Equity or Equality? Which Approach Brings More Satisfaction in a Kidney-Exchange Chain?

In United States (U.S.), government-funded organizations, such as NLDAC, reimburse travel and subsistence expenses incurred during living-organ donation process. However, in Iran, there is a non-governmental organization called Iranian Kidney Foundation (IKF) that funds the direct and indirect costs of donors through charitable donations and contributions from participants in the exchange program. In this article, for countries outside the U.S. that currently use an equality approach, we propose a potential new compensation-apportionment approach (equitable approach) for kidney-exchange chains and compare it with the currently available system (equality approach) in terms of the apportionment of compensation in a kidney-exchange chain to cover the expenses incurred by the initiating living donor of the chain in the act of donation. To this end, we propose a mechanism to apportion compensation among all participating pairs based on the equity approach by utilizing a prediction model to calculate the probability of graft survival in each transplant operation. These probabilities are then used to define the utility of any transplantation, considering the quality of each pair's donated and received kidney in the chain. Afterward, the corresponding cost is apportioned by a mechanism based on the normalized differences between the utility of donated and received kidneys for each incompatible pair of the chain. In summary, we demonstrate that by utilizing the equitable approach, there is more fairness and equity in the allocation of resources in organ-procurement systems, which results in more satisfaction among incompatible pairs. Additional future prospective studies are needed to assess this proposed equitable approach for kidney-exchange chains in countries outside the U.S., such as Iran, that currently use an equality approach.