Journals / Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology / 2022 / Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 4

Evaluation of Psychosocial Outcomes of Living Liver Donors in Liver Transplantation

Pages
346–355
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Financial status needs to be assessed in detail before and after the operation.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the risk factors affecting psychosocial outcomes of living liver donors after liver transplantations.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The sample consisted of living liver donors followed by 2 liver transplantation centers in 2 private hospitals in 2 different provinces, between August 2017 and October 2019.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Financial status needs to be assessed in detail before and after the operation.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the risk factors affecting psychosocial outcomes of living liver donors after liver transplantations. Methods: This was a descriptive, cross-sectional study. The sample consisted of living liver donors followed by 2 liver transplantation centers in 2 private hospitals in 2 different provinces, between August 2017 and October 2019. All the living liver donors were contacted without a time frame after donation and all the participants were evaluated once. The Beck Depression Scale, SF-36, General Self- Efficacy Scale, and Perceived Available Support Scale were used to collect data. The t-test, Kruskal–Wallis test, Mann–Whitney U-test, and Pearson correlation analysis were used for data analysis. Results: The mean age of the patients was 34.31 ± 8.22 years. There was a positive, weak correlation between age and physical func- tion. Gender, marital status, financial status, and education levels significantly affected physical components, social function, vitality, depression, and self-efficacy scores. High depression levels negatively affected the physical component, self-efficacy, and social sup- port scores of the living liver donors. High self-efficacy positively affected social support. Conclusion: The study revealed that gender, marital status, employment status, and education levels were associated with psychosocial outcomes. The financial status was the main factor affecting each psychosocial variable. Financial status needs to be assessed in detail before and after the operation.

🔖

Cite This Article

ORDİN, Y. S., SEREN, A. K. H., KARAYURT, Ö., KUL, G. A., KILIÇ, M., BOZOKLAR, C. A., TOKAT, Y. (2022). Evaluation of Psychosocial Outcomes of Living Liver Donors in Liver Transplantation. Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology, Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 4, 346–355. https://ajindex.com/articles/408411

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (7)

  1. Newsletter Transplant. International figures on donation and transplantation, EDQM. 2018. Available at: https://www.europarl. europa.eu/EPRS/Newsletter_Transplant_2019.pdf Accessed: Janu- ary 2022
  2. The Declaration of Istanbul on Organ Trafficking and Transplant Tourism. International summit on transplant tourism and organ traf- ficking. Transplantation. 2008;86(8):1013-1018. [CrossRef] 3. IRODaT. International registry on organ donation and transplan- tation−2019. 2019. Available at: https://www.irodat.org, Accessed May 2020
  3. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN). Proce- dures to collect post-donation follow-up data from living donors. 2019. Available at: https://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/professionals/ by-topic/guidance/procedures-to-collect-post-donation-follow- up-data-from-living-donors/ Accessed: January 2022., Accessed March 2020
  4. The European Parliament, The Council of the European Union. Directive 2010/45/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 7 July 2010 on standards of quality and safety of human organs intended for transplantation. 2010. Available at: https://eur-lex. europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32010L0053 Accessed: January 2022
  5. Sixty-Third World Assembly, World Health Organization. WHO guiding principles on human cell, tissue and organ transplantation. Cell Tissue Bank. 2010;11(4):413-419. [CrossRef] 7. Dew MA, Butt Z, Humar A, DiMartini AF. Long-term medical and psychosocial outcomes in living liver donors. Am J Transplant. 2017;17(4):880-892. [CrossRef] 8. Manyalich M, Ricart A, Martínez I, et al. EULID project: European living donation and public health. Transplant Proc. 2009;41(6):2021- 2024. [CrossRef] 9. Lennerling A, Lovén C, Dor FJMF, et al. Living organ donation prac- tices in Europe - results from an online survey. Transpl Int. 2013;26(2):145-153. [CrossRef] 10. Manyalich M, Menjívar A, Yucetin L, et al. Living donor psychoso- cial assessment/follow-up practices in the partners’ countries of the ELIPSY project. Transplant Proc. 2012;44(7):2246-2249. [CrossRef] 11. LIDOBS. Living Donor Knowledge Community: experience, research and consensus-LIDOBS. 2017. Brussels, Belgium: The Euro- pean Commission. Available at: http://www.eulivingdonor.eu/lidobs/, Accessed May 17, 2020
  6. Chadran B, Bharathan VK, Mathew JS, et al. Quality of life of donors following donor hepatectomy. Indian J Gastroenterol. 2017;36(2):92-98
  7. Dew MA, DiMartini AF, Ladner DP, et al. Psychosocial outcomes