EN
Back to the archive

The encyclopedia · R&D & Science · Operational decision · 2002

US liver allocation switched from discretion to an objective score, and got fairer

In 2002 the US began allocating donor livers by a validated MELD score, which reduced waiting-list deaths and removed a racial bias.

United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS)

the move

Donor livers are scarce, and the pre-2002 US allocation ranked patients by broad urgency status categories and time on the list, so patients within a category were not separated by how close they were to dying.

In February 2002 the system was anchored to the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) and its pediatric version PELD, an objective score that predicts a patient's risk of death within three months.

A JAMA study of the UNOS waiting list found that before MELD, black patients were more likely than white patients to die or become too sick for transplant (27.0% vs 21.7%) and were less likely to receive a transplant; after MELD those disparities were no longer statistically significant.

Because the score ranks by urgency and also predicts post-transplant need, it aligned the system with evidence rather than with a local committee's call.

why it works

  • An objective score replaces judgment calls that can be second-guessed or biased.
  • Ranking by predicted mortality reduces deaths on the waiting list.
  • A validated, transparent measure is more defensible than a discretionary committee.
  • It aligns urgency with expected benefit, so the sickest and the most likely to do well are both served.
the payoffRank patients by an objective score of how soon they'll dieclever

what transfers

When you must ration something life-or-death, make the tie-breaker an objective, validated measure.

what came after

MELD/PELD, refined by exception scores and later by a 2018 continuous-distribution rule, remained the basis of US liver allocation and became the model for evidence-based organ allocation worldwide.

references

spotted an error? The archive wants to know.

same kind of clever