A Mixed-Methods Approach to Understanding Variation in Social Support Requirements and Implications for Access to Transplantation in the United States.

Clicks: 531
ID: 58443
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #1 of 3 articles by views in progress in transplantation (aliso viejo, calif)

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Social support is a key component of transplantation evaluation in the United States. Social support definitions and evaluation procedures require examination to achieve clear, consistent implementation. We surveyed psychosocial clinicians from the Society for Transplant Social Workers and American Society of Transplant Surgeons about their definitions and evaluation procedures for using social support to determine transplant eligibility. Bivariate statistical analysis was used for quantitative data and content analysis for qualitative data. Among 276 psychosocial clinicians (50.2% response rate), 92% had ruled out patients from transplantation due to inadequate support. Social support definitions varied significantly: 10% of respondents indicated their center lacked a definition. Key domains of social support included informational, emotional, instrumental, motivational, paid support, and the patient's importance to others. Almost half of clinicians (47%) rarely or never requested second opinions when excluding patients due to social support. Confidence and perceived clarity and consistency in center guidelines were significantly associated with informing patients when support contributed to negative wait-listing decisions ( = .001). Clinicians who excluded fewer patients because of social support offered significantly more supportive health care ( = .02). Clearer definitions and more supportive care may reduce the number of patients excluded from transplant candidacy due to inadequate social support.
Reference Key
ladin2019aprogress Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Ladin, Keren;Marotta, Satia A;Butt, Zeeshan;Gordon, Elisa J;Daniels, Norman;Lavelle, Tara A;Hanto, Douglas W;
Journal progress in transplantation (aliso viejo, calif)
Year 2019
DOI
10.1177/1526924819874387
URL
Keywords
access kidney mixed-methods social support lung ethics disparities qualitative liver social work health services research heart justice psychosocial organ transplantation and evaluation candidate evaluation health-care quality transplant candidate transplant evaluation

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.