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
. 2023 Jul 17;17(1):24.
doi: 10.1186/s13030-023-00281-6.

Characterization of the stanford integrated psychosocial assessment for transplant for heart, liver, and kidney transplant candidates in Japan

Kosuke Takano  1 , Hidehiro Oshibuchi  2 , Sayaka Kobayashi  1   3 , Junko Tsutsui  1   4 , Satoko Ito  1 , Rumiko Kamba  1 , Rie Akaho  1 , Katsuji Nishimura  1
Affiliations

Characterization of the stanford integrated psychosocial assessment for transplant for heart, liver, and kidney transplant candidates in Japan

Kosuke Takano et al. Biopsychosoc Med. .

Abstract

Background: The Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplantation (SIPAT) is a comprehensive psychosocial assessment proven useful for predicting the outcomes of organ transplantation that is expected to be useful in Japan. However, the characteristics of organ-specific SIPAT scores for organ transplant recipient candidates in Japan are unclear and, to date, the SIPAT has not been properly utilized in clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to present basic data that can be used to establish the relation between SIPAT scores and post-transplantation psychosocial outcomes as well as organ-specific outcomes.

Methods: This study included 167 transplant recipient candidates (25 heart, 71 liver, and 71 kidney) who completed a semi-structured interview based on the Japanese version of SIPAT (SIPAT-J) prior to transplantation. The differences between organs in terms of SIPAT scores and differences in SIPAT scores based on demographic data were comparatively analyzed.

Results: The total SIPAT scores were higher for liver recipient candidates than for heart recipient candidates (P = .019). Regarding the subscales, SIPAT B (social support system) scores were higher for liver and kidney recipient candidates than for heart recipient candidates (P = .021), whereas SIPAT C (psychological stability and psychopathology) scores were higher for liver recipient candidates than for kidney recipient candidates (P = .002). Recipient candidates with a history of psychiatric treatment and those who were unemployed had higher SIPAT scores, regardless of the transplant organ, than recipient candidates without a history of psychiatric treatment and those who were employed (P < .001, P = .016, respectively).

Conclusions: There were notable differences in the total SIPAT-J and subscale scores among the liver, heart, and kidney recipient candidates. Each organ was associated with specific psychosocial issues that should be addressed before transplantation. Interventions such as information provision and patient education based on SIPAT assessment results for each organ may improve recipient post-transplant outcomes.

Keywords: Organ-specific; Post-transplant outcomes; Pre-transplant evaluation; Psychosocial support; Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for transplantation; Transplant recipient.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Distribution of the total Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplantation scores A: (All) Distribution of the total Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplantation scores for all organs. B: (Heart) Distribution of the total Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplantation scores for heart. C: (Liver) Distribution of the total Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplantation scores for liver. D: (Kidney) Distribution of the total Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplantation scores for kidney
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Owen JE, Bonds CL, Wellisch DK. Psychiatric evaluations of heart transplant candidates: predicting post-transplant hospitalization, rejection episodes, and survival. Psychosomatics. 2006;47(3):213–22. doi: 10.1176/appi.psy.47.3.213. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Dobbels F, Vanhaecke J, Dupont L, Nevens F, Verleden G, Pirenne J, et al. Pretransplant predictors of posttransplant adherence and clinical outcome: an evidence base for pre-transplant psychosocial screening. Transplantation. 2009;87(10):1497–504. doi: 10.1097/TP.0b013e3181a440ae. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chacko RC, Harper RG, Kunik M, Young J. Relationship between psychiatric morbidity and psychosocial factors in organ transplant candidates. Psychosomatics. 1996;37(2):100–7. doi: 10.1016/S0033-3182(96)71575-X. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Laederach-Hofmann K, Bunzel B. Noncompliance in organ transplant recipients: a literature review. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2000;22(6):412–24. doi: 10.1016/S0163-8343(00)00098-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Farmer SA, Grady KL, Wang E, McGee EC, Jr, Cotts WG, McCarthy PM. Demographic, psychosocial, and behavioral factors associated with survival after heart transplantation. Ann Thorac Surg. 2013;95(3):876–83. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.11.041. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources