Premium
Multicenter investigation of the reliability and validity of the live donor assessment tool as an enhancement to the psychosocial evaluation of living donors
Author(s) -
Kook Yoon won Amy,
Shenoy Akhil,
Hunt Julia,
Desrosiers Farrah,
GordonElliott Janna S.,
JowseyGregoire Sheila,
Trompeta Joyce A.,
Vandrovec Margo,
Weinberg Sandra,
Fan Weijia,
LaPointe Rudow Dianne
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
american journal of transplantation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.89
H-Index - 188
eISSN - 1600-6143
pISSN - 1600-6135
DOI - 10.1111/ajt.15170
Subject(s) - psychosocial , medicine , inter rater reliability , single center , clinical psychology , physical therapy , family medicine , psychiatry , surgery , rating scale , psychology , developmental psychology
The live donor assessment tool ( LDAT ) is the first psychosocial assessment tool developed to standardize live donor psychosocial evaluations. A multicenter study was conducted to explore reliability and validity of the LDAT and determine its ability to enhance the psychosocial evaluation beyond its center of origin. Four transplant programs participated, each with their own team of evaluators and unique demographics. Liver and kidney living donors ( LD s) undergoing both standard psychosocial evaluation and LDAT from June 2015 to September 2016 were studied. LDAT interrater reliability, associations between LDAT scores and psychosocial evaluation outcome, and psychosocial outcomes postdonation were tested. 386 LD evaluations were compared and had a mean LDAT score of 67.34 ± 7.57. In 140 LD s with two LDAT s by different observers, the interrater scores correlated ( r = 0.63). LDAT scores at each center and overall stratified to the conventional grouping of psychosocial risk level. LDAT scores of 131 subjects who proceeded with donation were expectedly lower in LD s requiring postdonation counseling ( t = −2.78, P = .01). The LDAT had good reliability between raters and predicted outcome of the psychosocial evaluation across centers. It can be used to standardize language among clinicians to communicate psychosocial risk of LD candidates and assist teams when anticipating postdonation psychosocial needs.