Towards a standardised informed consent procedure for live donor nephrectomy: The PRINCE (Process of Informed Consent Evaluation) project-study protocol for a nationwide prospective cohort study

Introduction: Informed consent is mandatory for all (surgical) procedures, but it is even more important when it comes to living kidney donors undergoing surgery for the benefit of others. Donor education, leading to informed consent, needs to be carried out according to certain standards. Informed consent procedures for live donor nephrectomy vary per centre, and even per individual healthcare professional. The basis for a standardised, uniform surgical informed consent procedure for live donor nephrectomy can be created by assessing what information donors need to hear to prepare them for the operation and convalescence. Methods and analysis: The PRINCE (Process of In formed Consent Evaluation) project is a prospective, multicentre cohort study, to be carried out in all eight Dutch kidney transplant centres. Donor knowledge of the procedure and postoperative course will be evaluated by means of pop quizzes. A baseline cohort (prior to receiving any information from a member of the transplant team in one of the transplant centres) will be compared with a control group, the members of which receive the pop quiz on the day of admission for donor nephrectomy. Donor satisfaction will be evaluated for all donors who completed the admission pop-quiz. The primary end point is donor knowledge. In addition, those elements that have to be included in the standardized format informed consent procedure will be identified. Secondary end points are donor satisfaction, current informed consent practices in the different centres (eg, how many visits, which personnel, what kind of information is di

Towards a standardised informed consent procedure for live donor nephrectomy:the PRINCE (Process of Informed Consent Evaluation) project-study protocol for a nationwide prospective cohort study

Introduction: Informed consent is mandatory for all (surgical) procedures, but it is even more important when it comes to living kidney donors undergoing surgery for the benefit of others. Donor education, leading to informed consent, needs to be carried out according to certain standards. Informed consent procedures for live donor nephrectomy vary per centre, and even per individual healthcare professional. The basis for a standardised, uniform surgical informed consent procedure for live donor nephrectomy can be created by assessing what information donors need to hear to prepare them for the operation and convalescence. Methods and analysis: The PRINCE (Process of Informed Consent Evaluation) project is a prospective, multicentre cohort study, to be carried out in all eight Dutch kidney transplant centres. Donor knowledge of the procedure and postoperative course will be evaluated by means of pop quizzes. A baseline cohort (prior to receiving any information from a member of the transplant team in one of the transplant centres) will be compared with a control group, the members of which receive the pop quiz on the day of admission for donor nephrectomy. Donor satisfaction will be evaluated for all donors who completed the admission pop-quiz. The primary end point is donor knowledge. In addition, those elements that have to be included in the standardised format informed consent procedure will be identified. Secondary end points are donor satisfaction, current informed consent practices in the different centres (eg, how many visits, which personnel, what kind of information is disclosed, in which format, etc) and correlation of donor knowledge with surgeons' estimation thereof. Ethics and dissemination: Approval for this study was obtained from the medical ethical committee of the Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, on 18 February 2015. Secondary approval has been obtained from the local ethics committees in six participating centres. Approval in the last centre has been sought. Results: Outcome will be published in a scientific journal

Early Steroid Withdrawal Compared With Standard Immunosuppression in Kidney Transplantation - Interim Analysis of the Amsterdam-Leiden-Groningen Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: The optimal immunosuppressive regimen in kidney transplant recipients, delivering maximum efficacy with minimal toxicity, is unknown. METHODS: The Amsterdam, LEiden, GROningen trial is a randomized, multicenter, investigator-driven, noninferiority, open-label trial in 305 kidney transplant recipients, in which 2 immunosuppression minimization strategies-one consisting of early steroid withdrawal, the other of tacrolimus minimization 6 months after transplantation-were compared with standard immunosuppression with basiliximab, corticosteroids, tacrolimus, and mycophenolic acid. The primary endpoint was kidney function. Secondary endpoints included death, primary nonfunction, graft failure, rejection, discontinuation of study medication, and a combined endpoint of treatment failure. An interim analysis was scheduled at 6 months, that is, just before tacrolimus minimization. RESULTS: This interim analysis revealed no significant differences in Modification of Diet in Renal Disease between the early steroid withdrawal group and the standard immunosuppression groups (43.2 mL/min per 1.73 m2 vs 45.0 mL/min per 1.73 m2, P = 0.408). There were also no significant differences in the secondary endpoints of death (1.0% vs 1.5%; P = 0.737), primary nonfunction (4.1% vs 1.5%, P = 0.159), graft failure (3.1% vs 1.5%, P = 0.370), rejection (18.6% vs 13.6%, P = 0.289), and discontinuation of study medication (19.6% vs 12.6%, P = 0.348). Treatment failure, defined as a composite endpoint of these individual secondary endpoints, was more common in the early steroid withdrawal group (P = 0.027), but this group had fewer serious adverse events and a more favorable cardiovascular risk profile. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these interim results, early steroid withdrawal is a safe short-term immunosuppressive strategy. Long-term outcomes, including a comparison with tacrolimus minimization after 6 months, will be reported in the final 2-year analysis

Changes of perceived control after kidney transplantation: a prospective study

AimsThe aim of this study was to determine if kidney transplantation is associated with increases of perceived control and how changes of perceived control affect the course of psychological distress until 1year after transplantation. BackgroundLow levels of perceived control are associated with reduced well-being among dialysis patients. DesignProspective longitudinal cohort study. MethodsPerceived control (Mastery Scale) and psychological distress (GHQ-12) were prospectively assessed before (T0; n=470) and three (T1; n=197), six (T2; n=210) and twelve (T3; n=183) months after transplantation. Differences between T1 and T0 perceived control were used to stratify the sample into three groups (control gain, stable control and control loss). Socio-demographic and clinical variables, including complications, were examined as potential correlates and the course of psychological was distress compared across groups. Data were collected between July 2008 - July 2013. ResultsPerceived control showed a small increase overall, with 351%, 500% and 149% reporting gain, stable level and loss respectively. Patients with secondary schooling were overrepresented in the control loss group. The course of psychological distress varied across perceived control change groups, with patients in the control gain group experiencing a significant reduction in psychological distress. ConclusionA considerable number of patients report increased levels of perceived control after transplantation that are associated with a subsequent decrease in psychological distress. Results emphasize the importance of perceived control and could inform interventions to facilitate well-being after kidney transplantation

Great expectations? Pre-transplant quality of life expectations and distress after kidney transplantation: A prospective study

ObjectivesPrevious research suggests that prior to kidney transplantation, patients overestimate their post-transplant quality of life (QoL). The current study aimed to corroborate these findings, identify determinants of QoL overestimation, examine its association with subsequent distress, and clarify the role of optimism. DesignProspective observational study. MethodsPhysical, psychological, and social QoL expectations, actual QoL, and distress (GHQ-12) of participants (56% male) were prospectively assessed before (T0; n=228) and 3 (T1; n=149), 6 (T2; n=146), and 12 (T3; n=114) months after successful transplantation. ResultsPatients who were treated with haemodialysis before transplantation reported greater physical QoL overestimation than those who received treatment with peritoneal dialysis. Neither physical nor social QoL overestimation at T1 was prospectively associated with increased distress at T2 or T3. The interaction between optimism and social QoL overestimation at T1 (=-.56, p ConclusionsQoL overestimation is not associated with subsequent distress. Findings suggest that patients low in optimism are more vulnerable to distress following QoL overestimation