The use of psychosocial criteria in Australian patient selection guidelines for kidney transplantation

Kate Anderson, Alan Cass, Joan Cunningham, Paul Snelling, Jeannie Devitt and Cilla Preece

Social Science & Medicine, 2007, vol. 64, issue 10, 2107-2114

Abstract: Psychosocial criteria are increasingly being included in practice guidelines for determining patient suitability for kidney transplantation. Although intended to promote evidence-based decision-making, if poorly defined, the inclusion of psychosocial criteria has the potential to reduce transparency in patient selection and equity of access. We reviewed all Australian practice guidelines concerning patient suitability for kidney transplantation and qualitatively analysed their inclusion of, and approach towards, psychosocial criteria. Transplant Directors from all Australian adult transplant units were invited to submit their unit's guidelines for this national research audit. All 16 units (100%) submitted some form of documentation. We analysed only those documents that were purposely structured tools for directing patient selection (eight guidelines used in 10 transplant units). Content analysis was performed on the abstracted psychosocial criteria. Psychosocial criteria--particularly non-compliance and smoking--were commonly included. In general, the psychosocial criteria were ill-defined and lacking in substantiating evidence and recommendations for assessment or action. Our results reveal that current Australian patient selection guidelines for kidney transplantation incorporate poorly defined psychosocial criteria that vary greatly. Furthermore, there appears to be a weak evidence base underpinning their inclusion. The use of psychosocial criteria in this manner decreases the transparency of patient selection and increases the potential for subjective estimates of social worth to influence patient selection. The priority given to such criteria in transplant guidelines requires attention and debate.

Keywords: Healthcare; rationing; Kidney; transplantation; Patient; selection; Practice; guidelines; Psychosocial; criteria; Australia (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2007
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(07)00050-0
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:socmed:v:64:y:2007:i:10:p:2107-2114

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
http://www.elsevier. ... _01_ooc_1&version=01

Access Statistics for this article

Social Science & Medicine is currently edited by Ichiro (I.) Kawachi and S.V. (S.V.) Subramanian

More articles in Social Science & Medicine from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().