scholarly journals Perception Regarding Live Kidney Donation in the General Population of South Korea

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eunjeong Kang ◽  
Jangwook Lee ◽  
Sehoon Park ◽  
Yaerim Kim ◽  
Hyo Jeong Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Population ◽  
Donor Nephrectomy ◽  
Government Support ◽  
Kidney Donation ◽  
Kidney Donors ◽  
Living Kidney Donors ◽  
Proportional Allocation ◽  
Economic Support ◽  
Live Kidney Donation ◽  
The Government

Abstract This study aimed to know how the general population recognizes live kidney donation in Korea. Participants were randomly selected from the general population after proportional allocation by region, sex, and age. Selected participants received a questionnaire that included demographic information, socioeconomic and marital statuses, prior recognition of live donor KT, expected changes after donation, and the need for support after donor nephrectomy. Among the 1,000 participants from the web-based survey, 83.8% answered they fully understood living donor KT, 81.1% knew about them, and 51.1% were willing to donate. Various complications after nephrectomy and deterioration in health after donation were the most significant reasons for those reluctant to donate. Most agreed that the government should provide social and economic support to living kidney donors, especially after exposure to the description of donor nephrectomy. Financial support, including surgery and regular medical check-up costs, was the most preferred government support. The Korean general population seemed aware of the value and safety of kidney donation, although only half of them were willing to donate due to concerns about possible complications. Most participants agreed on social and economic support for living kidney donors, especially surgery-related costs.

scholarly journals Perception Regarding Live Kidney Donation in the General Population of South Korea

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eunjeong Kang ◽  
Jangwook Lee ◽  
Sehoon Park ◽  
Yaerim Kim ◽  
Hyo Jeong Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Population ◽  
Living Donor ◽  
Donor Nephrectomy ◽  
Government Support ◽  
Kidney Donation ◽  
Kidney Donors ◽  
Living Kidney Donors ◽  
Economic Support ◽  
Live Kidney Donation ◽  
The Government

Abstract Background: It is necessary to know how the general population recognizes live kidney donation in Korea, where living donor kidney transplantations (KT) are the mainstream.Methods: Participants were randomly selected from the general population after proportional allocation by region, sex, and age. Selected participants received a questionnaire that included demographic information, socioeconomic and marital statuses, prior recognition of live donor KT, expected changes after donation, and the need for support after donor nephrectomy.Results: In total, 1,000 participants responded to the web-based survey. After reading the detailed explanation, 83.8% of the respondents answered that they fully understood living donor KT. Among the participants, 811(81.1%) answered that they knew about living donor KT, and 51.1% were willing to donate. Various complications after nephrectomy (54.4%) and deterioration in health after donation (69.1%) were the most important reasons for those who were reluctant to donate, and the possibility of a decrease in economic activities after donation accounted for 33.8%. Overall, 73.2% were more likely to agree that the government should provide social and economic support to living kidney donors; this number increased to 81.3% after exposure to the description of donor nephrectomy (P<0.001). Financial support, including surgery (74.2%) and regular medical check-up costs (70.1%), was the most preferred government support.Conclusions: The Korean general population seemed to be aware of the value and safety of kidney donation, although only half of them were willing to donate due to concerns about possible complications. Most participants agreed on social and economic support for living kidney donors, especially for surgery-related costs.

scholarly journals Long-Term Consequences of Live Kidney Donation Follow-Up in 93% of Living Kidney Donors in a Single Transplant Center

2005 ◽  
Vol 5 (10) ◽  
pp. 2417-2424 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Gossmann ◽  
Albina Wilhelm ◽  
Heinz-Georg Kachel ◽  
Jochen Jordan ◽  
Uli Sann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Kidney Donation ◽  
Kidney Donors ◽  
Living Kidney Donors ◽  
Transplant Center ◽  
Live Kidney Donation ◽  
Long Term Consequences

scholarly journals Long-term risks after kidney donation: how do we inform potential donors? A survey from DESCARTES and EKITA transplantation working groups

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geir Mjøen ◽  
Umberto Maggiore ◽  
Nicos Kessaris ◽  
Diederik Kimenai ◽  
Bruno Watschinger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Kidney Donation ◽  
Kidney Donors ◽  
Living Kidney Donors ◽  
Relative Risks ◽  
Written Information ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Stage Renal Disease ◽  
End Stage

Abstract Background Publications from the last decade have increased knowledge regarding long-term risks after kidney donation. We wanted to perform a survey to assess how transplant professionals in Europe inform potential kidney donors regarding long-term risks. The objectives of the survey were to determine how they inform donors and to what extent, and to evaluate the degree of variation. Methods All transplant professionals involved in the evaluation process were considered eligible, regardless of the type of profession. The survey was dispatched as a link to a web-based survey. The subjects included questions on demographics, the information policy of the respondent and the use of risk calculators, including the difference of relative and absolute risks and how the respondents themselves understood these risks. Results The main finding was a large variation in how often different long-term risks were discussed with the potential donors, i.e. from always to never. Eighty percent of respondents stated that they always discuss the risk of end-stage renal disease, while 56% of respondents stated that they always discuss the risk of preeclampsia. Twenty percent of respondents answered correctly regarding the relationship between absolute and relative risks for rare outcomes. Conclusions The use of written information and checklists should be encouraged. This may improve standardization regarding the information provided to potential living kidney donors in Europe. There is a need for information and education among European transplant professionals regarding long-term risks after kidney donation and how to interpret and present these risks.

scholarly journals Mental Health Among Living Kidney Donors: A Prospective Comparison With Matched Controls From the General Population

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 508-517 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Timmerman ◽  
M. Laging ◽  
G. J. Westerhof ◽  
R. Timman ◽  
W. C. Zuidema ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
General Population ◽  
Kidney Donors ◽  
Living Kidney Donors ◽  
Prospective Comparison

UK policy for the conservation and rural economy of the hills and uplands

1994 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
G. F. Waters
Keyword(s):  
Rural Economy ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
Government Support ◽  
Environmental Benefit ◽  
Economic Support ◽  
The Government ◽  
Hill Farming ◽  
Grant Scheme

AbstractThere has been a long history, nearly 50 years, of support by the government for farming in the upland areas and the modern schemes continue the essential features of support that have been developed over the years. However the justification for the support has changed with time, from maximizing production to more social issues. It is now being recognized that the hill farmer's efforts have helped create and maintain one of our most attractive national assets and it is this environmental benefit which increasingly provides much of the justification for continued public support for hill farming. So the government's policies are important in two respects: the vital rôle of economic support and the encouragement of farmers to manage their land with greater concern for the environment.On the economic front, one of the most important ways that support is provided to upland farming is through HLCAs. Also vitally important are the EC sheepmeat regime and the changes made to that regime and the EC beef regime in the recent CAP reform settlement.The government's encouragement of farmers to manage their land with greater concern for the environment is increasing in importance and there are a number of ways in which this encouragement is delivered. The government has built on the success of Environmentally Sensitive Areas. As well as ESAs, there are other schemes available to farmers such as the Farm and Conservation Grant Scheme. In addition, an opportunity to develop a coherent framework for the delivery of a number of environmental schemes has presented itself as a result of the CAP reform. However, Government support should not be thought of as the only source of extra income for hill farmers. The farmer and the farmer's family should use every opportunity open to them to maximize their income.

scholarly journals Physician Attitudes Toward Living Kidney Donation

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Howard Trachtman ◽  
Brendan Parent ◽  
Ari Kirshenbaum ◽  
Arthur Caplan
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Careful Consideration ◽  
Physician Attitudes ◽  
Kidney Donation ◽  
Living Donation ◽  
Living Kidney Donation ◽  
Kidney Donor ◽  
Living Kidney Donor ◽  
Kidney Donors ◽  
Living Kidney Donors

Background: Compared to dialysis, living kidney donation has a greater chance of restoring health and is associated with better outcomes than deceased kidney donation. Although physicians advocate for this treatment, it is uncertain how they would act as potential living kidney donors or recipients. Methods: We surveyed 104 physicians, pediatric, and internal medicine nephrologists, to ascertain their attitudes toward living donation. Results: Among surveyed nephrologists, there was nearly universal support for living kidney donation as a viable medical option, and nearly all of them would support a healthy and medically cleared patient who wishes to participate. Although support was still strong, nephrologists were significantly less likely to support their friends and relatives participating in living kidney donation, and their support declined further for friends and relatives donating to nonrelatives. Conclusion: Our findings suggest the need to more deeply examine physician-perceived risks involved in serving as a living kidney donor. Based on differences in surveyed nephrologist attitudes regarding donation to and from loved ones versus nonrelatives, we suggest that physicians should give careful consideration to how they describe the risks of living donation to potential donors.

Changes in Muscle Quality and Body Composition 1 Year After Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy in Living Kidney Donors

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 682-688
Author(s):  
Hiroki Fukuhara ◽  
Takaaki Nawano ◽  
Akiko Kanda ◽  
Toshihide Tomosugi ◽  
Manabu Okada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Body Composition ◽  
Donor Nephrectomy ◽  
Muscle Quality ◽  
Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy ◽  
Kidney Donors ◽  
Living Kidney Donors
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document