Exploring Staff Attitudes Towards Unspecified Kidney Donors in the United Kingdom: Results From the BOUnD Study.

Unspecified kidney donation (UKD) has made substantial contributions to the UK living donor programme. Nevertheless, some transplant professionals are uncomfortable with these individuals undergoing surgery. This study aimed to qualitatively explore the attitudes of UK healthcare professionals towards UKD. An opportunistic sample was recruited through the Barriers and Outcomes in Unspecified Donation (BOUnD) study covering six UK transplant centres: three high volume and three low volume centres. Interview transcripts were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. The study provided comprehensive coverage of the UK transplant community, involving 59 transplant professionals. We identified five themes: staff's conception of the ethics of UKD; presence of the known recipient in the donor-recipient dyad; need for better management of patient expectations; managing visceral reactions about the "typical" unspecified kidney donor; complex attitudes toward a promising new practice. This is the first in-depth qualitative study of attitudes of transplant professionals towards UKD. The data uncovered findings with strong clinical implications for the UKD programme, including the need for a uniform approach towards younger candidates that is adhered to by all transplant centres, the need to equally extend the rigorous assessment to both specified and unspecified donors, and a new approach to managing donor expectations.

Experiences of completed and withdrawn unspecified kidney donor candidates in the United Kingdom: An inductive thematic analysis from the BOUnD study.

Objectives This study sheds light on some controversial aspects of unspecified kidney donation (UKD) as well as the ways in which potential donors are screened and prepared for the donation experience and its aftermath. The aim of this study was to qualitatively investigate the experiences of individuals involved in the United Kingdom (UK) UKD scheme, including those who complete the donation, are eventually medically withdrawn, or self-withdraw. Better insight into the different experiences of these groups will provide useful guidance to clinical teams on how to better address the differing psychological needs of completed donors as well as those who do not proceed to donation. Methods A purposive sample was recruited through the Barriers and Outcomes in Unspecified Donation (BOUnD) study covering 23 transplant centres in the United Kingdom. Semi-structured interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim and subjected to inductive thematic analysis. Results Participants consisted of 15 individuals who had donated, 11 who had been withdrawn by the transplant team and nine who had self-withdrawn. The analysis resulted in six themes and 14 subthemes. The major themes were maximizing and sharing benefits; risk-to-motivation analysis; support; self-actualization/finding meaning; the donor as patient; and relationship with the transplant team. Conclusions The data demonstrate that, although all donors enter the process with a similar level of commitment, those who did not proceed to donation expressed dissatisfaction and lingering emotional consequences linked to lack of follow-up from transplant teams. The implication for the UKD programme is that from the beginning there needs to be a strategic and consistent approach to managing expectations in order to prepare those who embark on the donation process for all possible outcomes and their associated emotional consequences.

The umbilicus: a reliable surface landmark for the aortic bifurcation?

PURPOSE: Anatomical surface landmarks are frequently used by clinicians to guide both diagnosis and treatment. Few studies have examined the reliability of vascular anatomical landmarks in living subjects. The umbilicus has traditionally been described as a surface landmark for the bifurcation of the abdominal aorta. This study examined the factors affecting the position of the umbilicus relative to that of the aortic bifurcation in 95 patients. METHODS: 106 consecutive abdominal CT scans were analysed by a surgeon and radiologist. Following exclusion of CT scans with relevant significant intra-abdominal pathology, 95 patients were included in the study. Measurements were taken of the craniocaudal distance between the aortic bifurcation and umbilicus, as well as maximum subcutaneous fat thickness at the level of the umbilicus. Patient age and gender were also documented. RESULTS: The umbilicus was found to lie -6.3 ± 26.5 mm from the aortic bifurcation. Increasing subcutaneous fat thickness was associated with a more caudal position of the umbilicus relative to the aortic bifurcation. This result was highly statistically significant in males over 65 years old. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the umbilicus is a reliable clinical surface landmark for the bifurcation of the abdominal aorta. Whilst some variation in craniocaudal distance exists between patients, in the majority of cases, the bifurcation of the abdominal aorta lies within a clinically narrow range of distances from the umbilicus.