v. 46 yr, p=0.45). Both groups demonstrated a high rate of prior altruistic behavior (73.6% overall). However, donors reported previous blood donation more often than non-donors (72.6% v. 60.0%). The non-donor group was more likely to be single (23.6% v. 7.8%) and require social support outside the home (65.5% v. 49.0%) than donor group. Remainder of factors examined appear in tables 1 and 2.
*Conclusions: Social factors persist as barriers to donation even after LKD candidates make it to an in-person SW evaluation. Developing resources to support potential LKDs may increase rates of actual donation.
Overall, N (%) | Non-Donors, N (%) | Donors, N (%) | P-Value | |
Total | 106 (100) | 55 (51.9) | 51 (48.1) | |
Marital status: married, in a partnership, widowed/divorced, single | 62 (58.5), 20 (18.9), 7 (6.6), 17 (16.0) | 25 (45.5), 11 (20.0), 6 (10.9), 13 (23.6) | 37 (72.6), 9 (17.7), 1 (2.0), 4 (7.8) | 0.01 |
Owns home | 86 (81.1) | 43 (78.2) | 43 (84.3) | 0.34 |
Owns car | 103 (97.2) | 52 (94.6) | 51 (100.0) | 0.24 |
Has access to computer | 101 (95.3) | 52 (94.6) | 49 (96.1) | 0.87 |
Living with dependent | 56 (52.8) | 26 (47.3) | 30 (58.8) | 0.24 |
Owns pet | 65 (61.3) | 30 (54.6) | 35 (68.6) | 0.11 |
Overall, N (%) | Non-Donors, N (%) | Donors, N (%) | P-Value | |
Share of household income: minimal, split, majority | 14 (13.2), 63 (59.4), 29 (27.4) | 8 (14.6), 31 (56.4), 16 (29.1) | 6 (11.8), 32 (62.8), 13 (25.5) | 0.79 |
Share of household tasks: minimal, split, majority | 10 (9.4), 68 (64.2), 28 (26.4) | 8 (14.6), 30 (54.6), 17 (30.9) | 2 (3.9), 38 (74.5), 11 (21.6) | 0.06 |
Currently employed | 87 (82.1) | 44 (80.0) | 43 (84.3) | 0.84 |
Has health insurance | 98 (92.5) | 52 (94.6) | 46 (90.2) | 0.40 |
Has paid leave | 64 (60.4) | 36 (65.5) | 28 (54.9) | 0.36 |
Requires social support from outside the home | 61 (57.6) | 36 (65.5) | 25 (49.0) | 0.09 |
Social support requires time off from work | 30 (28.3) | 16 (29.1) | 14 (27.5) | 0.32 |
To cite this abstract in AMA style:
Cholin L, Ramos E, Yahr J, Schold J, Poggio E, Huml A. Impact of Novel Social Factors on Living Kidney Donation [abstract]. Am J Transplant. 2022; 22 (suppl 3). https://atcmeetingabstracts.com/abstract/impact-of-novel-social-factors-on-living-kidney-donation/. Accessed November 21, 2024.« Back to 2022 American Transplant Congress