OPTN Proposal: Require Reporting of Aborted Living Donations. Comment by 6/13/14

[Clark]

http://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/policiesAndBylaws/publicComment/proposals.asp

Living Donor Committee: Proposal to Require the Reporting of Aborted Living Donor Organ Recovery Procedures *
Promoting patient safety is a critical component of the OPTN's mission. The OPTN seeks to protect the safety of transplant candidates, recipients, and living donors, but living donors are unique in that they put themselves at risk without any potential benefit to their own health. Due to a variety of reasons, including last minute recipient or donor health problems and unforeseen donor anatomy issues, living donor organ recovery procedures occasionally need to be aborted after anesthesia has been administered, but before the recovery of the organ. Monitoring the safety of these prospective donors is an important part of the OPTN's goal of promoting living donor safety. The OPTN relies on the UNetSM Improving Patient Safety Portal for notification of patient safety concerns and living donor adverse events. Under this proposal, an aborted living donor organ recovery procedure would become a new category of living donor adverse event that recovery hospitals would need to report through the UNetSM Improving Patient Safety Portal. Additionally, the proposal would clarify current living donor adverse event reporting requirements by eliminating some redundant sections of policy.
http://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/PublicComment/pubcommentPropSub_338.pdf

Comment:
http://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/policiesAndBylaws/publicComment/submitYourComment.asp?PropID=362

[donor99]

This is already on the ld feedback form...why document it twice?

[Clark]

For those of us not intimately familiar with what is and isn't mandated and clear on the required reports, what, precisely is novel and what is duplication of existing requirements? Note the significant nature of a change from guideline to requirement, if that's what you're identifying as duplication.