Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33175900›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2020

The experiences of adult heart, lung, and heart-lung transplantation recipients: A systematic review of qualitative research evidence.

Claire Stubber, Maggie Kirkman

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Emerging Paradigms in Bioengineering the Lungs.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Claire StubberGlobal and Women's Health, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Maggie KirkmanGlobal and Women's Health, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0976-0260

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo review evidence about the experience of being the recipient of a donated heart, lungs, or heart and lungs.

designA systematic review (registered with PROSPERO: CRD42017067218), in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. DATA SOURCES: Seven databases and Google Scholar were searched in May 2017 and July 2019 for papers reporting English-language research that had used qualitative methods to investigate experiences of adult recipients. REVIEW

methodsQuality was assessed and results were analysed thematically.

results24 papers (reporting 20 studies) were eligible and included. Their results were organised into three chronological periods: pre-transplant (encompassing the themes of 'dynamic psychosocial impact', 'resources and support'), transplant ('The Call', 'intensive care unit'), and post-transplant ('dynamic psychosocial impact', 'management', 'rejection'). Sub-themes were also identified. It was evident that contemplating and accepting listing for transplantation entailed or amplified realisation of the precipitating illness's existential threat. The period surrounding transplantation surgery was marked by profound, often surreal, experiences. Thereafter, although life usually improved, it incorporated unforeseen challenges. The transplantation clinic remained important to the recipient. The meaning of the clinic and its staff could be both reassuring (providing care and support) and threatening (representing onerous medical requirements and potential organ rejection).

conclusionThis review has implications for the psychosocial care of transplant recipients and indicates the need for further research to gain insight into the experience of receiving a donated heart and/or lung. IMPACT: Medical consequences of heart and lung transplantation are well documented; this is the first systematic review of research using qualitative methods to investigate the experience of heart, lung, and heart-and-lung transplantation. The psychosocial impact of transplantation was found to be dynamic and complex, with notable features evident before, during, and after transplantation. Clinic staff remained significant to recipients. It is clear that recipients need continuing psychosocial as well as medical support.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeHeart-Lung TransplantationHumansProfessional-Patient RelationsPsychosocial Support SystemsQualitative ResearchTransplant Recipients

Identifiers

PMID33175900
PMCPMC7657484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.