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
Review
. 2012 Jun;17(3):241-7.
doi: 10.1097/MOT.0b013e32835365c6.

Quality of life, risk assessment, and safety research in liver transplantation: new frontiers in health services and outcomes research

Zeeshan Butt  1 , Neehar D Parikh, Anton I Skaro, Daniela Ladner, David Cella
Affiliations
Review

Quality of life, risk assessment, and safety research in liver transplantation: new frontiers in health services and outcomes research

Zeeshan Butt et al. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2012 Jun.

Abstract

Purpose of review: In this review, we briefly summarize three fruitful, emerging areas in liver transplantation research, quality of life; risk assessment; and patient safety. Our goal is to highlight recent findings in these areas, with a call for increased integration of social scientists and transplant clinicians to address how best to shape policy and improve outcomes.

Recent findings: After liver transplantation, recipients generally experience clinically significant, sustained improvement in their physical, social and emotional well being. However, a sizeable minority of patients do experience excess morbidity that may benefit from ongoing surveillance and/or intervention. There is growing body of research that describes risks associated with liver transplantation, which can be useful aids to better inform decision making by patients, clinicians, payers, and policy makers. In contrast, there has been a relative lack of empirical data on transplant patient safety vulnerabilities, placing the field of surgery in stark contrast to other high-risk industries, wherein such assessments inform continuous process improvement.

Summary: Health services and outcomes research has grown in importance in the liver transplantation literature, but several important questions remain unanswered that merit programmatic, interdisciplinary research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Depiction of the multi-department, inter-school, transdisciplinary Northwestern University Transplant Outcomes Research Collaborative (NUTORC). [NMH = Northwestern Memorial Hospital]
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Measuring Healthy Days. Atlanta, Georgia: CDC: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2000. Nov,
    1. Jay CL, Butt Z, Ladner DP, et al. A review of quality of life instruments used in liver transplantation. J Hepatol. 2009 Nov;51(5):949–959. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ware JE, Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical care. 1992 Jun;30(6):473–483. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.]. - PubMed
    1. Gralnek IM, Hays RD, Kilbourne A, et al. Development and evaluation of the Liver Disease Quality of Life instrument in persons with advanced, chronic liver disease--the LDQOL 1.0. American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2000;95(12):3552–3565. - PubMed

    1. Saab S, Ng V, Landaverde C, et al. Development of a disease-specific questionnaire to measure health-related quality of life in liver transplant recipients. Liver Transpl. 2011 May;17(5):567–579. The authors describe a rigorous approach to developing a patient-reported outcome measure for liver transplant recipients. Additional psychometric data will add to the scale’s utility in clinical research.

Publication types