Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Mar;26(3):337-348.
doi: 10.1002/lt.25715.

Tool to Aid Patients in Selecting a Liver Transplant Center

Affiliations

Tool to Aid Patients in Selecting a Liver Transplant Center

Cory R Schaffhausen et al. Liver Transpl. 2020 Mar.

Abstract

Variations in candidate and donor acceptance criteria may influence access and mortality for liver transplantation. We sought to understand how recipient and donor characteristics vary across centers and how patients interpret this information, and we used these data to develop a tool to provide tailored information to candidates seeking a center (www.transplantcentersearch.org). We analyzed liver recipient data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients to determine how recipient and donor characteristics (eg, age, Medicaid use, and human immunodeficiency virus status) varied across programs. Data included recipients and donors at each US program between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2017. The variation in characteristics was plotted with centers stratified by total transplant volume and by volume of each characteristic. A subset of characteristics was plotted to show variation over 3 years. We created mockups of potential reports displaying recipient characteristics alongside pretransplant and posttransplant outcomes and solicited feedback at patient and family interviews and focus groups, which included 39 individuals: 10 pilot interviews with candidates seeking liver transplant at the University of Minnesota-Fairview (UMNF) and 5 focus groups with 13 UMNF candidates, 6 UMNF family members, and 10 national recipients. Transcripts were analyzed using a thematic analysis. Several themes emerged: (1) Candidates experience gaps in existing education about center options; (2) patients requested information about how selection criteria might impact access to transplant; and (3) information tailored to a candidate's medical characteristics can inform decisions. Characteristics shown on mockups varied across centers (P < 0.01). Variation was widespread for small and large centers. In conclusion, variation exists in recipient and donor characteristics across centers. Liver transplant patients provide positive feedback upon viewing patient-specific search tools.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Potential conflict of interest: Nothing to report.

Figures

FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.
Patient-specific data entry screen mockup discussed in focus groups. The original color figure has been converted to grayscale.
FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.
Early iteration of patient-specific search results mockup. The original color figure has been converted to grayscale.
FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.
Revised iteration of patient-specific search results mockup. The original color figure has been converted to grayscale.
FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.
The distribution of transplant recipient and donor volumes for small (1-25 transplants/year), medium (26-75 transplants/year), and large (76+ transplants/year) centers for each recipient and donor characteristic (P < 0.01 for all characteristics). The darker shading reflects a higher number of recipients/donors at a center for each characteristic. A larger shaded area reflects a greater proportion of US centers for each center size. HCV+ donor and recipient indicates that the recipient has HCV+ serology status and the donor has HCV+ serology status. HIV+ recipient indicates that the recipient has HIV+ serology status.
FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.
The proportion of recipients of age ≥65 years for each US center for 3 consecutive 1-year periods (2015-2017). Points represent the mean proportions for each transplant center, and the lines represent the minimum-maximum range for each transplant center.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Martin P, DiMartini A, Feng S, Brown R, Fallon M. Evaluation for liver transplantation in adults: 2013 practice guideline by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the American Society of Transplantation. Hepatology 2014;59:1144–1165. - PubMed
    1. Fayek SA, Quintini C, Chavin KD, Marsh CL. The current state of liver transplantation in the United States: Perspective from American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) Scientific Studies Committee and endorsed by ASTS Council. Am J Transplant 2016;16:3093–3104. - PubMed
    1. Secunda K, Gordon EJ, Sohn MW, Shinkunas LA, Kaldjian LC, Voigt MD, Levitsky J. National survey of provider opinions on controversial characteristics of liver transplant candidates. Liver Transpl 2013;19:395–403. - PubMed
    1. Hasanin M, Dubay DA, McGuire BM, Schiano T, Singal AK. Liver transplantation for alcoholic hepatitis: a survey of liver transplant centers. Liver Transpl 2015;21:1449–1452. - PubMed
    1. Schaffhausen CR, Bruin MJ, Chu S, Wey A, Snyder JJ, Kasiske BK, Israni AK. The importance of transplant program measures: surveys of three national patient advocacy groups. Clin Transplant 2018;32:e13426. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types