2013 - ISODP 2013 Congress


Oral Presentation 4 on Graft and Patient Outcomes 1

42.5 - Outcomes following transplantation: preferences and priorities of kidney transplant recipients.

Presenter: Martin, Howell, Westmead, Australia
Authors: Martin Howell, Germaine Wong, Allison Tong, John Rose, Jonathan Craig, Kirsten Howard


Outcomes following transplantation: preferences and priorities of kidney transplant recipients.

Martin Howell1,2, Germaine Wong1,2,4, Allison Tong1,2, John Rose3, Jonathan Craig1,2, Kirsten Howard2

1Centre for Kidney Research, Westmead, Australia, 2School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia, 3Institute of Transport and Logistics, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia, 4Centre for Transplant and Renal Reseacrh, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, Australia

Background: Knowledge of the extent to which recipients would be willing to trade the risk of adverse outcomes for graft survival should be taken into account when considering expansion of the organ donor pool. 

Aim: To evaluate transplant recipient preferences and trade-offs for adverse outcomes after transplantation.

Methods: Kidney transplant recipients were presented a survey that contained a list of nine outcomes including; graft survival and the risk of dying before graft failure; serious adverse events; and drug related side effects. The survey instrument assessed the participants’ preferences of the best and worst outcomes for each scenario.  The questionnaires were sent and returned by post or completed on the Web.  Responses were analysed using multinominal logit models to evaluate relative importance and trade-offs between outcomes.  Interviews were conducted with selected participants to evaluate understanding of the survey.

Results:  Of the 83 eligible participants, 35 recipients (42%) (35-73 years) participated.  Graft survival was the most important outcome, followed by cancer, cardiovascular disease and serious infection .  Modelling suggested that  participants were willing to forgo 4.5 to 5 years of graft survival to prevent a 10% increased risk of cancer, cardiovascular disease or serious infection.  In contrast participants were willing to forgo only 2.6 years of graft survival to prevent a 10% increase in the risk of dying with a functioning graft.

Conclusion: Transplant recipients are willing to accept a high probability of serious outcomes and side effects to maximize graft survival.  Aversion of returning to dialysis was reflected in the relatively low importance placed on the probability of dying with a functioning graft.


You must be logged in to view recordings

Important Disclaimer

By viewing the material on this site you understand and accept that:

  1. The opinions and statements expressed on this site reflect the views of the author or authors and do not necessarily reflect those of The Transplantation Society and/or its Sections.
  2. The hosting of material on The Transplantation Society site does not signify endorsement of this material by The Transplantation Society and/or its Sections.
  3. The material is solely for educational purposes for qualified health care professionals.
  4. The Transplantation Society and/or its Sections are not liable for any decision made or action taken based on the information contained in the material on this site.
  5. The information cannot be used as a substitute for professional care.
  6. The information does not represent a standard of care.
  7. No physician-patient relationship is being established.

Our Corporate Sponsors

TTS gratefully acknowledges the Corporate Partners whose generous support makes the work of the Society possible:

  • astellas
  • roche
  • sanofi