Our possessions are a major contributor to and reflection of our identities A variety of evidence is presented supporting this simple and compelling premise Related streams of research are identified and drawn upon in developing this concept and implications are derived for consumer behavior Because the construct of extended self involves consumer behavior rather than buyer behavior, it appears to be a much richer construct than previous formulations positing a relationship between self-concept and consumer brand choice

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/2489522.pdf

Possessions and the extended self.

https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/72729/j.1600-6135.2005.00832.x.pdf;sequence=1

Organ Donation and Utilization in the United States, 1996–2005

Objective This review evaluates the effectiveness of quality improvement (QI) strategies in reducing disparities in health and health care. Data sources We identified papers published in English between 1983 and 2011 from the MEDLINE® database, the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science Social Science Index, and PsycINFO. Review methods All abstracts and full-text articles were dually reviewed. Studies were eligible if they reported data on effectiveness of QI interventions on processes or health outcomes in the United States such that the impact on a health disparity could be measured. The review focused on the following clinical conditions: breast cancer, colorectal cancer, diabetes, heart failure, hypertension, coronary artery disease, asthma, major depressive disorder, cystic fibrosis, pneumonia, pregnancy, and end-stage renal disease. It assessed health disparities associated with race or ethnicity, socioeconomic status, insurance status, sexual orientation, health literacy/numeracy, and language barrier. We evaluated the risk of bias of individual studies and the overall strength of the body of evidence based on risk of bias, consistency, directness, and precision. Results Nineteen papers, representing 14 primary research studies, met criteria for inclusion. All but one of the studies incorporated multiple components into their QI approach. Patient education was part of most interventions (12 of 14), although the specific approach differed substantially across the studies. Ten of the studies incorporated self-management; this would include, for example, teaching individuals with diabetes to check their blood sugar regularly. Most (8 of 14) included some sort of provider education, which may have focused on the clinical issue or on raising awareness about disparities affecting the target population. Studies evaluated the effect of these strategies on disparities in the prevention or treatment of breast or colorectal cancer, cardiovascular disease, depression, or diabetes. Overall, QI interventions were not shown to reduce disparities. Most studies have focused on racial or ethnic disparities, with some targeted interventions demonstrating greater effect in racial minorities--specifically, supporting individuals in tracking their blood pressure at home to reduce blood pressure and collaborative care to improve depression care. In one study, the effect of a language-concordant breast cancer screening intervention was helpful in promoting mammography in Spanish-speaking women. For some depression care outcomes, the collaborative care model was more effective in less-educated individuals than in those with more education and in women than in men. Conclusions The literature on QI interventions generally and their ability to improve health and health care is large. Whether those interventions are effective at reducing disparities remains unclear. This report should not be construed to assess the general effectiveness of QI in the health care setting; rather, QI has not been shown specifically to reduce known disparities in health care or health outcomes. In a few instances, some increased effect is seen in disadvantaged populations; these studies should be replicated and the interventions studied further as having potential to address disparities.

Closing the quality gap: revisiting the state of the science (vol. 3: quality improvement interventions to address health disparities).

The European Best Practice Guideline group (EBPG) issued guidelines on the evaluation and selection of kidney donor and kidney transplant candidates, as well as post-transplant recipient care, in the year 2000 and 2002. The new European Renal Best Practice board decided in 2009 that these guidelines needed updating. In order to avoid duplication of efforts with kidney disease improving global outcomes, which published in 2009 clinical practice guidelines on the post-transplant care of kidney transplant recipients, we did not address these issues in the present guidelines.The guideline was developed following a rigorous methodological approach: (i) identification of clinical questions, (ii) prioritization of questions, (iii) systematic literature review and critical appraisal of available evidence and (iv) formulation of recommendations and grading according to Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). The strength of each recommendation is rated 1 or 2, with 1 being a 'We recommend' statement, and 2 being a 'We suggest' statement. In addition, each statement is assigned an overall grade for the quality of evidence: A (high), B (moderate), C (low) or D (very low). The guideline makes recommendations for the evaluation of the kidney transplant candidate as well as the potential deceased and living donor, the immunological work-up of kidney donors and recipients and perioperative recipient care.All together, the work group issued 112 statements. There were 51 (45%) recommendations graded '1', 18 (16%) were graded '2' and 43 (38%) statements were not graded. There were 0 (0%) recommendations graded '1A', 15 (13%) were '1B', 19 (17%) '1C' and 17 (15%) '1D'. None (0%) were graded '2A', 1 (0.9%) was '2B', 8 (7%) were '2C' and 9 (8%) '2D'. Limitations of the evidence, especially the lack of definitive clinical outcome trials, are discussed and suggestions are provided for future research.We present here the complete recommendations about the evaluation of the kidney transplant candidate as well as the potential deceased and living donor, the immunological work-up of kidney donors and recipients and the perioperative recipient care. We hope that this document will help caregivers to improve the quality of care they deliver to patients. The full version with methods, rationale and references is published in Nephrol Dial Transplant (2013) 28: i1-i71; doi: 10.1093/ndt/gft218 and can be downloaded freely from http://www.oxfordjournals.org/our_journals/ndt/era_edta.html.

European Renal Best Practice Guideline on kidney donor and recipient evaluation and perioperative care

This article presents a critical review of psychological perspectives on organ donation. The review considers individual decisions to donate organs posthumously and next-of-kin consent decisions. A theoretical analysis of intention to donate is presented for both types of donation decisions, and the literature is reviewed within the context of the proposed framework. Donation decisions are examined as a function of attitude toward donation and the religious, cultural, altruistic, normative, and knowledge-based beliefs that comprise the attitude. Consent decisions are primarily influenced by prior knowledge of the deceased individual's wishes. An alternative conceptual model is offered to explain the basis of consent decisions in the absence of this knowledge. Suggestions are offered to improve measurement strategy and to guide theoretically based organ donation research within selected disciplines of psychology.

Psychological aspects of organ donation : a critical review and synthesis of individual and next-of-kin donation decisions

The past decade has witnessed an inexorable widening in the gap between the supply of organs for transplantation (i.e., the donors) and the need for organs on the part of desperately ill candidates for transplantation. As of June 1990, some 20,882 persons were waiting for organs to become available.1 Three patients on the waiting list die every day as a consequence of this shortage,1 and the scarcity of organs has become the chief limiting factor in clinical transplantation.2 In 1978 the Southeastern Organ Procurement Foundation asked us to identify obstacles to organ donation in the black population, and in particular . . .

Organ donation and blacks. A critical frontier.

PATIENTS REQUIRING KIDNEY TRANSPLANTS HAVE THREE POSSIBLE SOURCES: (1) a kidney from an individual who dies suddenly (approval for the transplant must be given by the next-of-kin of the deceased); (2) a kidney from a relative; and (3) a kidney from one who "willed" it to be transplanted following his or her death. Each of these circumstances requires decision making. On the basis of this information, a research program designed to determine the nature of attitudes of blacks toward kidney donations was developed. Results disclosed a lack of knowledge about kidney transplantation; disassociation and lack of communication between blacks and the medical community; religious fears; fears of premature death; and racism.

Attitudes Among Blacks Toward Donating Kidneys for Transplantation: A Pilot Project

1. These successful education programs initially aimed at the AA community are being expanded into other minority groups such as Native American (Alaskan and American Indian), Hispanic (Latino), and Asian-Pacific Islander populations; and if the same modus operandus, ie, a minority-targeted message delivered by ethnically and culturally similar and sensitive messengers is used, this will have equal applicability to the majority population. MOTTEP, the first grass roots national transplant education program, while directed first to the minority population, can when presented to the majority population help all groups address the number one problem in transplantation today--the shortage of donors. 2. Active inclusion and involvement of minorities at all levels of problem resolution (resource allocation, research, and education), emphasizing community participation, education, and empowerment are the important next steps to allow for minority transplant equity in America. 3. The emergence of ASMHTP as the responsible brain trust for future minority-related efforts along with MOTTEP, a community based, empowering transplant education program, highlights the importance of a national strategy necessary for the survival of minority communities. This will enhance the interaction between minority transplant health professionals and the minority community and requires minority inclusion at all decision making levels of problem resolution within the transplant community.

/pdf/a-national-minority-organ-tissue-transplant-education-9xbtn1naz2.pdf

A national minority organ/tissue transplant education program: the first step in the evolution of a national minority strategy and minority transplant equity in the USA.

Yeager C

Papers

Organ donation and blacks. A critical frontier.

Attitudes Among Blacks Toward Donating Kidneys for Transplantation: A Pilot Project

A national minority organ/tissue transplant education program: the first step in the evolution of a national minority strategy and minority transplant equity in the USA.

Organ donation in blacks: the next frontier.

Psychologic factors related to dialysis in kidney transplant decisions.