According to OPTN’s living donor committee meeting notes, more than two years after OPTN required transplant centers to follow-up with living donors for two years after surgery (in 2000, they required one-year follow-ups), the data is “too inconsistent for comparison and analysis”.
In addtion, during a review of such forms, the Committee noted that many forms were incomplete, contained suspicious data, and listed many living donors as “lost to follow up.”
Many?! What is the definition of “many” – 20%, 40%??
Also, On July 22, 2008, the Committee Chair gave a presentation to the Membership and Professional Standards Committee (MPSC) on the current status of living donor follow-up. That presentation explained that the Committee’s review of LDF forms revealed a large number of programs reported their donors as “lost to follow?up” when it is uncertain if realistic measures were taken to contact donors in this effort.
In other words, the transplant centers didn’t bother to even try to contact the living donors. That’s how much they care about our health and well-being. Hey, they have the kidney (or liver) – we’re of no use to them now.
Additionally, this Committee’s review found that completing a single data element on the form enabled a center to meet requirements for completion of the form.
So, if a center submits a follow-up form with the name of the living donor, and maybe their surgical date or organ donated, they’re given credit for ‘completing’ the form. How incredibly ethical.