What's Mine is Yours: Long-Term Experiences of Good Samaritan Organ Donors

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

110 Downloads (Pure)


This study is a long-term follow-up on the health and quality of life of Good Samaritan living organ donors who donated an average of 10 years ago. Thirteen donors (kidney, liver, and lung) completed 2 surveys. Data from the RAND 36-Item Health Survey showed that for all domains, as well as the physical and mental component summary scales, the Good Samaritan donor outcomes were superior to the general population (P < .0001). Data from the European Living Donor Satisfaction Survey (EULID) showed that in all 8 theme areas, the donors reported statistically significant positive reactions as compared to negative reactions. With regard to self-reported health status, there was a strong, positive correlation between the RAND 36-Item Health Survey and the EULID (n = 13, Pearson correlation coefficient: 0.874). All but 1 donor reported good, very good, or excellent health status. Although donors overwhelmingly reported positivity about the donation experience, narrative comments about adverse events and recipient death must keep transplant teams alert to these critical areas. Good Samaritan organ donors come to the hospital healthy, give a gift to a stranger, and sometimes leave and linger disabled. Donor teams should be observing, questioning, and responding in an effort to maximize their welfare. This research is unique because investigation of the long-term health and psychosocial outcomes of Good Samaritan organ donors is rare. Existing studies that report long-term outcomes of kidney donors do not separately analyze Good Samaritan donor data from related living donors.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)16-20
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Patient Experience
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2018


Dive into the research topics of 'What's Mine is Yours: Long-Term Experiences of Good Samaritan Organ Donors'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this