Improving Access to Kidney Transplantation: Referral Is Not Enough

Use of Federal Reimbursement for Living Donor Costs by Racial and Ethnic Minorities: Implications for Disparities in Access to Living Donor Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Minority race, ethnicity, and financial barriers are associated with lower rates of living donor (LD) kidney transplantation (LDKT). Financial reimbursement for LD costs may impact social determinants of health and, therefore, impact disparities in access to LDKT.

METHODS

Among US LDKTs, we studied associations between racial and ethnic minority status and utilization of the National Living Donor Assistance Center (NLDAC), a means-tested reimbursement program for nonmedical LD costs. We analyzed demographic, clinical, income, and survey data from NLDAC and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2022) to identify predictors of NLDAC utilization.

RESULTS

Among 70 069 US LDKTs, 6093 NLDAC applicants were identified (9% of US LDKTs). Racial and ethnic minorities were over-represented in NLDAC-supported LDKTs compared with non-NLDAC US LDKTs (Black donors 12% versus 9%; Black recipients 15% versus 12%; Hispanic donors 21% versus 14%; Hispanic recipients 23% versus 15%; all P < 0.001). Among preemptive transplants, use of NLDAC by donors to Hispanic recipients (11%) was nearly twice as high as that of non-Hispanic recipients (6%) (P < 0.001). At time of NLDAC application, 72% stated NLDAC "will make it possible" to donate; higher proportions of minority applicants agreed (Black 80%, White 70%, P < 0.001; Hispanic 79%, non-Hispanic 70%, P < 0.001). Racial and ethnic minority-concordant transplants were significantly more likely to use NLDAC (donor/recipient: Black/Black risk-adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.85, other/other OR 2.59, Hispanic/Hispanic OR 1.53; all P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Reduction of LD financial barriers may increase access to LDKT, particularly in racial and ethnic minority communities.

Differences in Racial and Ethnic Disparities Between First and Repeat Kidney Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Recent data suggest patients with graft failure had better access to repeat kidney transplantation (re-KT) than transplant-naive dialysis accessing first KT. This was postulated to be because of better familiarity with the transplant process and healthcare system; whether this advantage is equitably distributed is not known. We compared the magnitude of racial/ethnic disparities in access to re-KT versus first KT.

METHODS

Using United States Renal Data System, we identified 104 454 White, Black, and Hispanic patients with a history of graft failure from 1995 to 2018, and 2 357 753 transplant-naive dialysis patients. We used adjusted Cox regression to estimate disparities in access to first and re-KT and whether the magnitude of these disparities differed between first and re-KT using a Wald test.

RESULTS

Black patients had inferior access to both waitlisting and receiving first KT and re-KT. However, the racial/ethnic disparities in waitlisting for (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.80) and receiving re-KT (aHR = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.58-0.64) was greater than the racial/ethnic disparities in first KT (waitlisting: aHR = 0.91; 95% CI, 0.90-0.93; Pinteraction = 0.001; KT: aHR = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.64-0.72; Pinteraction < 0.001). For Hispanic patients, ethnic disparities in waitlisting for re-KT (aHR = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.79-0.88) were greater than for first KT (aHR = 1.14; 95% CI, 1.11-1.16; Pinteraction < 0.001). However, the disparity in receiving re-KT (aHR = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.72-0.80) was similar to that for first KT (aHR = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.68-0.79; Pinteraction = 0.55). Inferences were similar when restricting the cohorts to the Kidney Allocation System era.

CONCLUSIONS

Unlike White patients, Black and Hispanic patients with graft failure do not experience improved access to re-KT. This suggests that structural and systemic barriers likely persist for racialized patients accessing re-KT, and systemic changes are needed to achieve transplant equity.

Predicting Kidney Transplant Evaluation Non-attendance

Non-attendance to kidney transplant evaluation (KTE) appointments is a barrier to optimal care for those with kidney failure. We examined the medical and socio-cultural factors that predict KTE non-attendance to identify opportunities for integrated medical teams to intervene. Patients scheduled for KTE between May, 2015 and June, 2018 completed an interview before their initial KTE appointment. The interview assessed various social determinants of health, including demographic (e.g., income), medical (e.g. co-morbidities), transplant knowledge, cultural (e.g., medical mistrust), and psychosocial (e.g., social support) factors. We used multiple logistic regression analysis to determine the strongest predictor of KTE non-attendance. Our sample (N = 1119) was 37% female, 76% non-Hispanic White, median age 59.4 years (IQR 49.2-67.5). Of note, 142 (13%) never attended an initial KTE clinic appointment. Being on dialysis predicted higher odds of KTE non-attendance (OR 1.76; p = .02; 64% of KTE attendees on dialysis vs. 77% of non-attendees on dialysis). Transplant and nephrology teams should consider working collaboratively with dialysis units to better coordinate care, (e.g., resources to attend appointment or outreach to emphasize the importance of transplant) adjusting the KTE referral and evaluation process to address access issues (e.g., using tele-health) and encouraging partnership with clinical psychologists to promote quality of life for those on dialysis.

Breaking Barriers and Bridging Gaps: Advancing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Kidney Transplant Care for Black and Hispanic Patients in the United States

Kidney transplantation offers better mortality and quality of life outcomes to patients with end-stage renal failure compared to dialysis. Specifically, living donor kidney transplantation is the best treatment for end-stage renal disease, since it offers the greatest survival benefit compared to deceased donor kidney transplant or dialysis. However, not all patients from all racial/ethnic backgrounds enjoy these benefits. While black and Hispanic patients bear the predominant disease burden within the United States, they represent less than half of all kidney transplants in the country. Other factors such as cultural barriers that proliferate myths about transplant, financial costs that impede altruistic donation, and even biological predispositions create a complex maze and can also perpetuate care inaccessibility. Therefore, blanket efforts to increase the overall donation pool may not extend access to vulnerable populations, who may require more targeted attention and interventions. This review uses US kidney transplantation data to substantiate accessibility differences amongst racial minorities as well as provides examples of successful institutional and national systemic level changes that have improved transplantation outcomes for all.

Ethics of Organ Transplantation in Persons with Intellectual Disability

Historically, individuals with intellectual disability and end-stage organ disease were discriminated against by transplant professionals and often excluded from transplantation waitlists. Despite antidiscrimination legislation, some transplant programs continue to include intellectual disability as a relative, if not an absolute, contraindication to listing for an organ; this is true for both pediatric and adult individuals in end-stage organ disease. This commentary opposes the absolute exclusion of patients with intellectual disability and end-stage organ disease from transplantation waitlists provided that the candidates are expected to gain a predefined minimum benefit threshold of life-years and quality-adjusted-life years. Intellectual disability is one of many factors that should be considered in determining transplant eligibility and each candidate should have an individualized interdisciplinary assessment.

Failure to Advance Access to Kidney Transplantation over Two Decades in the United States

BACKGROUND

Extensive research and policies have been developed to improve access to kidney transplantation among patients with ESKD. Despite this, wide variation in transplant referral rates exists between dialysis facilities.

METHODS

To evaluate the longitudinal pattern of access to kidney transplantation over the past two decades, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with ESKD initiating ESKD or placed on a transplant waiting list from 1997 to 2016 in the United States Renal Data System. We used cumulative incidence models accounting for competing risks and multivariable Cox models to evaluate time to waiting list placement or transplantation (WLT) from ESKD onset.

RESULTS

Among the study population of 1,309,998 adult patients, cumulative 4-year WLT was 29.7%, which was unchanged over five eras. Preemptive WLT (prior to dialysis) increased by era (5.2% in 1997-2000 to 9.8% in 2013-2016), as did 4-year WLT incidence among patients aged 60-70 (13.4% in 1997-2000 to 19.8% in 2013-2016). Four-year WLT incidence diminished among patients aged 18-39 (55.8%-48.8%). Incidence of WLT was substantially lower among patients in lower-income communities, with no improvement over time. Likelihood of WLT after dialysis significantly declined over time (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 0.82) in 2013-2016 relative to 1997-2000.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite wide recognition, policy reforms, and extensive research, rates of WLT following ESKD onset did not seem to improve in more than two decades and were consistently reduced among vulnerable populations. Improving access to transplantation may require more substantial interventions.

Public health service increased risk donor kidney grafts for transplant into children, a survey of pediatric nephrologists

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplant is the best treatment for end-stage renal disease (ESRD); however, access is limited by severe organ shortage. Public Health Service increased risk donors (PHS-IRD) represent a significant portion of available organs which are discarded at disproportional rates.

METHODS

Pediatric nephrologists were surveyed regarding PHS-IRD kidneys to understand attitudes and perceived barriers to the use of these grafts in children. We sought to elucidate what methods may help increase the likelihood of PHS-IRD acceptance.

RESULTS

Twenty-two responses were received from United States pediatric nephrologists representing 11 UNOS regions (response rate 5.9%). Of respondents, 50% had been practicing for 20+ years, 77% in academic hospitals, and 63% in cities with over 1 000 000 people. All respondents worked in an institution with a kidney transplant program. 41% reported that they would not accept PHS-IRD kidneys under any circumstance, 45% would accept depending on the candidate's medical status, and 14% routinely accepted PHS-IRD kidneys. Infectious transmission was the biggest disincentive reported (59%), with only 55% of respondents feeling comfortable counseling families on the associated risks. 82% of respondents did not perceive all PHS-IRD as the same, and 90% supported stratifying PHS-IRD into tiers based on risk, which would increase the likelihood of organ acceptance (82%) and assist in counseling families (91%).

CONCLUSIONS

With improved utilization, PHS-IRD kidneys offer a step toward decreasing the organ shortage. These findings suggest hesitance in use of PHS-IRD kidneys for pediatric recipients. Further stratification of risk could aid in provider organ acceptance and counseling patients.

Securing the future of kidney transplantation by addressing the challenges of transplant nephrology

Kidney transplant is a life-changing procedure, and transplant nephrologists, as part of a larger transplant team, play an important role in the field by managing the complex medical needs of transplant patients. The subspecialty of transplant nephrology, however, faces structural challenges related to its workforce, reporting structures, compensation, research and innovation, and health care information technology. The position of transplant nephrology at the academic and operational intersection of medicine and surgery may limit its access to critical resources, hinder academic promotion, and contribute to physician burnout. The authors provide an overview of the subspecialty transplant nephrology and propose solutions. Collaborative efforts that fortify the subspecialty of transplant nephrology will ultimately improve the lives of patients suffering from kidney disease.

Barriers to access in pediatric living-donor liver transplantation

Children receiving a LDLT have superior post-transplant outcomes, but this procedure is only used for 10% of transplant recipients. Better understanding about barriers toward LDLT and the sociodemographic characteristics that influence these underlying mechanisms would help to inform strategies to increase its use. We conducted an online, anonymous survey of parents/caregivers for children awaiting, or have received, a liver transplant regarding their knowledge and attitudes about LDLT. The survey was completed by 217 respondents. While 97% of respondents understood an individual could donate a portion of their liver, only 72% knew the steps in evaluation, and 69% understood the donor surgery was covered by the recipient's insurance. Individuals with public insurance were less likely than those with private insurance to know the steps for LDLT evaluation (44% vs 82%; P < 0.001). Respondents with public insurance were less likely to know someone that had been a living donor (44% vs 56%; P = 0.005) as were individuals without a college degree (64% vs 85%; P = 0.007). Nearly all respondents generally trusted their healthcare team. Among respondents, 82% believed they were well-informed about LDLT but individuals with public insurance were significantly less likely to feel well-informed (67% vs 87%; P = 0.03) and to understand how donor surgery might impact donor work/time off (44% vs 81%; P = 0.001). Substantial gaps exist in parental understanding about LDLT, including its evaluation, potential benefits, and complications. Greater emphasis on addressing these barriers, especially to individuals with fewer resources, will be helpful to expand the use of LDLT.

Kidney transplantation in Indonesia: An update

Objective

Indonesia has overcome several barriers to the growth of kidney transplantation within the past decade. Currently, the procedure is increasingly performed in several centers across the country. However there are limited publications on kidney transplantation from Indonesia, especially from centers outside Jakarta. This study aims to give a brief overview on transplantation performed, discuss current efforts and progresses of transplantation in Indonesia and chiefly Semarang.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of 20 transplant cases in Semarang during 2014–2018 was performed. Information from other transplant centers was acquired through formal correspondences with 11 central teaching hospitals in Jakarta, Surabaya, Yogyakarta, Malang, Bali, Solo, Palembang, Aceh, Medan, Bandung, and Padang.

Results

There were 629 recorded kidney transplantations performed in 12 centers, and we report on 245 cases with viable data. The average age of kidney recipients were younger (35.4 years old) compared to the donors (41.3 years old). Approximately half of the kidneys were obtained from related donors (49.0%) and there was only one case of cadaveric donor. The three leading etiologies of end-stage renal disease were hypertension (37.4%), diabetes mellitus (26.1%), and autoimmune disease (11.3%). There is only one center that has performed more than 100 kidney transplants in Indonesia.

Conclusion

Indonesia has successfully overcome several major hurdles that had previously hindered the growth of transplantation. Further improvement should concentrate on the development of integrated organ transplant infrastructure, decentralization of transplant professionals, establishment of National kidney transplant database and changing the Nation's paradigm on cadaveric organ donor through public education.

Potential implications of a more timely living kidney donor evaluation

Living donor kidney transplantation is the most promising way to avoid or minimize the amount of time a recipient spends on dialysis before transplantation. We studied 887 living kidney donors at 5 transplant centers in Ontario, Canada, who started their evaluation and donated between April 2006 and March 2014. Using a series of hypothetical scenarios, we estimated the impact of an earlier living donor evaluation completion and donation on the number pre-emptive transplants, the time spent on dialysis, healthcare cost savings from averted dialysis costs (CAD $2016), and the number of additional transplants. During the study period, if the donor transplants occurred 3 months earlier, the healthcare system would save on average $12 055 (standard deviation [SD] $13 594) per recipient; 21 recipients could have avoided dialysis altogether, and 57 additional transplants (a 26% increase) could have occurred each year. For the 220 living kidney donor transplants performed in Ontario, Canada, each year, this translates to a total annual cost savings of $2.7M. In conclusion, a more timely evaluation of living donor candidates and their intended recipients may increase the supply of kidneys for transplantation. Improved evaluation efficiency may also yield more pre-emptive transplants and substantial healthcare cost savings through averted dialysis costs.

Racial disparities in kidney transplant waitlist appearance in Chicago: Is it race or place?

BACKGROUND

Prior work has demonstrated how neighborhood poverty and racial composition impact racial disparities in access to the deceased donor kidney transplant waitlist, both nationally and regionally. We examined the association between neighborhood characteristics and racial disparities in time to transplant waitlist in Chicago, a diverse city with continued neighborhood segregation.

METHODS

Using data from the United States Renal Data System (USRDS) and the US Census, we investigated time from dialysis initiation to kidney transplant waitlisting for African American and white patients in Chicago using cause-specific proportional hazards analyses, adjusting for individual sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, as well as neighborhood poverty and racial composition.

RESULTS

In Chicago, African Americans are significantly less likely than whites to appear on the renal transplant waitlist (HR 0.73, P < .05). Compared to whites in nonpoor neighborhoods, African Americans in poor neighborhoods are significantly less likely to appear on the transplant waitlist (HR 0.61, P < .05). Over 69% of African Americans with ESRD live in these neighborhoods.

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with national data, African Americans in Chicago have a lower likelihood of waitlisting than whites. This disparity is explained in part by neighborhood poverty, which impacts the majority of African American ESRD patients in Chicago.

Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio to Assess Performance of Transplant Referral among Dialysis Facilities

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

For patients with ESRD, referral from a dialysis facility to a transplant center for evaluation is an important step toward kidney transplantation. However, a standardized measure for assessing clinical performance of dialysis facilities transplant access is lacking. We describe methodology for a new dialysis facility measure: the Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Transplant referral data from 8308 patients with incident ESRD within 249 dialysis facilities in the United States state of Georgia were linked with US Renal Data System data from January of 2008 to December of 2011, with follow-up through December of 2012. Facility-level expected referrals were computed from a two-stage Cox proportional hazards model after patient case mix risk adjustment including demographics and comorbidities. The Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio (95% confidence interval) was calculated as a ratio of observed to expected referrals. Measure validity and reliability were assessed.

RESULTS

Over 2008-2011, facility Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios in Georgia ranged from 0 to 4.87 (mean =1.16, SD=0.76). Most (77%) facilities had observed referrals as expected, whereas 11% and 12% had Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios significantly greater than and less than expected, respectively. Age, race, sex, and comorbid conditions were significantly associated with the likelihood of referral, and they were included in risk adjustment for Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio calculations. The Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios were positively associated with evaluation, waitlisting, and transplantation (r=0.46, 0.35, and 0.20, respectively; P<0.01). On average, approximately 33% of the variability in Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios was attributed to between-facility variation, and 67% of the variability in Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios was attributed to within-facility variation.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of observed variation in dialysis facility referral performance was due to characteristics within a dialysis facility rather than patient factors included in risk adjustment models. Our study shows a method for computing a facility-level standardized measure for transplant referral on the basis of a pilot sample of Georgia dialysis facilities that could be used to monitor transplant referral performance of dialysis facilities.

Dialysis facility staff perceptions of racial, gender, and age disparities in access to renal transplantation

Background

Racial/ethnic, gender, and age disparities in access to renal transplantation among end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients have been well documented, but few studies have explored health care staff attitudes towards these inequalities. Staff perceptions can influence patient care and outcomes, and identifying staff perceptions on disparities could aid in the development of potential interventions to address these health inequities. The objective of this study was to investigate dialysis staff (n = 509), primarily social workers and nurse managers, perceptions of renal transplant disparities in the Southeastern United States.

Methods

This is a mixed methods study that uses both deductive and inductive qualitative analysis of a dialysis staff survey conducted in 2012 using three open-ended questions that asked staff to discuss their perceptions of factors that may contribute to transplant disparities among African American, female, and elderly patients.

Results

Study results suggested that the majority of staff (n = 255, 28%) perceived patients’ low socioeconomic status as the primary theme related to why renal transplant disparities exist between African Americans and non-Hispanic whites. Staff cited patient perception of old age as a primary contributor (n = 188, 23%) to the disparity between young and elderly patients. The dialysis staff responses on gender transplant disparities suggested that staff were unaware of differences due to limited experience and observation (n = 76, 14.7%) of gender disparities.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that dialysis facilities should educate staff on existing renal transplantation disparities, particularly gender disparities, and collaboratively work with transplant facilities to develop strategies to actively address modifiable patient barriers for transplant.