Filiz İZCİ, Ebru FINDIKLI, Serkan ZİNCİR, Akif CAMKURT, Ozlem KİZİLKURT, Ferzan GİYNAS, SEVDA KORKMAZ, Emin Barış AKIN

Bir üniversite hastanesine başvuran organ nakli verici adaylarının psikiyatrik değerlendirmeleri, anksiyete, depresyon ve yaşam kalitesi düzeyleri

Amaç: Çalışmamızda organ nakli verici adaylarının psikiyatrik değerlendirmeleri, anksiyete, depresyon ve yaşam kalitesi düzeyleri araştırılması amaçlanmıştır.Yöntem: Araştırma Mayıs 2015-Şubat 2016 tarihleri arasında yürütülmüştür. Toplam 102 gönüllü çalışmaya dahil edilmiştir. Hastalara Sosyodemografik veri formu, DSM-IV Eksen Tanıları İçin Yapılandırılmış Klinik Görüşme Ölçeği-Klinik Versiyonu(SCID-I/CV) ölçeği, Beck Anksiyete Ölçeği (BAÖ), Beck Depresyon Ölçeği (BDÖ), Belirti Tarama Listesi (SCL-90-R), SF-36 Yaşam Kalitesi Ölçeği (SF-36) uygulanmıştır. Bulgular: Başvuranların yaş ortalaması 41.64±12.02 olup, %42.2'si (n=43) erkek, %57.8'i (n=59) kadındı. Verici adaylarının alıcılara olan yakınlık dereceleri; %57.8'i (n=59) 1. derece akraba, %19.6'sı (n=20) eş, %22.5'i (n=23) diğer akraba ve tanıdık idi. Yakınlık derecelerine göre yapılan gruplandırmada; BDÖ, BAÖ ve SCL-90-R toplam puanı ile kişilerarası duyarlılık ortalaması gruplar arasında anlamlı düzeyde farklılık vardı. Sonuç: Dünya ortalamasına göre ülkemizde canlı verici sayısı kadavra vericiye göre daha fazla olup, genellikle verici adayları eş, birinci derece akraba gibi yakın aile içindeki bireylerden oluşmaktadır. Bu sebeple; nakil sürecinden doğrudan ve dolaylı olarak etkilenen aile içi ve yakın akrabalar verici adayı/verici olarak daha fazla ruhsal ve sosyal yönden etkilenebilmektedirler. Nakil süreci gibi uzun bir tedavi ve bakım gerektiren bir durumu iyi yönetebilmek için alıcı yanında vericilerin de psikososyal durumlarını değerlendirerek bu sürece dahil etmek gerekmektedir

Psychiatric Evaluation of Organ Donor Candidates in a University Hospital and Their Anxiety, Depression and Quality of Life Levels

Psychiatric evaluation of organ donor candidates in a university hospital and their anxiety, depression and quality of life levelsObjective: The aim of this study was to conduct a psychiatric evaluation of organ donor candidates and to investigate their levels of anxiety, depression and quality of life.Material and Methods: This study was performed between May 2015 and February 2016. It included 102 volunteers. The socio-demographic Data Collection Form, DSM-IV Clinical Interview Form – Clinical Version Structured for Axis Diagnoses (SCID-I/CV), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Symptom Checklist (SCL-90-R), and SF-36 Quality of Life Survey (SF-36) were administered to the patients. Results: The average age of the applicants was found to be 41.64±12.02, 42.2% (n=43) being male and 57.8% (n=59) being female. When it comes to the degree of affinity between potential donors and recipients, 57.8% (n=59) were first-degree relatives, 19.6% (n=20) were spouses, and 22.5% (n=23) were other relatives and/or close relations. By dividing donor candidates into groups by the degree of their affinity to recipients, there were statistically significant differences revealed between BDI, BAI and SCL-90-R total scores and interpersonal sensitivity subscale scores. Conclusion: As compared to the global average, the number of living donors is higher than cadaver donors; and donor candidates mostly comprise spouses and first-degree relatives. Therefore, family members and first-degree relatives who are affected directly or indirectly by the transplant process are exposed to social and psychological effects more as the donor candidates/donors. It is of crucial importance to evaluate the psychosocial states of donors, in addition to recipients, in order to manage the long-lasting transplant process, a treatment- and care- demanding one in a more appropriate way

PDF

___

1. Karasu Z. Live Donor Liver Transplantation; Current Situation in Turkey. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Internal Medical Sciences 2006; 2:1-5. (Turkish)
2. Pascher A, Sauer IM, Walter M, Lopez-Haeninnen E, Theruvath T, Spinelli A, Neuhaus R, Settmacher U, Mueller AR, Steinmueller T, Neuhaus P. Donor evaluation, donor risks, donor outcome, and donor quality of life in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2002; 8:829-837. [CrossRef]
3. Kim-Schluger L, Florman SS, Schiano T, O’Rourke M, Gagliardi R, Drooker M, Emre S, Fishbein TM, Sheiner PA, Schwartz ME, Miller CM. Quality of life after lobectomy for adult liver transplantation. Transplantation 2002; 73:1593-1597. [CrossRef]
4. Miyagi S, Kawagishi N, Fujimori K, Sekiguchi S, Fukumori T, Akamatsu Y, Satomi S. Risks of donation and quality of donors’ life after living donor liver transplantation. Transpl Int 2005; 18:47-51. [CrossRef]
5. Schulz KH, Kroencke S, Beckmann M, Nadalin S, Paul A, Fischer L, Nashan B, Senf W, Erim Y. Mental and physical quality of life in actual living liver donors versus potential living liver donors: a prospective, controlled, multicenter study. Liver Transpl 2009; 15:1676-1687. [CrossRef]
6. Bilgin N, Moray G, Karakayali H, Demirag A, Tirnaksiz MB, Haberal M. Analysis of 1167 consecutive kidney transplants at our center. Transplant Proc 1999; 31:3107-3109. [CrossRef]
7. Haberal M, Tirnaksiz MB, Moray G, Karakayali H, Yildirim S, Demirag A, Bilgin N. Intrafamilial organ transplantation: a solution to organ shortage in developing countries. Transplant Proc 1999; 31:3383-3384. [CrossRef]
8. Faeder S, Moschenross D, Rosenberger E, Dew MA, DiMartini A. Pychiatric aspects of organ transplantation and donation. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2015; 28:357-364. [CrossRef]
9. First MB, Spitzer RL, Gibbon M, Williams Janet BW. Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders, Clinical Version (SCID-CV). Washington DC: American Psychiatric Press Inc, 1996.
10. Corapcioglu A, Aydemir O, Yildiz M. Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders (SCID-I). Ankara: Hekimler Yayin Birligi, 1999.
11. Beck AT, Epstein N, Brown G, Steer RA. An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety: psychometric properties. J Consult Clin Psychol 1988; 56:893-897. [CrossRef]
12. Ulusoy M, Sahin NH, Erkmen H. Turkish version of Beck anxiety inventory: psychometric properties. J Cogn Psychother 1998; 12:163-172.
13. Beck AT, Ward CH, Mendelson M, Mock J, Erbaugh J. An inventory for measuring depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1961; 4:562-571. [CrossRef]
14. Hisli N. Reliability and validity of Beck Depression Inventory for university students. Psikoloji Dergisi 1989; 7:3-13. (Turkish)
15. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992; 30:473-483. [CrossRef]
16. Kocyigit H, Aydemir O, Olmez N, Memis A. Reliability and validity of Turkish version of Short Form 36 (SF-36). Ilac ve Tedavi Dergisi 1999; 12:102-106. (Turkish)
17. Derogates LR. Confirmation of the dimensional structure of the SCL-90: a study ın construct validation. J Clin Psychol 1977; 33:981-989. [CrossRef]
18. Dag I. Reliability and validity of Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R) for university students. Turk Psikiyatri Derg 1991; 2:5-12. (Turkish)
19. Aydemir O, Koroglu E. Clinical Scales Used in Pscyhiatry. Ankara: Hekimler Yayin Birligi, 2000;33-41. (Turkish)
20. Ozcurumez G, Tanriverdi N, Zile L. Kidney transplantation and psychiatry. Turkish Clinical Psychiatry 2003; 6:225-234. (Turkish)
21. Pérez San Gregorio MA, Martín Rodríguez A, Pérez Bernal J. Psychological differences of patients and relatives according to post-transplantation anxiety. Span J Psychol 2008; 11:250-258. [CrossRef]
22. Taylor R, Franck LS, Gibson F, Dhawan A. A critical review of the health-related quality of life of children and adolescents after liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2005; 11:51-60. [CrossRef]
23. Erim Y, Beckmann M, Kroencke S, Sotiropoulos GC, Paul A, Senf W, Schulz KH. Influence of kinship on donors’ mental burden in living donor liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2012; 18:901- 906. [CrossRef]
24. Avsar U, Avsar UZ, Cansever Z, Set T, Cankaya E, Kaya A, Gozubuyuk H, Saatci F, Keles M. Psychological and emotional status, and caregiver burden in caregivers of patients with peritoneal dialysis compared with caregivers of patients with renal transplantation. Transplant Proc 2013; 45:883-886. [CrossRef]
25. Schover LR, Streem SB, Boparai N, Duriak K, Novick AC. The psychosocial impact of donating kidney: long-term followup from a urology based center. J Urol 1997; 157:1596-1601. [CrossRef]