| 1. |
- Abbey, Susan E., et al.
(author)
-
Qualitative interviews versus standardised self-report questionnaires in assessing qualityb of life in heart transplant recipients
- 2011
-
In: The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation. - : Elsevier. - 1053-2498 .- 1557-3117. ; 30:8, s. 963-966
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Quality of life (QoL) studies in heart transplant recipients (HTRs) using validated, quantitative, self-report questionnaires have reported poor QoL in approximately 20% of patients. This consecutive mixed methods study compared self-report questionnaires, the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form Health Survey (MOS SF-36) and the Atkinson Life Satisfaction Scale, with phenomenologically informed audiovisual (AV) qualitative interview data in 27 medically stable HTRs (70% male; age 53 ± 13.77 years; time since transplant 4.06 ± 2.42 years). Self-report questionnaire data reported poor QoL and more distress compared with previous studies and normative population samples; in contrast, 52% of HTRs displayed pervasive distress according to visual methodology. Using qualitative methods to assess QoL yields information that would otherwise remain unobserved by the exclusive use of quantitative QOL questionnaires.
|
|
| 2. |
- Gewarges, M., et al.
(author)
-
Canadian Society of Transplantation Members Views on Anonymity in Organ Donation and Transplantation
- 2015
-
In: Transplantation Proceedings. - : ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. - 0041-1345 .- 1873-2623. ; 47:10, s. 2799-2804
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background. Anonymity has been central to medical, psychosocial, and societal practices in organ donation and transplantation. The purpose of this investigation was to explore transplant professionals views on anonymity in the context of organ transplantation. Methods. The study consisted of an electronic 18-item survey distributed to the Canadian Society of Transplantation membership, asking about anonymity vs open communication/contact between organ recipients and donor families. Results. Of the 541 members surveyed, 106 replied. Among respondents, 71% felt that organ recipients and donor families should only communicate anonymously, yet 47% felt that identifying information could be included in correspondence between consenting recipients and donor families. When asked whether organ recipients and donor families should be allowed to meet, 53% of respondents agreed, 27% disagreed, and 20% neither agreed nor disagreed. With social media facilitating communication and eliminating the ability to maintain donor/recipient anonymity, 38% of respondents felt that a reexamination of current policies and practices pertaining to anonymity was necessary. Conclusion. In conclusion, there was no dominant position on the issue of anonymity/communication between donor families and transplant recipients. Further research and discussion concerning the views of healthcare professionals, organ recipients, and donor families on the mandate of anonymity is needed and may influence future policy.
|
|
