Donation Experience Research Articles

POS-783 ORGAN DONATION IN A DEVELOPING CARIBBEAN COUNTRY: THE TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO EXPERIENCE

Patients diagnosed with end stage organ failure often benefit from organ transplantation, however, the global shortage of available organs for transplant is unable to meet the demand. In Trinidad and Tobago, Chronic Kidney Disease is the fourth leading cause of death with an estimated 1,800 patients receiving dialysis. The National Organ Transplant Unit (NOTU) was established in 2006 with the aim of providing renal and corneal transplants services. This study assessed the current state of NOTU and the organ donation experience at a single center intensive care unit in Trinidad.

It is not a big deal: a qualitative study of clinical biobank donation experience and motives

BackgroundThe success of biobanking is directly linked to the willingness of people to donate their biological materials for research and storage. Ethical issues related to patient consent are an essential component of the current biobanking agenda. The majority of data available are focused on population-based biobanks in USA, Canada and Western Europe. The donation decision process and its ethical applications in clinical populations and populations in countries with other cultural contexts are very limited. This study aimed to evaluate the decision-making experience of the clinical biobank donors, as well as psychological and social motivators and deterrents of this decision and associated ethical risks.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted in two medical institutions, in St Petersburg (Russia), in 2016–2017, among 13 donors of a clinical biobank (pregnant women, cardiac patients, and patients with multiple sclerosis) and three donation organisers—medical specialists involved in recruiting donors for a clinical biobank. Analysis of interview data was based on qualitative content analysis.ResultsDonors of a clinical biobank express beliefs in the absence of risks associated with the donation. The primary motivators for donating to the biobank were: prosocial, indirect reciprocity (response to or anticipation of an act in kind by a third party), intrinsic motivation (to enhance their self-esteem and satisfying their curiosity about the donation process), and comparability with personal values. A high level of trust in biomedical research and the particular physician can contribute to a favourable decision. The overall decision-making process regarding the biobank donation could be described as quick and not based on a careful reading of informed consent documents. The integration of biobank donation decision-making in the process of medical care might prompt patient to donate to biobank without proper consideration. The specific type of therapeutic misconception—the presence of unrealistic hope that donation could provide a direct benefit for a third person in need was discovered.ConclusionsPatients recruited to a clinical biobank in Russia have virtually no concerns as to the storage of their biomaterials. The donation decision is mainly motivated by prosocial attitudes and other factors that are similar to the motivating factors of blood donation. The fact of going through inpatient treatment and poor differentiation between donation for other people's benefit and for research purposes can make the process of obtaining consent more ethically problematic.

Level and determinants of willingness to donate organs among the general public: A cross-sectional survey in China.

This study aims to assess the level and determinants of the general public's willingness to organ donation. We conducted a population-based cross-sectional study of 4261 participants in China. The primary outcome was the willingness to donate organs. Logistic regression modelling was used to determine the factors that affect willingness to donate organs. Overall, the proportion of participants who showed a willingness to donate organs was 47.45% (95%CI: 0.46, 0.49) in this study. Logistic regression modelling showed participants from Western (OR = 1.33, 95%CI = 1.11-1.59) and Eastern China (OR = 1.40, 95%CI = 1.19-1.65) were more willing to donate organs compared with those from Central China. The odds of being willing to donate organs was higher in females than males (OR = 1.35, 95%CI = 1.17-1.55); and was higher in those participants with experience of organ donation (OR = 1.58, 95%CI = 1.13-2.21), experience of caring for organ transplant patients (OR = 1.45, 95%CI = 1.01-2.07), and those undertaking related voluntary activities (OR = 1.67, 95%CI = 1.45-1.94), than those without. The general public's level of willingness to organ donation was not high in this study. Geographical region, gender, experience of organ donation related activities, taking care of organ transplant patients and volunteering in related activities were independently associated with participants' willingness to donate organs.

Anonymous living liver donor perspectives on the role of family in their donation experience.

Anonymous living organ donation is an understudied but rapidly expanding sector in organ transplantation, in which donors choose to donate anonymously to a recipient in need. The family members and close support network of living donors often play a crucial role in the donation process, and their influence likely has a large impact on the decision to donate as well as the donor's physical and psychosocial state. However, there is limited data examining the impact donor families have on the anonymous donor, and in turn, the impact donation has on donors' families. To assess this, we analyzed a semi-structured qualitative interview on living donor experiences with 26 anonymous living liver donors for common themes concerning donor families. Responses surrounding donor families were grouped into three major categories: (1) family reactions to donation, ranging from (a) pride/support, (b) fear/worry, and (c) jealousy/anger; (2) the impact of donation on donor-family relationships, including (a) positive impacts, (b) negative impacts, (c) a positive ripple effect; (3) gaps in institutional support for donor families. This study provides unique information on anonymous living liver donor perceptions related to their families and will help improve existing programs to accommodate donor family needs and cater to donor relationships.

Sexual risk behavior questions: Understanding and mitigating donor discomfort.

BackgroundBlood operators are working to improve donor screening and eligibility for gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM), and trans and nonbinary donors. Many consider screening all donors for specific sexual risk behaviors to be a more equitable approach that maintains the safety of the blood supply. Feasibility considerations with this change include ensuring donor understanding of additional sexual behavior questions and minimizing donor loss due to discomfort.Study design and methodsQualitative one‐on‐one interviews were conducted with Canadian whole blood and plasma donors (N = 40). A thematic analysis was conducted to assess participants' understandings of the questions, examine their comfort/discomfort, and identify strategies to mitigate donor discomfort.ResultsAll participants understood what the sexual behavior questions were asking and thought the questions were appropriate. Themes related to comfort/discomfort include: their expectations of donor screening, social norms that they bring to donation, whether their answer felt like personal disclosure, knowing the reasons for the question, trusting confidentiality, confidence in knowing their sexual partner's behavior, and potential for the question to be discriminatory. Strategies to mitigate discomfort include: providing an explanation for the questions, forewarning donors of these questions, reducing ambiguity, and using a self‐administered questionnaire.ConclusionWhile many blood operators and regulators view the move to sexual behavior–based screening for all donors as a significant paradigmatic shift, donors may not perceive additional sexual behavior questions as a significant change to their donation experience. Further research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of strategies to mitigate donor discomfort.

Donor's Perspectives on Blood Donation During Covid-19 Pandemic.

Covid-19 pandemic had affected transfusion services including recruitment of donors and blood donation camps activities. The blood donors may have concerns, confusion, and misleading rumours about blood donation during pandemic. People's priorities for blood donation may shift because of a dearth of necessities. It is important to identify factors which prevent or motivate blood donors during pandemic. This study was designed to understand blood donors' knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions during the Covid-19 pandemic. A descriptive cross-sectional study to assess donor’s knowledge, attitude, and perception regarding blood donation using self-administered 20 questions. The study duration was 4 months. A total 503 whole blood donors participated. The fear of infection and reduced blood donor motivation were observed to be the major deterrents of blood donation activity. Environment of blood donation area and travel to blood donation site were perceived two major sources of Covid-19 infection by participants. The top 3 motivational factor for blood donation were direct patient request to donate (30%), followed by family/ friends need and social media campaigns (26% each). Most donors (70.6%) were aware of importance of Covid-19 appropriate behaviour during current pandemic. The 67% donors felt that adequate Covid-19 preventive measures had been followed by the staff involved in blood collection. Based on the survey results, the inferences are that donors may harbour fear of infection and concerns for their safety, deterring blood donation. The direct appeal from a patient's relative to donate blood or a requirement in their family/friends and social media appeals emerge important factors to motivate donors. Travel facility arrangement may aide blood donation. Most of the donors are more than satisfied with the blood donation experience and are motivated to inform the transfusion services of any appearance of Covid-19 symptoms post donation. The donors were satisfied with the steps to reduce Covid-19 infection.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12288-021-01504-y.

Living-Donor Liver Transplant in Oman: A Quantitative Cross-Sectional Study of Donors' Experiences and Challenges.

Background In Oman, the first liver transplant was performed at the Royal Hospital (RH) in September 2017. Since then, thirteen cases have been operated on at the RH. All of these cases were living-donor liver transplants (LDLT), and the remaining cases were treated in India with a total of approximately 193 recipients. To provide an in-depth overview of donor experiences, challenges, and perceptions, a cross-sectional study was conducted. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted at one tertiary hospital in 2019. The survey was designed to collect data composed of closed and open-ended questions to reveal a thorough knowledge of the topic. Results A total of 50 of 120 donors responded to the survey with male dominance in the sample (68%) and 64% were aged 28 to 38 years. 66% of the respondents came to know about the donation through hospital staff. Interestingly, respondents (n = 8/12) who reported that fear of operation is the cause that prevents people from donating are among the male gender, while more men believe that the main cause is lack of knowledge. 90% of the respondents felt satisfied after donation. More men reported ambiguous feelings before donation. Moreover, married donors reported ambiguous feelings before donation (p = 0.008). The younger age group reported anxiety and doubt as a challenge through their donation experience. Conclusion This study revealed that donors have a positive feeling after donating as they have saved a life, as well as being empowered by family and community. The donors encourage individuals to donate a portion of their liver. Some crucial questions arose, such as anxiety before surgery, ambiguous feelings before surgery, and fatigue after surgery. These findings underscore the importance of a holistic approach that would enable donors to be well informed prior to surgery.

Motivation, blood donor satisfaction and intention to return during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background and ObjectivesThis study aimed to describe motives as well as donation experiences and the intention to return for further donations of German whole blood donors who donated at the beginning of the COVID‐19 pandemic.Materials and MethodsTo describe motives and donor experiences, a retrospective survey was conducted among whole blood donors that had a donation appointment at the German Red Cross Blood Donation Service in the first 4 weeks of the pandemic. A donor questionnaire including 17 retrospective questions was sent to 7500 donors. Donor motivation and donor experiences were compared for different donor groups using chi‐square statistics. Finally, in an ordinal logistic regression model predictors for the intention to return were identified.ResultsMore than half of the participating donors (56.9%) wanted to contribute to the fight against the pandemic by donating blood. Most of the donors were satisfied with their last donation experience and felt safe during the blood donor appointment. However, some donors would have liked more information on how to deal with the pandemic (20.3%). Intention to return for further donations was strongly associated with overall satisfaction (OR: 1.67, CI: 1.47–1.90) and the feeling of being safe during blood donation (OR: 1.33, CI: 1.05–1.68).ConclusionDonor satisfaction with the last donation was high and the vast majority of donors felt very safe. However, those donors who felt unsafe expressed a low intention to return and blood donation services should therefore carefully monitor donor satisfaction.

Voluntary and non-voluntary blood donations among doctors.

BackgroundPhysicians may be an important source of blood donations as they are more likely to be familiar with the importance of donating and the donation process. The aim of this study is to report physicians' knowledge, attitudes, and practices towards voluntary and non‐voluntary blood donations.Study Design and MethodsThis was a cross‐sectional study conducted at King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre (KFSH&RC), Saudi Arabia. One‐hundred‐and‐sixteen physicians and dentists responded to an online structured questionnaire sent to their institutional emails.ResultsSixty‐eight percent of participants (79% of males and 43% of females) reported previously having donated blood. Eighty‐six percent of donors had previously donated on a voluntary basis, whereas 31% of donors had previously donated for a specific person. A recent donation within 5 years was associated with the younger age group and knowledge of the minimum interval between donations. Fifty‐six percent of participants agreed with using replacement donations. Compared to participants in the youngest age group (25‐35 years), older participants in the age groups (46‐55 years) and (>55 years) were less likely to express intention to donate in the next 6 months (OR 0.289, P = .022 and OR 0.083, P = .004, respectively). Participants reporting poor nutritional status or other medical reasons as a barrier to donating blood were less likely to intend to donate (OR 0.146, P < .001). Among previous donors, intention to donate was associated with a recent donation within 1 year (OR 27.13, P = .002) and having had a pleasant donation experience (OR 14.98, P < .001).ConclusionBlood donation practices are strongly tied to physicians' gender and age and their knowledge of the donation process. The most significant barrier to blood donation was found to be nutritional and medical status.

An intervention study for the prevention of vasovagal reactions and evaluating donors' experience: Analysis of donors' return for subsequent donation.

The EPISoDe (Experience Success in Donation) study investigated the effect of interventions on self-reported vasovagal reactions (VVRs) in first-time and novice (second to fourth donation) whole blood donors aged ≤30 years, demonstrating a 23% reduction of VVR from water drinking shortly before donation in the novice donors. Because donation experience and complications affect donor retention, we analysed intervention group donors' return for subsequent donation, a predefined secondary outcome. The interventions were as follows: 330 ml water, 500 ml water, ball squeezing before phlebotomy (placebo) and a control group. All donors received an online questionnaire about their experience within a week after donation. In the Netherlands, eligible donors are invited at least yearly depending on hospitals' needs. We analysed attendances within 421 days through return percentages and binomial logistic regression. Of the 8300 EPISoDe participants, 6538 (78.8%) returned within 421 days. Return did not differ between the two water groups, whereas odds for return were significantly higher in both water and placebo intervention donors compared to the control group (odds ratio [OR] 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-1.29 and 1.22, 1.05-1.43, respectively) after adjustment for occurrence of VVR, unsuccessful collection, gender and donation history. Staff-recorded or self-reported VVR at index donation was associated with reduced odds for return (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.37-0.60 and OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.46-0.61, respectively). In this cohort of younger inexperienced blood donors, 78.8% returned for subsequent donation. Donors who received an active study intervention, either water or placebo, were more likely to return than control group donors.

Message Framing and Perceived Risk of Blood Donation

ABSTRACT This paper builds on previous research into message framing, focusing on the persuasiveness of message framing on blood donation intention, moderating effect of perceptions of risk, and the role of previous experience of blood donation. A total of 273 participants took part in this between-subjects post-test only with control experiment. The researchers measured participants’ perceived risk (RISK-AB and RISK-EB) and past donation behavior before assigning the stimuli and measured blood donation intention after exposure to the stimulus. Positively-framed messages were found to be more effective when RISK-AB (perceived risk associated with blood donation) was high, and RISK-EB (perceived risk associated with non-donation of blood) was low, or RISK-AB was low, and RISK-EB was high or both RISK-AB and RISK-EB were low. Negatively framed messages were found to be more persuasive when people had high RISK-AB and high RISK-EB. People’s previous experience had no impact on the effectiveness of message framing. Based on these findings, the authors suggest designing persuasive blood donation messages according to RISK-AB and RISK-EB. The study emphasizes the impact of goal framing. Future studies can explore the impact of both goal and attribute framed messages on blood donation. Future research can also use the actual donation as an outcome measure. The study introduces components of perceived risk (RISK-AB and RISK-EB) as essential moderators of framed blood donation messages. In this study, we measured the impact of existing perceived risk, which is natural to an individual. It also confirmed no impact of prior donation experience.

Adverse reactions to the Donation of Platelet by Apheresis and Related Factors in a Tertiary Level Care Blood Center

Background and Objectives: Although blood donation by apheresis is very safe, it is essential to identify the adverse reactions that happen and address the factors related to it so as to improve the donation experience both to the donors and the center accepting donations. This study was designed to assess the frequency of adverse reaction in donors undergoing apheresis for platelet donation and delineate the factors associated with the occurrence of such adverse donor reactions, if any. Methodology: This was an analytical retrospective study on the available data of all the donors who donated single-donor apheretic platelets in our blood center from January 2014 to October 2018. Results: The overall donor reaction rate was 8.3%, with the majority (4.7%) being a local reaction in the form of a hematoma. The other 3.6% were systemic reactions, among which 2.1% were citrate reactions and 1.5% vasovagal reactions (VVRs). The variables associated with a VVR were body weight &lt;75 kg and diastolic blood pressure of &lt;70 mmHg, whereas for citrate-related toxicities, it was the duration of the procedure and the amount of anticoagulant used. 4.7% of them were localized reactions in the form of the hematoma, which were more common in first-time donors. Conclusion: Adverse donor reactions to plateletpheresis are notable (8.3%) but generally mild. Auditing them to look for factors associated helps us review the policies and improve competencies among the staff to improve the safety of donors.

Matched Unrelated Donor Attrition in a Stem Cell Registry

Background and Objective: Increment in voluntary stem cell donor registrations has led to an increase in the chances of a patient finding a perfect match for matched unrelated donor (MUD) hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplant. However, it has been seen multiple times that the donor's passion to donate HSCs is short lived. They register with a strong commitment, however, when they are approached to donate, they back out. This write-up is an attempt to quantify and analyze the rate and reasons of MUD deferral in a stem cell registry from North India. Methods: Registered volunteer stem cell donors who backed out after getting matched were interviewed to understand the reasons behind their deferral. Key steps taken for sustaining the passion of registered donors included amendments in the donor recruitment process and maintaining constant communication with the recruited donors. Results: The attrition rate of the registry for final donation during the studied period was 22.91%. A total of 22 cases of donor deferral were observed. Among these, 15 donors (68.19%) who backed out were female and 7 (31.81%) were male. There were three main reasons observed behind this attrition, namely personal reasons, medical reasons from the donor side, and medical reasons from the patient side. Conclusion: To minimize donor deferral, various new strategies could be implemented such as requesting the participation of experienced donors in counseling sessions, requesting guardian's involvement in case the donor is a teen or is in their early twenties (between 18 and 25 years), and requesting the name of the person they consulted before signing up for donation.

Evaluating blood donor experiences and barriers/facilitators to blood donation in the United States using YouTube video content.

Understanding donor perception of the blood donation experience is central to maintaining an adequate blood supply. Studies that use questionnaires to assess barriers/facilitators to donation may be influenced by response bias. To address this, we conducted an innovative study integrating quantitative informatic techniques with qualitative data analysis of YouTube video content to explore donor experiences and barriers and facilitators to whole blood donation. Sampling of YouTube videos was conducted using search parameters for identifying relevant videos, based on donors' language used to describe their whole blood donation experiences (e.g., blood donation, blood donor, donated blood, gave/give blood). We eliminated duplicate videos; filtered out non-English videos, those made outside the United States, and those with no transcripts; and restricted the time period during which videos were posted from 2015 to 2019. Search parameters were fed into a Python script, which downloaded video transcripts for all search results. The final sample was 102 noncommercial and 34 commercial transcripts. The subsequent transcriptions were uploaded into qualitative analysis software and coded two coders. A third coder randomly selected transcripts to review to ensure consistency. Barriers to whole blood donation include having prior negative experiences with donation and donation-related fear. Facilitators included altruism, having a personal connection to donation, donation center incentives, and positive experiences with blood center staff. Themes identified in this study were similar to those in the existing literature. This suggests that current questionnaires to address barriers/facilitators to donation are unlikely to be meaningfully impacted by response bias.

An Identity-Based Model Explaining Online Donor Appreciation

Nonprofit organization (NPO) marketers are now increasingly turning online to recognize donors, with little understanding as to how online donor appreciation influences behavior. A scenario-based research design using an online survey was administered to a random sample of voluntary blood donors ( n = 356). The findings contribute to identity theory by demonstrating that online recognition (digital badge shared to Facebook) can strengthen subjective impressions of identity-related behavior above a private thank-you email alone. Furthermore, outcomes of a positive identity appraisal (accountability and emotional value) were found to differentially drive NPO-benefiting activities (positive electronic word-of-mouth and donation intentions) depending on donation experience. The results strategically inform online donor appreciation activities to improve donor retention.

Moral Distress: Its Manifestations in Healthy Donors during Peripheral Blood Hematopoietic Stem Cell Harvesting

Hematopoietic stem cell donors (HSCDs) may have ambivalent feelings about donation. These feelings are related to moral obligation to help a sick relative and/or fear about the donation procedure. This ambivalence can produce moral distress (MD) and anxiety, which are usually unnoticed by the treating physician. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of MD and anxiety in a group of related HSCDs for allogeneic transplantation. In this prospective observational study, to assess MD and anxiety, we applied 3 self-answered questionnaires-a questionnaire developed to assess MD (MDQ), State Trait Anxiety Index (STAI), and Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS)-before, during, and after hematopoietic stem cell donation. A total of 60 consecutive related HSCDs with a mean age of 38.2 years were included. Thirty-six were male. Hematopoietic stem cell collections were done by apheresis, performed as an outpatient process in all cases. The incidence of MD during the donation process was 56%. The proportion of HSCDs with moderate to high state anxiety decreased significantly from before donation (63%) to after donation (30%). Higher scores for MD correlated with higher scores on the STAI questionnaire (r=0.448; P < .005). Thirty-seven donors (62%) had at least 1 physical symptom even before the stem cell mobilization process started, mainly anxiety (33%), difficulty sleeping (33%), and fatigue (30%). The number of symptomatic donors increased during donation (100%) and decreased after the procedure (80%). We conclude that MD and anxiety symptoms experienced by HSCDs are very common and can be explained by mixed feelings about the donation process. Providing comprehensive psychological support before starting the donation process and guaranteeing respect for the donor's autonomy are needed to decrease the negative impact of the donation experience.

Applying a systems and complexity lens to building evaluation capacity: Learning from a multicountry donor's experience

AbstractAlthough the evaluation field has increasingly integrated systems thinking and complexity science (STCS) into its work, little has been published on how capacity is built to do STCS‐informed evaluation. The chapter helps address this gap by exploring paired concepts drawn from the STCS and evaluation capacity building (ECB) literature: adaptive action and culture; boundaries and systems and structures; interrelationships and leadership; and perspectives and communication. The ideas are grounded with illustrative examples from a reflective case narrative of an international donor organization and the system surrounding it. Ultimately, the case shares how STCS can reimagine ECB and how increased capacity of the participants and organization can change the broader system.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ experience of organ donation and transplantation

The Transplant Journal of Australasia is published three times per year and is exclusive to members of the Transplant Nurses Association Inc. Articles are sourced from within Australia and from leading practitioners and institutions abroad to keep members abreast of trends and best practice.

Post-donation telephonic interview: A tool for active follow-up of voluntary whole blood donors for analysis of frequency and predisposing factors of adverse reactions

Objectives: Blood donation experience by most donors is satisfactory; however, a few may encounter adverse reactions. Healthy, altruistic, voluntary blood donors ensure adequate blood supply despite the potential risk of adverse reactions. Post-donation follow-up is crucial to get information about these adverse reactions. This study aimed to evaluate the frequency and type of adverse donor reactions and their correlation with contributory factors if any among the blood donors in a tertiary care oncology center. Material and Methods: It was a prospective observational study of 1000 consecutive voluntary whole blood donors who consented to participate in the study. Donors were followed up telephonically on two instances (first after 24 h of donation and second after 2 weeks of donation) and were asked a self-structured donor questionnaire to collect information regarding the adverse donor reactions if any. An appropriate statistical tool was used for analysis (IBM, SPSS software). Results: Of the 1000 voluntary whole blood donors, 92.6% (926/1000) responded to telephonic calls on both occasions. Of these 926, 8.5% (79/926) donors experienced adverse reactions. All these donors experienced immediate reactions, that is, within 24 h of donation while none reported fresh adverse reactions beyond 24 h–2 weeks. Of the 79 donors, 60% (49/79) experienced vasovagal reactions (VVR) and 40% (32/79) experienced hematoma including two donors who experienced both. A total of 86% (68/79) of reactions occurred in outdoor blood donation camps while 14% (11/79) occurred in-house (indoor). First time donors, female donors, and donors with weight on the lower side were more prone to immediate VVR (P &lt; 0.05). Of the 49 VVR, 76% (37/49) were mild, 18% (9/49) were moderate, and 6% (3/49) were severe. Most of the hematomas, that is, 90% (29/32) occurred at outdoor blood donation camps while 10% (3/32) occurred indoor. Most hematomas (53%) took more than 7 days to recover. Conclusion: Post-donation interview proves to be an efficient tool to acquire information about adverse donor reactions. This will help in improving donor safety and satisfaction and will have a positive impact on the national blood supply by improving the donor return rate. Blood transfusion services (BTSs) staff must be trained to promptly identify the donor reactions onsite and manage them to enhance the donation experience of voluntary donors. Post-donation follow-up will aid in getting the donation experience and BTS can develop strategies to enhance it. This will also help in donor hemovigilance in the future for the betterment of donor safety.

Evaluation of a multimodal analgesic regimen on outcomes following laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy.

Postoperative pain is a significant source of morbidity in patients undergoing living donor nephrectomy (LDN) and a deterrent for candidates. We implemented a standardized multimodal analgesic regimen, which consists of pharmacist-led pre-procedure pain management education, a combination transversus abdominis plane and rectus sheath block performed by the regional anesthesia team, scheduled acetaminophen and gabapentin, and as-needed opioids. This single-center retrospective study evaluated outcomes between patients undergoing LDN who received a multimodal analgesic regimen and a historical cohort. The multimodal cohort had a significantly shorter length of stay (LOS) (days, mean±SD: 1.8±0.7 vs. 2.6±0.8; p<.001) and a greater proportion who were discharged on postoperative day (POD) 1 (38.6% vs. 1.5%; p<.001). The total morphine milligram equivalents (MME) that patients received during hospitalization were significantly less in the multimodal cohort on POD 0-2. The outpatient MME prescribed through POD 60 was also significantly less in the multimodal cohort (median [IQR]; 180 [150-188] vs. 225 [150-300]; p<.001). The mean patient-reported pain score (PRPS) was significantly lower in the multimodal cohort on POD 0-2. The maximum PRPS was significantly lower on POD 0 (mean±SD: 7±2 vs. 8±1, respectively; p=.02). This study suggests that our multimodal regimen significantly reduces LOS, PRPS, and opioid requirements and has the potential to improve the donation experience.