National survey of second opinions for hospitalized patients in need of liver transplantation
- PMID: 37439670
- DOI: 10.1097/LVT.0000000000000213
National survey of second opinions for hospitalized patients in need of liver transplantation
Abstract
Decisions about patient candidacy for liver transplant (LT) can mean the difference between life and death. We surveyed LT centers across the United States to assess their perceptions of and barriers to second-opinion referrals for inpatients declined for transplant. The medical and surgical directors of 100 unique US LT programs that had done >20 LTs in 2021 were surveyed with a 33-item questionnaire including both multiple-choice and free-response questions. The response rate was 60% (60 LT centers) and included 28 larger-volume ( ≥100 LTs in 2021) and 32 smaller-volume (<100 LTs in 2021) programs. The top 3 reasons for inpatient denial for LT included lack of social support (21%), physical frailty (20%), and inadequate remission duration from alcohol use (11%). Twenty-five percent of the programs reported "frequently" facilitating a second opinion for a declined inpatient, 52% of the programs reported "sometimes" doing so, and 7% of the programs reported never doing so. One hundred percent of the programs reported that they receive referrals for second opinions. Twenty-five percent of the programs reported transplanting these referrals frequently (over 20% of the time). Neither program size nor program location statistically impacted the findings. When asked if centers would be in favor of standardizing the evaluation process, 38% of centers would be in favor, 39% would be opposed, and 23% were unsure. The practices and perceptions of second opinions for hospitalized patients evaluated for LT varied widely across the United States. Opportunities exist to improve equity in LT but must consider maintaining individual program autonomy.
Copyright © 2023 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.
Comment in
-
Second thoughts about second opinions for liver transplantation.Liver Transpl. 2023 Dec 1;29(12):1253-1254. doi: 10.1097/LVT.0000000000000262. Epub 2023 Sep 26. Liver Transpl. 2023. PMID: 37747274 No abstract available.
References
-
- Secunda K, Gordon EJ, Sohn MW, Shinkunas LA, Kaldjian LC, Voigt MD, et al. National survey of provider opinions on controversial characteristics of liver transplant candidates. Liver Transplant. 2013;19:395–403.
-
- Alshuwaykh O, Kwong A, Goel A, Cheung A, Dhanasekaran R, Ahmed A, et al. Predictors of outcomes of patients referred to a transplant center for urgent liver transplantation evaluation. Hepatol Commun. 2021;5:516–525.
-
- Arya A, Hernandez-Alejandro R, Marotta P, Uhanova J, Chandok N. Recipient ineligibility after liver transplantation assessment: a single centre experience. Can J Surg. 2013;56:E39.
-
- Alali J, Ramji A, Ho JK, Scudamore CH, Erb SR, Cheung E, et al. Liver transplant candidacy unsuitability: a review of the British Columbia experience. Can J Gastroenterol. 2006;20:95–99.
-
- Kroeker KI, Bain VG, Shaw-Stiffel T, Fong TL, Yoshida EM. Adult liver transplant survey: policies towards eligibility criteria in Canada and the United States 2007. Liver Int. 2008;28:1250–1255.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
