Introduction: Living donation increases the organ supply, but associated non-medical expenses can disincentivize donation. Programs aimed at increasing living donation need to better understand how financial obstacles, including lost wages, impact the decision to pursue donation. Methods/Approach: Forty-eight interviews were conducted and analyzed using a grounded theory approach. Findings: Three key themes were identified that influenced decision-making: emotional attachment, temporal flexibility, and job security. These themes emerged when dividing interview participants into 3 groups: close relationship donors, broader network donors, and non-directed donors, representing donation to a family member or friend, a specific person they do not know well or at all, or a non-specified individual, respectively. Most close relationship donors wanted to donate regardless of personal financial cost, based on emotional attachment to the recipient. Wage reimbursement did not typically affect their decision-making but could reduce stress. Since non-directed donors did not donate to a specific individual, they could wait to achieve financial stability before donating, if needed. While wage reimbursement might create more proximate stability, non-directed donors had the flexibility to postpone donations until they could independently achieve financial stability. Lacking emotional attachment and temporal flexibility, broader network donors were particularly active decision-makers and most influenced by wage reimbursement. Across all groups, donors with job security were more resolute about donating. Conclusion: The findings underscore the importance of lost wage reimbursement to facilitate donation and reduce stress, and policies to protect donor job security.
Satisfaction with life and depressive symptoms in living organ donors and non‐donors: New insights from the National Living Donor Assistance Center
AbstractBackgroundPrevious studies indicate there may be psychological consequences of being unable to serve as a living donor, but these have not been explored in a large national cohort of low‐income individuals who initiated living donor evaluation in US transplant centers.MethodsUsing data from 6574 National Living Donor Assistance Center (NLDAC) participants (November 1, 2007‐December 31, 2018), we utilized a cross‐sectional study design to evaluate short‐term depressive symptoms and satisfaction with life in living donors and non‐donors (those who were declined or withdrew from evaluation) using the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) and the PHQ‐8, with and without risk adjustment using linear regression.ResultsNational Living Donor Assistance Center participants originated from 207 US transplant centers. 52% of NLDAC participants responded to the survey (n = 3423; donors = 2848 (58.6% of all donors), non‐donors = 575 (33.5% of all non‐donors); ncenters = 201)). Respondents were significantly older, more likely to be female, white, non‐Hispanic, married, more educated, more full‐time employed, and more likely to be unrelated to the recipient vs non‐respondents (all, P < .001). Among survey respondents, donors were significantly younger, more likely to be non‐Hispanic, employed, and related to the recipient compared to non‐donors (all, P < .05). Higher PHQ‐8 scores were correlated with lower SWL scores (r = −.32, P < .001). Both groups displayed high SWLS (donors vs non‐donors: 27.1 vs 26.3, P = .002). Both groups had low levels of depressive symptoms overall, but donors had more symptoms than non‐donors (3.5 vs 2.4, P < .001). After risk adjustment, non‐donors had significantly less depressive symptoms by PHQ‐8 (28% lower, P < .001), but had lower life satisfaction (1.2 points lower, P < .001).ConclusionsDonors and non‐donors have high global levels of overall life satisfaction and low levels of depressive symptoms at 8 weeks after donation or denial. While small effect sizes were observed between groups in these outcomes, being a non‐donor was an independent risk factor for lower life satisfaction, which warrants further evaluation.