Randomized Controlled Trial of a Computer-Based Education Program in the Home for Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: Impact on Medication Knowledge, Satisfaction, and Adherence

Video Education and Behavior Contract to Improve Outcomes After Renal Transplantation (VECTOR): A Randomized Controlled Trial

Sub-optimal adherence to immunosuppressant medications reduces graft survival for kidney transplant recipients and adherence-enhancing interventions are resource and time intensive. We performed a multi-center randomized controlled trial to investigate the impact of an electronically delivered intervention on adherence. Of 203 adult kidney transplant recipients who received a de novo kidney transplant n = 173 agreed to participate (intent-to-treat population) and were randomized to the intervention (video education plus behavior contract n = 91) or the control (standard education, n = 82). No significant differences were found between the groups for medication adherence measured by the Basel Assessment of Adherence to Immunosuppressive Medications Scale, intrapatient variability in tacrolimus levels, time in therapeutic range for any immunosuppressant, knowledge, self-efficacy, QOL, or hospitalizations. Among a subgroup of 64 participants randomized to the intervention group who completed a post-intervention questionnaire, two-thirds (67%, n = 43) reported watching at least 80% of the videos and 58% (n = 37) completed the electronic goal setting exercise and adherence contract. An autonomous goal setting exercise and electronic behavioural contract added to standard of care did not improve any outcomes. Our findings reiterate that nonadherence in transplantation is a difficult multifactorial problem that simple solutions will not solve. Trial registration number NCT03540121.

Transplant recipient, care partner, and clinician perceptions of medication adherence monitoring technology: A mixed methods study

Medication nonadherence is a leading cause of graft loss. Adherence monitoring technologies-reminder texts, smart bottles, video-observed ingestion, and digestion-activated signaling pills-may support adherence. However, patient, care partner, and clinician perceptions of these tools are not well studied. We conducted qualitative individual semistructured interviews and focus groups among 97 participants at a single center: kidney and liver transplant recipients 2 weeks to 18 months posttransplant, their care partners, and transplant clinicians. We assessed adherence practices, reactions to monitoring technologies, and opportunities for care integration. One-size-fits-all approaches were deemed infeasible. Interviewees considered text messages the most acceptable approach; live video checks were the least acceptable and raised the most concerns for inconvenience and invasiveness. Digestion-activated signaling technology produced both excitement and apprehension. Patients and care partners generally aligned in perceptions of adherence monitoring integration into clinical care. Key themes were importance of routine, ease of use, leveraging technology for actionable medication changes, and aversion to surveillance. Transplant clinicians similarly considered text messages most acceptable and video checks least acceptable. Clinicians reported that early posttransplant use and real-time adherence tracking with patient feedback may facilitate successful implementation. The study provides initial insights that may inform future adherence technology implementation.

Patient randomised controlled trial of technology enabled strategies to promote treatment adherence in liver transplantation: rationale and design of the TEST trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Liver transplantation is a life-saving procedure for end-stage liver disease. However, post-transplant medication regimens are complex and non-adherence is common. Post-transplant medication non-adherence is associated with graft rejection, which can have long-term adverse consequences. Transplant centres are equipped with clinical staff that monitor patients post-transplant; however, digital health tools and proactive immunosuppression adherence monitoring has potential to improve outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a patient-randomised prospective clinical trial at three transplant centres in the Northeast, Midwest and South to investigate the effects of a remotely administered adherence programme compared with usual care. The programme monitors potential non-adherence largely levering text message prompts and phenotypes the nature of the non-adhere as cognitive, psychological, medical, social or economic. Additional reminders for medications, clinical appointments and routine self-management support are incorporated to promote adherence to the entire medical regimen. The primary study outcome is medication adherence via 24-hour recall; secondary outcomes include additional medication adherence (ASK-12 self-reported scale, regimen knowledge scales, tacrolimus values), quality of life, functional health status and clinical outcomes (eg, days hospitalised). Study implementation, acceptability, feasibility, costs and potential cost-effectiveness will also be evaluated.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The University of Pennsylvania Review Board has approved the study as the single IRB of record (protocol # 849575, V.1.4). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and summaries will be provided to study funders.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05260268.

Interventions for improving health literacy in people with chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Low health literacy affects 25% of people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and is associated with increased morbidity and death. Improving health literacy is a recognised priority, but effective interventions are not clear.

OBJECTIVES

This review looked the benefits and harms of interventions for improving health literacy in people with CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 12 July 2022 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also searched MEDLINE (OVID) and EMBASE (OVID) for non-randomised studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies that assessed interventions aimed at improving health literacy in people with CKD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed studies for eligibility and performed risk of bias analysis. We classified studies as either interventions aimed at improving aspects of health literacy or interventions targeting a population of people with poor health literacy. The interventions were further sub-classified in terms of the type of intervention (educational, self-management training, or educational with self-management training). Results were expressed as mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 120 studies (21,149 participants) which aimed to improve health literacy. There were 107 RCTs and 13 non-randomised studies. No studies targeted low literacy populations. For the RCTs, selection bias was low or unclear in 94% of studies, performance bias was high in 86% of studies, detection bias was high in 86% of studies reporting subjective outcomes and low in 93% of studies reporting objective outcomes. Attrition and other biases were low or unclear in 86% and 78% of studies, respectively. Compared to usual care, low certainty evidence showed educational interventions may increase kidney-related knowledge (14 RCTs, 2632 participants: SMD 0.99, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.32; I² = 94%). Data for self-care, self-efficacy, quality of life (QoL), death, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and hospitalisations could not be pooled or was not reported. Compared to usual care, low-certainty evidence showed self-management interventions may improve self-efficacy (5 RCTs, 417 participants: SMD 0.58, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.03; I² = 74%) and QoL physical component score (3 RCTs, 131 participants: MD 4.02, 95% CI 1.09 to 6.94; I² = 0%). There was moderate-certainty evidence that self-management interventions probably did not slow the decline in eGFR after one year (3 RCTs, 855 participants: MD 1.53 mL/min/1.73 m², 95% CI -1.41 to 4.46; I² = 33%). Data for knowledge, self-care behaviour, death and hospitalisations could not be pooled or was not reported. Compared to usual care, low-certainty evidence showed educational with self-management interventions may increase knowledge (15 RCTs, 2185 participants: SMD 0.65, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.93; I² = 90%), improve self-care behaviour scores (4 RCTs, 913 participants: SMD 0.91, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.82; I² =97%), self-efficacy (8 RCTs, 687 participants: SMD 0.50, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.89; I² = 82%), improve QoL physical component score (3 RCTs, 2771 participants: MD 2.56, 95% CI 1.73 to 3.38; I² = 0%) and may make little or no difference to slowing the decline of eGFR (4 RCTs, 618 participants: MD 4.28 mL/min/1.73 m², 95% CI -0.03 to 8.85; I² = 43%). Moderate-certainty evidence shows educational with self-management interventions probably decreases the risk of death (any cause) (4 RCTs, 2801 participants: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.02; I² = 0%). Data for hospitalisation could not be pooled.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Interventions to improve aspects of health literacy are a very broad category, including educational interventions, self-management interventions and educational with self-management interventions. Overall, this type of health literacy intervention is probably beneficial in this cohort however, due to methodological limitations and high heterogeneity in interventions and outcomes, the evidence is of low certainty.

Interventions for increasing immunosuppressant medication adherence in solid organ transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Non-adherence to immunosuppressant therapy is a significant concern following a solid organ transplant, given its association with graft failure. Adherence to immunosuppressant therapy is a modifiable patient behaviour, and different approaches to increasing adherence have emerged, including multi-component interventions. There has been limited exploration of the effectiveness of interventions to increase adherence to immunosuppressant therapy.

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to look at the benefits and harms of using interventions for increasing adherence to immunosuppressant therapies in solid organ transplant recipients, including adults and children with a heart, lung, kidney, liver and pancreas transplant.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 14 October 2021 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register were identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cluster RCTs examining interventions to increase immunosuppressant adherence following a solid organ transplant (heart, lung, kidney, liver, pancreas) were included. There were no restrictions on language or publication type.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts of identified records, evaluated study quality and assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool. The ABC taxonomy for measuring medication adherence provided the analysis framework, and the primary outcomes were immunosuppressant medication initiation, implementation (taking adherence, dosing adherence, timing adherence, drug holidays) and persistence. Secondary outcomes were surrogate markers of adherence, including self-reported adherence, trough concentration levels of immunosuppressant medication, acute graft rejection, graft loss, death, hospital readmission and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Meta-analysis was conducted where possible, and narrative synthesis was carried out for the remainder of the results.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty studies involving 3896 randomised participants (3718 adults and 178 adolescents) were included. Studies were heterogeneous in terms of the type of intervention and outcomes assessed. The majority of studies (80%) were conducted in kidney transplant recipients. Two studies examined paediatric solid organ transplant recipients. The risk of bias was generally high or unclear, leading to lower certainty in the results. Initiation of immunosuppression was not measured by the included studies. There is uncertain evidence of an association between immunosuppressant medication adherence interventions and the proportion of participants classified as adherent to taking immunosuppressant medication (4 studies, 445 participants: RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.20; I² = 78%). There was very marked heterogeneity in treatment effects between the four studies evaluating taking adherence, which may have been due to the different types of interventions used. There was evidence of increasing dosing adherence in the intervention group (8 studies, 713 participants: RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.26, I² = 61%).  There was very marked heterogeneity in treatment effects between the eight studies evaluating dosing adherence, which may have been due to the different types of interventions used. It was uncertain if an intervention to increase immunosuppressant adherence had an effect on timing adherence or drug holidays. There was limited evidence that an intervention to increase immunosuppressant adherence had an effect on persistence. There was limited evidence that an intervention to increase immunosuppressant adherence had an effect on secondary outcomes. For self-reported adherence, it is uncertain whether an intervention to increase adherence to immunosuppressant medication increases the proportion of participants classified as medically adherent to immunosuppressant therapy (9 studies, 755 participants: RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.49; I² = 74%; very low certainty evidence). Similarly, it is uncertain whether an intervention to increase adherence to immunosuppressant medication increases the mean adherence score on self-reported adherence measures (5 studies, 471 participants: SMD 0.65, 95% CI -0.31 to 1.60; I² = 96%; very low certainty evidence). For immunosuppressant trough concentration levels, it is uncertain whether an intervention to increase adherence to immunosuppressant medication increases the proportion of participants who reach target immunosuppressant trough concentration levels (4 studies, 348 participants: RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.40; I² = 40%; very low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether an intervention to increase adherence to immunosuppressant medication may reduce hospitalisations (5 studies, 460 participants: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.02; I² = 64%; low certainty evidence). There were limited, low certainty effects on patient-reported health outcomes such as HRQoL. There was no clear evidence to determine the effect of interventions on secondary outcomes, including acute graft rejection, graft loss and death. No harms from intervention participation were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Interventions to increase taking and dosing adherence to immunosuppressant therapy may be effective; however, our findings suggest that current evidence in support of interventions to increase adherence to immunosuppressant therapy is overall of low methodological quality, attributable to small sample sizes, and heterogeneity identified for the types of interventions. Twenty-four studies are currently ongoing or awaiting assessment (3248 proposed participants); therefore, it is possible that findings may change with the inclusion of these large ongoing studies in future updates.

Pragmatic solutions to enhance self-management skills in solid organ transplant patients: systematic review and thematic analysis

Background

In organ transplantation, all patients must follow a complex treatment regimen for the rest of their lives. Hence, patients play an active role in the continuity of the care process in the form of self-management tasks. Thus, the main objective of our study was to investigate the pragmatic solutions applied by different studies to enhance adherence to self-management behaviors.

Method

A systematic review was conducted in five databases from 2010 to August 2021 using keywords. Eligible studies were all English papers that developed self-management programs to enhance patient care in solid organ transplantation. The interventions were analyzed using thematic analysis to determine the main descriptive areas. The quality of the included articles was evaluated using the research critical appraisal program (CASP) tool.

Results

Of the 691 retrieved articles, 40 met our inclusion criteria. Of these, 32 studies were devoted to the post-transplantation phase. Five main areas were determined (e-health programs for telemonitoring, non-electronic educational programs, non-electronic home-based symptom-monitoring programs, electronic educational plans for self-monitoring, and Telerehabilitation) according to thematic analysis. Most studies (72.5%) declared that developed programs and applied solutions had a statistically significant positive impact on self-management behavior enhancement in transplant patients.

Conclusion

The results showed that an effective solution for improving organ transplantation needs patient collaboration to address psychological, social, and clinical aspects of patient care. Such programs can be applied during candidate selection, waiting list, and after transplantation by putting the patient at the center of care.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-022-01766-z.

Pretransplant Patient Education in Solid-organ Transplant: A Narrative Review

Education for pretransplant, solid-organ recipient candidates aims to improve knowledge and understanding about the transplant process, outcomes, and potential complications to support informed, shared decision-making to reduce fears and anxieties about transplant, inform expectations, and facilitate adjustment to posttransplant life. In this review, we summarize novel pretransplant initiatives and approaches to educate solid-organ transplant recipient candidates. First, we review approaches that may be common to all solid-organ transplants, then we summarize interventions specific to kidney, liver, lung, and heart transplant. We describe evidence that emphasizes the need for multidisciplinary approaches to transplant education. We also summarize initiatives that consider online (eHealth) and mobile (mHealth) solutions. Finally, we highlight education initiatives that support racialized or otherwise marginalized communities to improve equitable access to solid-organ transplant. A considerable amount of work has been done in solid-organ transplant since the early 2000s with promising results. However, many studies on education for pretransplant recipient candidates involve relatively small samples and nonrandomized designs and focus on short-term surrogate outcomes. Overall, many of these studies have a high risk of bias. Frequently, interventions assessed are not well characterized or they are combined with administrative and data-driven initiatives into multifaceted interventions, which makes it difficult to assess the impact of the education component on outcomes. In the future, well-designed studies rigorously assessing well-defined surrogate and clinical outcomes will be needed to evaluate the impact of many promising initiatives.

Pharmacist-Facilitated Interactive E-Learning for Patients Newly Initiated on Warfarin: A Randomised Controlled Study

It is not known whether electronic-learning (e-learning) is effective for educating hospital inpatients about complex medications such as warfarin. This prospective randomised controlled study compared pharmacist-facilitated e-learning with standard pharmacist-delivered face-to-face education on patients’ or their unpaid carers’ knowledge of warfarin and satisfaction with warfarin education as well as the time that was spent by pharmacists in delivering warfarin education. Adult English-speaking patients (or their carers) who had been prescribed warfarin were randomised to receive standard pharmacist face-to-face education (control) or an e-learning module on a tablet device facilitated by a pharmacist (intervention). All of the participants received written warfarin information and were presented with the opportunity to ask any questions that they may have had to a pharmacist. Fifty-four participants completed the study (27 per group). The participants who received e-learning had median correct Oral Anticoagulation Knowledge (OAK) test scores of 85% compared to 80% for standard education (p = 0.14). The participants in both groups were satisfied with the information that they received. There was a trend towards pharmacists spending less time on warfarin education for the e-learning group than in the standard education group (25.5 vs. 33 min, respectively, p = 0.05). Education delivered via pharmacist-facilitated e-learning was non-inferior in terms of patient or carer warfarin knowledge compared to standard pharmacist-delivered education.

Medication adherence interventions in transplantation lack information on how to implement findings from randomized controlled trials in real-world settings: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Growing numbers of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are showing the effectiveness of interventions to improve medication adherence in transplantation recipients. However, real-world implementation is still a major challenge. This systematic review assesses the range of information available in RCTs supporting these interventions' clinical adoption in adult transplant populations.

METHODS

We included RCTs of interventions that a) targeted any phase of medication adherence in solid organ or allogeneic stem cell transplantation recipients and b) were published between January 2015 and November 2020. We excluded study protocols, conference abstracts and studies focusing only on pediatric populations. We identified relevant database and trial registries as well as traced references backward and citations forward. Implementation-relevant information was evaluated using adapted versions of Peters' ten criteria: 1. healthcare/organizational context; 2. social/economic/policy context; 3. patient involvement; 4. other stakeholder involvement; 5. sample representativeness; 6. trial conducted in a real-world-setting; 7. presence of feasibility study; 8. implementation strategy; 9. process evaluation; 10. implementation outcomes, using a stoplight color-rating system.

RESULTS

Screening 17'004 titles/abstracts resulted in 23 eligible RCTs, including 2'339 patients (n = 19-209/study). All included studies focused on the implementation phase of medication adherence. The best-reported criteria were feasibility study (43%), representative sample (17%) and conducted in a real-world-setting (17%). Least reported were context (9%), implementation strategies (4%), process evaluation (4%).

CONCLUSIONS

RCTs testing medication adherence interventions tend to report limited implementation-relevant information. This hinders their translation to real-world transplant settings. Integrating implementation science principles early in the conceptualization of RCTs would fuel real-world-translation, reducing research waste.

Effectiveness of eHealth interventions for improving medication adherence of organ transplant patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Organ transplantation is the most effective treatment for patients with end-stage organ failure. It has been actively carried out all over the world. Recently, eHealth interventions have been applied to organ transplant patients. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of eHealth interventions for improving medication adherence in organ transplant patients as compared to usual or conventional care alone.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE via PubMed, Excerpta Media dataBASE (EMBASE), the Cochrane Register Controlled Trials, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO, and six domestic Korean databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to April 17, 2020. Two reviewers independently selected relevant studies and extracted data. The quality and bias of the identified studies were assessed. To estimate the effect size, a meta-analysis of the studies was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration software Review Manager 5.3. PRISMA guidelines were followed. When statistical heterogeneity was greater than 80%, narrative synthesis was performed.

Results

Of the 1,847 articles identified, seven RCTs with a total of 759 participants met the inclusion criteria. The risk of bias assessment showed that the blinding of participants and personnel was high. In six studies, medication adherence (effect size = -0.18–1.30) and knowledge scores were not significantly different between those receiving eHealth interventions and the controls.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that eHealth interventions were similar to standard care or advanced care for improving medication adherence, and they faired equally well for improving medication knowledge. Therefore, eHealth interventions can be used for medication adherence of organ transplant patients. More research is needed to provide well-designed eHealth intervention to improve the medication adherence and knowledge of organ transplant patients.

Protocol registration number

CRD42017067145 16/05/2017

Efficacy of Adherence-Enhancing Interventions for Immunosuppressive Therapy in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Immunosuppressant non-adherence is a widespread problem among solid organ recipients. With the newly published clinical trials, the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) based systematic review of adherence-enhancing interventions on immunosuppressant adherence in solid organ recipients has not been completed. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we compared the efficacy of adherence-enhancing interventions versus routine intervention, as performed with RCTs, on immunosuppressant adherence in solid organ transplantation recipients.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL full text, and PsycINFO were searched from database inception to December 2019. This review was conducted following the PRISMA’s reporting guidelines and according to the principles recommended by Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review.

Results

The search yielded 10,479 articles. A total of 27 articles (26 studies) with 715 participants were included in our analysis. Results from the meta-analysis revealed that as compared with that of the routine intervention group, the rates of overall adherence, dosing adherence, and timing adherence were significantly increased within the adherence-enhancing intervention group, with the pooled risk ratio (RR) of overall adherence = 1.17, [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.07 to 1.28; p = 0.0006]; RR of dosing adherence = 1.21 (95% CI: 1.08 to 1.36, p = 0.001); RR of timing adherence = 1.16 (95% CI: 1.03 to 1.29, p = 0.01). There was a significantly increased adherence score in the adherence-enhancing intervention group; however, no statistical significance on the immunosuppressant blood concentration was found between the two study groups. Results obtained from a subgroup analysis shown interventions led by a multidisciplinary team, both the assessment time at 6 months and 12 months demonstrated a significantly increased adherence rate in the intervention group compared with the control group.

Conclusions

The findings of this report indicate that clinicians (doctors and nurses) should maintain a long-term intervention protocol to ensure immunosuppressant adherence within solid organ transplant recipients. To accomplish this goal, we recommend a multidisciplinary team-led, comprehensive intervention approach combined with mobile health monitoring for the administration of an effective immunosuppressive therapy regimen.

eHealth Interventions for Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Lack of support for self-management may contribute to adverse health outcomes. eHealth has the potential to support self-management, but evidence in solid organ transplantation remains unclear. This review aims to evaluate the benefits and harms of eHealth interventions to support self-management in solid organ transplant recipients.

METHODS

We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase databases for randomized trials of eHealth interventions in solid organ transplant recipients. We calculated the risk ratios or standardized mean difference of outcomes, and summary estimates were determined using random-effects models. The Cochrane risk of bias tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations were used to assess trial quality.

RESULTS

Twenty-one trials from 6 countries involving 2114 participants were included. Compared with standard care, eHealth interventions improved medication adherence (risk ratio, 1.34; CI, 1.12-2.56; I = 75%) and self-monitoring behavior (risk ratio, 2.58; CI, 1.56-4.27; I = 0%) up to 12 mo posttransplant. The treatment effects were largely consistent across different subgroups except for intervention functionality and mode of delivery. The effects on other outcomes were uncertain. Nine trials reported harms. The overall risk of bias was considered high or unclear, and the quality of evidence was low to very low for all outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

eHealth interventions may improve medication adherence and self-monitoring behavior in the short term, but high-quality intervention studies are needed to determine whether eHealth will improve long-term patient-relevant outcomes.

Rapid Modification of Workflows and Fellow Staffing at a Single Transplant Center to Address the COVID-19 Crisis

Background

Although hospital systems have largely halted elective surgical practices in preparing their response to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, transplantation remains an essential and lifesaving surgical practice. To continue transplantation while protecting immunocompromised patients and health care workers, significant restructuring of normal patient care practice habits is required.

Methods

This is a nonrandomized, descriptive study of the abdominal transplant program at 1 academic center (University of California, San Francisco) and the programmatic changes undertaken to safely continue transplantations. Patient transfers, fellow use, and patient discharge education were identified as key areas requiring significant reorganization.

Results

The University of California, San Francisco abdominal transplant program took an early and aggressive approach to restructuring inpatient workflows and health care worker staffing. The authors formalized a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transfer system to address patients in need of services at their institution while minimizing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 in their transplant ward and used technological approaches to provide virtual telehealth where possible. They also modified their transplant fellow staffing and responsibilities to develop an adequate backup system in case of potential exposures.

Conclusion

Every transplant program is unique, and an individualized plan to adapt and modify standard clinical practices will be required to continue providing essential transplantation services. The authors’ experience highlights areas of attention specific to transplant programs and may provide generalizable solutions to support continued transplantation in the COVID-19 era.

Using technology to enhance medication regimen education after solid organ transplantation

PURPOSE

The design and implementation of a tool that combines clinical teaching with cutting-edge, simplified technology for providing medication education to solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are described.

METHODS

In a retrospective study of adults who received kidney transplants from February 2015 through May 2017, patients were educated about their medications using a tablet computer application, Medication Regimen Education (MRxEd), that presented concise videos describing the name, indication, dose, adverse effects, and associated interactions of all medications received, as well as special considerations applicable to each agent. Assessment questions were used to reinforce key concepts and identify knowledge gaps.

RESULTS

The digital educational intervention was provided to 282 kidney transplant recipients. Patients were predominantly white (48%) and/or male (63%), with a median age of 51 years (interquartile range, 37-61 years). Patients came from a variety of education backgrounds. Most patients (81%) were educated on dual maintenance immunosuppression (with tacrolimus and mycophenolate) and 3 infection prophylaxis agents (nystatin, sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim, and valganciclovir). Most patients (90%) correctly answered questions related to medication indications, dosing, and special rules, but many (61%) had difficulty correctly answering questions about adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

An innovative approach for interactive and engaging medication teaching with the MRxEd application enhanced the education process for SOT recipients.

Health literacy in solid-organ transplantation: a model to improve understanding

Optimizing wellness and health are the most critical goals for patients post solid-organ transplantation. Low health literacy has important implications for wellness and health, increasing patient risk for negative health outcomes. More than 30% of the general US patient population has low health literacy, and solid-organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) may be especially vulnerable to low health literacy and its adverse impact on health outcomes. A comprehensive literature review was conducted and a model was adapted to better depict factors associated with low health literacy. Based on the Paasche-Orlow and Wolf model of health literacy, the Health Literacy Model in Transplantation (HeaL-T) provides a foundation to visually demonstrate the relationships among variables associated with low health literacy and to develop evidence-based strategies to improve care. The model depicts a number of patient and healthcare level factors associated with health literacy, several of which have bi-directional or reciprocal relationships, including access and utilization of healthcare, provider-patient interaction, and self-management/adherence. The impact of these factors and their relationships to SOTR outcomes are reviewed. The HeaL-T represents an important step in developing holistic understanding of the complexity of health literacy in SOTRs and offers clinicians a base from which to design strategies to mitigate adverse health effects including increased hospitalizations, graft failure, and mortality.