Disparities in provision of transplant information affect access to kidney transplantation

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.

Expanding the access to kidney transplantation: Strategies for kidney transplant programs

Kidney transplantation is the most successful kidney replacement therapy available, resulting in improved recipient survival and societal cost savings. Yet, nearly 70 years after the first successful kidney transplant, there are still numerous barriers and untapped opportunities that constrain the access to transplant. The literature describing these barriers is extensive, but the practices and processes to solve them are less clear. Solutions must be multidisciplinary and be the product of strong partnerships among patients, their networks, health care providers, and transplant programs. Transparency in the referral, evaluation, and listing process as well as organ selection are paramount to build such partnerships. Providing early culturally congruent and patient-centered education as well as maximizing the use of local resources to facilitate the transplant work up should be prioritized. Every opportunity to facilitate pre-emptive kidney transplantation and living donation must be taken. Promoting the use of telemedicine and kidney paired donation as standards of care can positively impact the work up completion and maximize the chances of a living donor kidney transplant.

Knowledge and Attitudes of Dialysis Patients Toward Kidney Transplantation: Preliminary Report from a Pilot Study Preceding a Cross-Sectional Nationwide Evaluation

BACKGROUND

The knowledge and attitudes of dialyzed patients toward the best method of renal replacement treatment (ie, kidney transplantation [KTx]) may be the main factor motivating them to apply and be put on the national kidney transplant waiting list, resulting in a better prognosis.

OBJECTIVE

Assessment of the knowledge and attitudes of dialyzed patients toward KTx.

METHODS

A pilot study is considered an introductory step before the nationwide project, which will cover dialysis centers in Poland from 2023 to 2024. The authorship 4-part questionnaire, including self-assessment knowledge, attitude dimension, pain and mental evaluation section, was made available to 30 patients with hemodialysis aged 30 to 75 years.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients was 59 years. The primary cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) was glomerulonephritis (33%). Most of the patients stayed on hemodialysis for 2 years or less (57%); 43% of the patients declared insufficient knowledge in the field of KTx, 41% of the patients were not informed at the nephrology clinic that KTx remains one of the methods of renal replacement therapy, and 65% did not receive information about the possibility of preemptive or early transplantation from a relative donor. Only 34% of the patients considered KTx to be a much better treatment option than dialysis, but only 20% of those were on the national waiting list for KTx.

CONCLUSIONS

The pilot study showed insufficient knowledge of patients with ESRD regarding kidney transplantation as a method of renal replacement therapy. There is a need to introduce an effective educational program.

Gender and kidney transplantation

Kidney transplantation provides the best form of kidney replacement therapy with improvement in quality of life and longevity. However, disparity exists in its availability, utilisation and outcomes, not only due to donor availability or financial constraints but also arising from the influence of biological sex and its sociocultural attribute i.e., Gender. Women make up the majority of kidney donors but are less likely to be counselled regarding transpantation, be waitlisted or receive living/deceased donor kidney. Biological differences also contribute to differences in kidney transplantation among the sexes. Women are more likely to be sensitised owing to pregnancy, especially in multiparous individuals, complicating donor compatibility. A heightened immune system in women, evidenced by more autoimmune illnesses, increases the risk of allograft rejection and loss. Differences in the pharmacokinetics of transplant drugs owing to biological variances could also contribute to variability in outcomes. Transgender medicine is also increasingly becoming a relevant topic of study, providing greater challenges in the form of hormonal manipulations and anatomic changes. It is thus important to determine and study transplantation and its nuances in this backdrop to be able to provide relevant sex and gender-specific interventions and design better practices for optimum kidney transplant utilisation and outcomes.

Impact of sex on the outcomes of deceased donor liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Data examining the impact of sex on liver transplant (LT) outcomes are limited. It is clear that further research into sex-related differences in transplant patients is necessary to identify areas for improvement. Elucidation of these differences may help to identify specific areas of focus to improve on the organ matching process, as well as the peri- and post-operative care of these patients.

AIM

To utilize data from a high-volume Eurotransplant center to compare characteristics of male and female patients undergoing liver transplant and assess asso ciation between sex-specific variables with short- and long-term post-transplant outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the University of Essen's transplant database was performed with collection of baseline patient characteristics, transplant-related data, and short-term outcomes. Comparisons of these data were made with Shapiro-Wilk, Mann-Whitney U, χ2 and Bonferroni tests applied where app ropriate. A P value of < 0.05 was accepted as statistically significant.

RESULTS

Of the total 779 LT recipients, 261 (33.5%) were female. Female patients suffered higher incidences of acute liver failure and lower incidences of alcohol-related or viremic liver disease (P = 0.001). Female patients were more likely to have received an organ from a female donor with a higher donor risk index score, and as a high urgency offer (all P < 0.05). Baseline characteristics of male and female recipients were also significantly different. In multivariate hazard regression analysis, recipient lab-Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score and donor cause of death were associated with long-term outcomes in females. Pre-operative diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma, age at time of listing, duration of surgery, and units transfused during surgery, were associated with long-term outcomes in males. Severity of complications was associated with long-term outcomes in both groups. Overall survival was similar in both males and females; however, when stratified by age, females < 50 years of age had the best survival.

CONCLUSION

Female and male LT recipients have different baseline and transplant-related characteristics, with sex-specific variables which are associated with long-term outcomes. Female recipients < 50 years of age demonstrated the best long-term outcomes. Pre- and post-transplant practices should be individualized based on sex-specific variables to optimize long-term outcomes.

Knowledge About Renal Transplantation Among African, Caribbean, and Black Canadian Patients With Advanced Kidney Failure

Introduction

Variable transplant-related knowledge may contribute to inequitable access to living donor kidney transplant (LDKT). We compared transplant-related knowledge between African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) versus White Canadian patients with kidney failure using the Knowledge Assessment of Renal Transplantation (KART) questionnaire.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional cohort study. Data were collected from a cross-sectional convenience sample of adults with kidney failure in Toronto. Participants also answered an exploratory question about their distrust in the kidney allocation system. Clinical characteristics were abstracted from medical records. The potential contribution of distrust to differences in transplant knowledge was assessed in mediation analysis.

Results

Among 577 participants (mean [SD] age 57 [14] years, 63% male), 25% were ACB, and 43% were White Canadians. 45% of ACB versus 26% of White participants scored in the lowest tertile of the KART score. The relative risk ratio to be in the lowest tertile for ACB compared to White participants was 2.22 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11, 4.43) after multivariable adjustment. About half of the difference in the knowledge score between ACB versus White patients was mediated by distrust in the kidney allocation system.

Conclusion

Participants with kidney failure from ACB communities have less transplant-related knowledge compared to White participants. Distrust is potentially contributing to this difference.

Disparities in Kidney Transplant Waitlisting Among Young Patients Without Medical Comorbidities

Importance

Disparities in kidney transplant referral and waitlisting contribute to disparities in kidney disease outcomes. Whether these differences are rooted in population differences in comorbidity burden is unclear.

Objective

To examine whether disparities in kidney transplant waitlisting were present among a young, relatively healthy cohort of patients unlikely to have medical contraindications to kidney transplant.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used the US Renal Data System Registry to identify patients with end-stage kidney disease who initiated dialysis between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2019. Patients who were older than 40 years, received a preemptive transplant, were preemptively waitlisted, or had documented medical comorbidities other than hypertension or smoking were excluded, yielding an analytic cohort of 52 902 patients. Data were analyzed between March 1, 2022, and February 1, 2023.

Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s)

Kidney transplant waitlisting after dialysis initiation.

Results

Of 52 902 patients (mean [SD] age, 31 [5] years; 31 132 [59%] male; 3547 [7%] Asian/Pacific Islander, 20 782 [39%] Black/African American, and 28 006 [53%] White) included in the analysis, 15 840 (30%) were waitlisted for a kidney transplant within 1 year of dialysis initiation, 11 122 (21%) were waitlisted between 1 and 5 years after dialysis initiation, and 25 940 (49%) were not waitlisted by 5 years. Patients waitlisted within 1 year of dialysis initiation were more likely to be male, to be White, to be employed full time, and to have had predialysis nephrology care. There were large state-level differences in the proportion of patients waitlisted within 1 year (median, 33%; range, 15%-58%). In competing risk regression, female sex (adjusted subhazard ratio [SHR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.90-0.94), Hispanic ethnicity (SHR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.75-0.80), and Black race (SHR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.64-0.68) were all associated with lower waitlisting after dialysis initiation. Unemployment (SHR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.45-0.48) and part-time employment (SHR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.70-0.77) were associated with lower waitlisting compared with full-time employment, and more than 1 year of predialysis nephrology care, compared with none, was associated with greater waitlisting (SHR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.46-1.56).

Conclusions and Relevance

This retrospective cohort study found that fewer than one-third of patients without major medical comorbidities were waitlisted for a kidney transplant within 1 year of dialysis initiation, with sociodemographic disparities in waitlisting even in this cohort of young, relatively healthy patients unlikely to have a medical contraindication to transplantation. Transplant policy changes are needed to increase transparency and address structural barriers to waitlist access.

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.

Survival Benefit of Kidney Transplantation in Patients With End-Stage Kidney Disease and Prior Acute Myocardial Infarction

Patients with end stage kidney disease (ESKD) and a previous acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have less access to KT. Data on ESKD patients with an AMI history who underwent first KT or dialysis between January 2007 and December 2018 were extracted from the Korean National Health Insurance Service. Patients who underwent KT (n = 423) were chronologically matched in a 1:3 ratio with those maintained on dialysis (n = 1,269) at the corresponding dates, based on time-conditional propensity scores. The 1, 5, and 10 years cumulative incidences for all-cause mortality were 12.6%, 39.1%, and 60.1% in the dialysis group and 3.1%, 7.2%, and 14.5% in the KT group. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of KT versus dialysis were 0.17 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.12-0.24; p < 0.001) for mortality and 0.38 (95% CI, 0.23-0.51; p < 0.001) for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Of the MACE components, KT was most protective against cardiovascular death (HR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.12-0.42; p < 0.001). Protective effects of KT for all-cause mortality and MACE were consistent across various subgroups, including patients at higher risk (e.g., age >65 years, recent AMI [<6 months], congestive heart failure). KT is associated with lower all-cause mortality and MACE than maintenance dialysis patients with a prior AMI.

Barriers and facilitators to surgical access in underinsured and immigrant populations

BACKGROUND

Marginalized communities are at risk of receiving inequitable access to surgical care. We aimed to examine the barriers and facilitators to access to surgery in underinsured and immigrant populations.

METHODS

A systematic review of disparities in access to surgical care was performed between January 1, 2000-March 2, 2022. Methodological quality was assessed with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A convergent integrated approach was used to code common themes between studies.

RESULTS

Of 1315 publications, a total of 66 studies were included for systematic review. Eight studies specifically discussed immigrant patient populations. Barriers and facilitators to surgical access were categorized by patient and health systems related factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Established facilitators to improve surgical access are centered on patient-level factors while interventions to address systems-related barriers are limited and may be an area for further investigation. Research focused on access to surgery in immigrant populations remains sparse.

Experiences With Kidney Transplant Among Undocumented Immigrants in Illinois: A Qualitative Study

Rationale & Objective

Noncitizen, undocumented patients with kidney failure have few treatment options in many states, although Illinois allows for patients to receive a transplant regardless of citizenship status. Little information exists about the experiences of noncitizen patients pursuing kidney transplantation. We sought to understand how access to kidney transplantation affects patients, their family, health care providers, and the health care system.

Study Design

A qualitative study with virtually conducted semistructured interviews.

Setting & Participants

Participants were transplant and immigration stakeholders (physicians, transplant center and community outreach professionals), and patients who have received assistance through the Illinois Transplant Fund (listed for or received transplant; patients could complete the interview with a family member).

Analytical Approach

Interview transcripts were coded using open coding and were analyzed using thematic analysis methods with an inductive approach.

Results

We interviewed 36 participants: 13 stakeholders (5 physicians, 4 community outreach stakeholders, and 4 transplant center professionals), 16 patients, and 7 partners. The following seven themes were identified: (1) devastation from kidney failure diagnosis, (2) resource needs for care, (3) communication barriers to care, (4) importance of culturally competent health care providers, (5) negative impacts of policy gaps, (6) new chance at life after transplant, and (7) recommendations for improving care.

Limitations

The patients we interviewed were not representative of noncitizen patients with kidney failure overall or in other states. The stakeholders were also not representative of health care providers because they were generally well informed on kidney failure and immigration issues.

Conclusions

Although patients in Illinois can access kidney transplants regardless of citizenship status, access barriers, and health care policy gaps continue to negatively affect patients, families, health care professionals, and the health care system. Necessary changes for promoting equitable care include comprehensive policies to increase access, diversifying the health care workforce, and improving communication with patients. These solutions would benefit patients with kidney failure regardless of citizenship.

Association of the Affordable Care Act on Access to and Outcomes After Kidney or Liver Transplant: A Transplant Registry Study

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effect of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansion on payor mix among patients on the kidney and liver transplant waiting list as well as waiting list and post-transplant outcomes.

DESIGN

Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we performed a secondary data analysis of all patients on the kidney and liver transplant waiting list from 2007 to 2018. We described changes in payor mix by timing of state Medicaid expansion. We used competing risks models to estimate cause-specific hazard ratios for the effects of insurance and era on death/delisting and transplant. We used a Poisson regression model to estimate the effect of insurance and era on incidence rate ratio of inactivations on the waiting list. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the effect of insurance and era on graft and patient survival.

RESULTS

A decade after implementation of the ACA, the prevalence of Medicaid beneficiaries listed for transplant increased by 2.5% (from 7.4% to 9.9%) for kidney and by 2.6% (15.3% to 17.9%) for liver. Expansion states had greater increases than nonexpansion states (kidney 3.8% vs 0.6%, liver 5.3% vs -1.8%). Among wait-listed patients, the magnitude of association of Medicaid insurance vs private insurance with transplant decreased over time for kidney candidates (era 1 subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR), 0.62 [95% CI, 0.60-0.64] vs era 3 SHR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.74-0.70]) but increased for liver candidates (era 1 SHR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.83-0.90] vs era 3 SHR 0.79 [95% CI, 0.77-0.82]). Medicaid-insured kidney and liver recipients had greater hazards of graft failure; this did not change over time (kidney: HR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.06-1.44] liver: HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.94-1.17]).

CONCLUSIONS

For the millions of patients with chronic kidney and liver diseases, implementation of the ACA has resulted in only modest increases in access to transplant for the publicly insured vs the privately insured.

Advocating for in-center hemodialysis patients via anonymous survey

We conducted an anonymous survey in 9 of our university affiliated outpatient dialysis units to address the concern that many in-center hemodialysis patients may not feel comfortable sharing their experiences. Major goals of this study: Investigating level of patient satisfaction with their care; Evaluating the subjective perception of the level of understanding of patients regarding pertinent issues of their disease and its management; Identifying potential avenues for care improvement. Survey was conducted in English, paper-based, with answer choices to individual questions for patient satisfaction and education graded using a 5-point Likert scale. Regarding potential areas of improvement, patients were asked to choose as many areas as deemed appropriate. To ensure anonymity, the completed surveys were folded and dropped into a box. Overall, 253 out of 516 (49%) screened patients were eligible and completed the survey. Patients expressed favorable responses regarding satisfaction (mean rating > 4 in each of 14 questions) and education (mean rating > 4 in 8 questions, > 3.5 in 2 questions) regarding hemodialysis. About 62% of overall study participants identified at least one area where they felt additional information would result in improvement of care. Our results indicate that patients undergoing outpatient hemodialysis were overall satisfied and had a good perceptive understanding about their health. Based on the patients' input, strategies focused on addressing pain and discomfort, privacy, providing information about palliative care/hospice, mental health resources, and the process of kidney transplantation may promote improvement in overall quality of care.

Transplantation Mediates Much of the Racial Disparity in Survival from Childhood-Onset Kidney Failure

BACKGROUND

The role of kidney transplantation in differential survival in Black and White patients with childhood-onset kidney failure is unexplored.

METHODS

We analyzed 30-year cohort data of children beginning RRT before 18 years of age between January 1980 and December 2017 (n=28,337) in the US Renal Data System. Cox regression identified transplant factors associated with survival by race. The survival mediational g-formula estimated the excess mortality among Black patients that could be eliminated if an intervention equalized their time with a transplant to that of White patients.

RESULTS

Black children comprised 24% of the cohort and their crude 30-year survival was 39% compared with 57% for White children (log rank P<0.001). Black children had 45% higher risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.45; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.36 to 1.54), 31% lower incidence of first transplant (aHR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.72), and 39% lower incidence of second transplant (aHR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.65). Children and young adults are likely to require multiple transplants, yet even after their first transplant, Black patients had 11% fewer total transplants (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.86 to 0.92). In Black patients, grafts failed earlier after first and second transplants. Overall, Black patients spent 24% less of their RRT time with a transplant than did White patients (aIRR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.78). Transplantation compared with dialysis strongly protected against death (aHR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.48) by time-varying analysis. Mediation analyses estimated that equalizing transplant duration could prevent 35% (P<0.001) of excess deaths in Black patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Equalizing time with a functioning transplant for Black patients may equalize survival of childhood-onset ESKD with White patients.

Kidney Organ Allocation System: How to Be Fair

Transplantation is a life-saving medical intervention that unfortunately is constrained by scarcity of available organs. An ideal system for allocating organs should seek to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number of people. It also must be fair and not disadvantage certain populations. However, policies aimed at reducing disparities also must be balanced with considerations of utility (graft outcomes), cost, efficiency, and any adverse effects on organ utilization. Here, we discuss the ethical challenges of creating a fair and equitable organ allocation system, focusing on the principles governing deceased donor kidney transplant waitlists around the world. The kidney organ allocation systems in the United States, Australia, and Hong Kong are used as illustrations.

Understanding Structural Racism as a Barrier to Living Donor Kidney Transplantation and Transplant Care

Recent Findings

Black and Hispanic patients carry higher burden of kidney disease, yet have lower access to LDKT. Until recently, these differences were thought to be due to medical co-morbidities and variation in transplant center practices. However, recent studies have shown that systemic and structural inequities related to race may be one of the major drivers.

Purpose of Review

In this paper, we examine the definition of race and systemic racism, then describe patient-, transplant center–, and society-level barriers to LDKT. We identify how social determinants, cultural biases and mistrust in medical system, influence behaviors, and provider racial profiling affects all phases of transplant evaluation. Finally, we discuss initiatives to overcome some of these barriers, starting from federal government, national organizations, transplant centers, and community partners.

Summary

Examining structural biases in transplant practices is an important step to developing solutions to address disparities in health care access and outcomes for patients who need and receive transplants.

Knowledge and Attitude of People With or Without a Medical Education Regarding Organ Donation and Transplant: A Sample From the City of Baghdad

OBJECTIVES

Organ donation is the driving force for transplant. Awareness about donation and transplant is invaluable for improved transplant services in any country. Our objective was to assess the knowledge and attitude toward organ donation and transplant among medically educated adult Iraqis versus adult Iraqis who were not medically educated, in Baghdad, Iraq.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For this study, we recruited 400 Iraqi residents of Baghdad city from December 1, 2018, to March 1, 2019. We used an interviewer-adm-inistered questionnaire to survey 200 health care professionals and 200 adults who lacked medical education, and then we analyzed the responses from the 2 groups.

RESULTS

The study included 165 males and 235 females (mean age 33.73 ± 10.38 years). Most participants (60%) were aware of organ donation, and a health care provider was the main source of their knowledge. Only 11.25% were aware of Iraqi legislation that permits donation after brain death. Nearly 50% of the participants volunteered to be living donors, and 229/400 (57.25%%) volunteered to donate after death. About 50% accepted the idea of organ donation as an act to save life, whomever the donor. The most important barrier was the fear of future risks to health after living donation and body disfigurement after death. There was a statistically significant difference in the knowledge and attitude scores between the 2 groups. From the study sample, 46.5% accepted the concept of incenting living donors or families of deceased donors.

CONCLUSIONS

Iraqi people are moderately informed about organ donation and transplant. Medically educated people demonstrated an attitude of greater acceptance. Religion and social beliefs were not barriers to organ donation in the study sample. Regulated governmental application of incentive programs may be a useful strategy at present.

A scoping review of inequities in access to organ transplant in the United States

Background

Organ transplant is the preferred treatment for end-stage organ disease, yet the majority of patients with end-stage organ disease are never placed on the transplant waiting list. Limited access to the transplant waiting list combined with the scarcity of the organ pool result in over 100,000 deaths annually in the United States. Patients face unique barriers to referral and acceptance for organ transplant based on social determinants of health, and patients from disenfranchised groups suffer from disproportionately lower rates of transplantation. Our objective was to review the literature describing disparities in access to organ transplantation based on social determinants of health to integrate the existing knowledge and guide future research.

Methods

We conducted a scoping review of the literature reporting disparities in access to heart, lung, liver, pancreas and kidney transplantation based on social determinants of health (race, income, education, geography, insurance status, health literacy and engagement). Included studies were categorized based on steps along the transplant care continuum: referral for transplant, transplant evaluation and selection, living donor identification/evaluation, and waitlist outcomes.

Results

Our search generated 16,643 studies, of which 227 were included in our final review. Of these, 34 focused on disparities in referral for transplantation among patients with chronic organ disease, 82 on transplant selection processes, 50 on living donors, and 61 on waitlist management. In total, 15 studies involved the thoracic organs (heart, lung), 209 involved the abdominal organs (kidney, liver, pancreas), and three involved multiple organs. Racial and ethnic minorities, women, and patients in lower socioeconomic status groups were less likely to be referred, evaluated, and added to the waiting list for organ transplant. The quality of the data describing these disparities across the transplant literature was variable and overwhelmingly focused on kidney transplant.

Conclusions

This review contextualizes the quality of the data, identifies seminal work by organ, and reports gaps in the literature where future research on disparities in organ transplantation should focus. Future work should investigate the association of social determinants of health with access to the organ transplant waiting list, with a focus on prospective analyses that assess interventions to improve health equity.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12939-021-01616-x.

Patient and Clinician Perceptions of Informed Consent and Decision Making About Accepting KDPI > 85 Kidneys

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background.

Although the impact of the kidney donor profile index (KDPI) on kidney discard is well researched, less is known about how patients make decisions about whether to give consent for KDPI > 85 kidney offers.

Methods.

We conducted in-depth, semistructured interviews with 16 transplant recipients, 15 transplant candidates, and 23 clinicians (transplant surgeons, nephrologists, and nurse coordinators) to assess and compare perceptions of transplant education, informed consent for KDPI > 85 kidneys‚ and the decision-making process for accepting kidney offers. Thematic analysis was used to analyze qualitative data.

Results.

Four themes emerged: (1) patients reported uncertainty about the meaning of KDPI or could not recall information about KDPI; (2) patients reported uncertainty about their KDPI > 85 consent status and a limited role in KDPI > 85 consent decision making; (3) patients’ reported willingness to consider KDPI > 85 kidneys depended on their age, health status, and experiences with dialysis, and thus it changed over time; (4) patients’ underestimated the survival benefit of transplantation compared with dialysis, which could affect their KDPI > 85 consent decision making.

Conclusions.

To better support patients’ informed decision making about accepting KDPI > 85 kidneys, centers must ensure that all patients receive education about the trade-offs between accepting a KDPI > 85 kidney and remaining on dialysis. Additionally, education about KDPI and discussions about informed consent for KDPI > 85 kidneys must be repeated at multiple time points while patients are on the waiting list.

The beneficial effect of providing kidney transplantation information on transplantation status differs between for-profit and nonprofit dialysis centers

Informing end-stage kidney disease patients about kidney transplantation options increases the likelihood of kidney transplant waiting list (WL) enrollment and live donor kidney transplant (LDKT) receipt. Patients in for-profit dialysis centers have lower rates of WL enrollment and LDKT receipt. This study examined if the ownership status of dialysis centers modified the association between informing patients about transplantation options and patients' transplantation status. Multilevel analysis using mixed-effect multinomial logistic regression was performed using the United States Renal Data System (USRDS) data (January 2005 to December 2017). The study showed that informing patients improved the odds of WL enrollment and LDKT receipt. However, the effect of informing patients on transplantation status was less pronounced at for-profit as compared with nonprofit centers (Nonprofit: WL enrollment OR: 2.23 [95% CI: 2.07-2.40], and LDKT receipt OR: 3.35 [95% CI: 2.65-4.25]. For-profit: WL enrollment OR: 1.73 [95% CI: 1.66-1.79], and LDKT receipt OR: 2.35 [95% CI: 2.08-2.66]), although the odds of informing patients was higher for for-profit centers, and type of patients informed were similar across both types of centers. Information provided by for-profit centers was potentially less effective than those provided by nonprofit centers. Standardized guidelines for transplantation information provision are needed in order to ensure similar informational quality across centers.

Age disparities in transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this review is to outline disparities in liver and kidney transplantation across age spectrum. Disparities do not involve only recipients whose age may severely affect the possibility to access to a potentially life-saving procedure, but donors as well. The attitude of transplant centers to use older donors reflects on waiting list mortality and drop-out. This review examines which age categories are currently harmed and how different allocation systems may minimize disparities.

RECENT FINDINGS

Specific age categories suffer disparities in the access to transplantation. A better understanding of how properly evaluate graft quality, a continuous re-evaluation of the most favorable donor-to-recipient match and most equitable allocation system are the three key points to promote 'justice and equality' among transplant recipients.

SUMMARY

The duty to protect younger patients waiting for transplantation and the request of older patients to have access to potentially life-saving treatment urge the transplant community to use older organs thus increasing the number of available grafts, to evaluate new allocation systems with the aim to maximize 'utility' while respecting 'equity' and to avoid 'futility' thus minimizing waiting list mortality and drop-out, and improving the survival benefits for all patients requiring a transplant.

VIDEO ABSTRACT

http://links.lww.com/COOT/A9.

Nonmedical barriers to early steps in kidney transplantation among underrepresented groups in the United States

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite numerous targeted interventions and policy reforms, underrepresented minorities and patients with low socioeconomic status (SES) continue to have unequal access to kidney transplant. In this review, we summarize the most recent evidence on barriers to early kidney transplant steps (i.e. referral and evaluation) among underrepresented racial and ethnic minorities and low SES groups in the United States.

RECENT FINDINGS

This review highlights the interconnectedness of several patient-level (e.g. medical mistrust, transplant knowledge, access to care), provider-level (e.g. dialysis profit status, patient--provider communication; staff accessibility), and system-level (e.g. center-specific criteria, healthcare logistics, neighborhood poverty, healthcare logistics) factors associated with lower rates of referral and evaluation among underrepresented minorities and low SES groups, and the influence of systemic racism operating at all levels.

SUMMARY

Collection of national surveillance data on early transplant steps, as well as routinely captured data on upstream social determinants of health, including the measurement of racism rather than race, is necessary to enhance our understanding of barriers to referral and evaluation. A multipronged approach (e.g. targeted and systemwide interventions, and policy change) implemented at multiple levels of the healthcare system will be necessary to reduce disparities in early transplant steps.

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.

[Prevalence and factors associated with non-enrollment for kidney transplant]

This study evaluated the prevalence and factors associated with lack of enrollment for kidney transplant among patients in chronic dialysis in Greater Metropolitan Fortaleza, Ceará, Brazil. The sample excluded patients with insufficient clinical status and those already in pre-kidney transplant evaluation. A semi-structured questionnaire was applied, including options for the question, "What is the main reason why you are not enrolled for kidney transplant?" Prevalence of patients considered fit but not enrolled or in pre- kidney transplant evaluation was 50.7%. The main reasons were fear of failure/loss of grafting (32.5%), difficulty with transportation or access to tests (20.9%), and temporary personal or family problems (13.7%). In the multivariate analysis, the variables associated with fear of failure or loss of graft were female sex (OR = 1.763; 95%CI: 1.224-2.540) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) due to hypertension (OR = 1.732; 95%CI: 1.178-2.547), while monthly income (number of minimum wages) showed a protective association (OR = 0.882; 95%CI: 0.785-0.991). Time on dialysis (months) was a risk factor for difficulty with transportation and access to tests (OR = 1.004; 95%CI: 1.001-1.007), and female sex showed a protective association (OR = 0.576; 95%CI: 0.368-0.901). These results show high prevalence of patients in dialysis not enrolled on the kidney transplant waitlist. The main causes were lack of information and lack of access. Female sex, low income, and ESRD due to hypertension were risk factors for lack of enrollment on the kidney transplant waitlist due to fear of loss of graft, resulting from lack of information on this treatment modality. Male sex and longer time on dialysis were risk factors for difficulty in access to kidney transplant.

Dialysis Facility Profit Status and Early Steps in Kidney Transplantation in the Southeastern United States

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Dialysis facilities in the United States play a key role in access to kidney transplantation. Previous studies reported that patients treated at for-profit facilities are less likely to be waitlisted and receive a transplant, but their effect on early steps in the transplant process is unknown. The study's objective was to determine the association between dialysis facility profit status and critical steps in the transplantation process in Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

In this retrospective cohort study, we linked referral and evaluation data from all nine transplant centers in the Southeast with United States Renal Data System surveillance data. The cohort study included 33,651 patients with kidney failure initiating dialysis from January 1, 2012 to August 31, 2016. Patients were censored for event (date of referral, evaluation, or waitlisting), death, or end of study (August 31, 2017 for referral and March 1, 2018 for evaluation and waitlisting). The primary exposure was dialysis facility profit status: for profit versus nonprofit. The primary outcome was referral for evaluation at a transplant center after dialysis initiation. Secondary outcomes were start of evaluation at a transplant center after referral and waitlisting.

RESULTS

Of the 33,651 patients with incident kidney failure, most received dialysis treatment at a for-profit facility (85%). For-profit (versus nonprofit) facilities had a lower cumulative incidence difference for referral within 1 year of dialysis (-4.5%; 95% confidence interval, -6.0% to -3.2%). In adjusted analyses, for-profit versus nonprofit facilities had lower referral (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.80 to 0.88). Start of evaluation within 6 months of referral (-1.0%; 95% confidence interval, -3.1% to 1.3%) and waitlisting within 6 months of evaluation (1.0%; 95% confidence interval, -1.2 to 3.3) did not meaningfully differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest lower access to referral among patients dialyzing in for-profit facilities in the Southeast United States, but no difference in starting the evaluation and waitlisting by facility profit status.

Does increasing access-to-care delay accessing of care? Evidence from kidney transplantation

Policies increasing healthcare availability might decrease the cost of delaying accessing of care, leading to potential negative consequences if patients delay treatment. We analyze a policy designed to increase access to kidney transplantation through the use of time since dialysis inception to prioritize patients for transplant, which was piloted at 26 of the 271 kidney transplant centers in the United States in 2006 and 2007. We model the patient's optimization problem comparing the benefits and costs of early waitlisting and predict that the policy change will lead to delayed waitlisting. To empirically test this prediction, we use difference-in-differences fixed effects panel regression techniques to analyze data on patients who began dialysis between 1/1/2000 and 12/31/2009. The results support the model's prediction; patients on dialysis who waitlist for kidney transplantation increase pre-waitlist dialysis duration by 11.6 percent or approximately 76 days from a pre-policy mean of 652 days (SD = 654). With regard to waitlist outcomes, the policy is associated with a 4.5 percentage point decrease in the probability of receiving a deceased donor transplant, somewhat offset by a 3.0 percentage point increase in the probability of receiving a live donor transplant. On the extensive margin, patients on dialysis decrease their likelihood of ever waitlisting by 1.5 percentage points. We find an increase in pre-waitlist dialysis time and a decrease in the likelihood of waitlisting at all, especially among populations likely to have experienced increased access to transplantation through the policy change: patients self-identifying as Black or Hispanic rather than Non-Hispanic White, and patients without private insurance. These results suggest that some individuals may not benefit if their access to care increases, if the increase in access sufficiently decreases the penalty of delaying accessing of care.

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.

Patient selection in the presence of regulatory oversight based on healthcare report cards of providers: the case of organ transplantation

Many healthcare report cards provide information to consumers but do not represent a constraint on the behavior of healthcare providers. This is not the case with the report cards utilized in kidney transplantation. These report cards became more salient and binding, with additional oversight, in 2007 under the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Conditions of Participation. This research investigates whether the additional oversight based on report card outcomes influences patient selection via waiting-list registrations at transplant centers that meet regulatory standards. Using data from a national registry of kidney transplant candidates from 2003 through 2010, we apply a before-and-after estimation strategy that isolates the impact of a binding report card. A sorting equilibrium model is employed to account for center-level heterogeneity and the presence of congestion/agglomeration effects and the results are compared to a conditional logit specification. Our results indicate that patient waiting-list registrations change in response to the quality information similarly on average if there is additional regulation or not. We also find evidence of congestion effects when spatial choice sets are smaller: new patient registrations are less likely to occur at a center with a long waiting list when fewer options are available.

Factors Affecting Access to the Kidney Transplant Waiting List in Eastern Hungary

Kidney transplantation is the best available treatment choice for patients suffering from end-stage renal disease; however, not all patients with end-stage renal disease have equal access to it. The aim of the study was to measure the factors that may influence access to the kidney transplant waiting list in eastern Hungary. A total of 254 patients with renal failure between 18 and 75 years old from 8 dialysis centers participated in the study. The factors associated with access to the waiting list were identified by univariate descriptive analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis where the outcome variable was placement on the kidney transplant waiting list. Our findings demonstrates that patients registered on the waiting list were younger (odds ratio [OR] = 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-0.98), were male (OR = 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30-0.98), were economically active (OR = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.29-0.98), and had greater knowledge in the field (OR = 1.17; 95% CI, 1.03-1.33). Disparity in access to the kidney transplant waiting list in Hungary does exist.

Measuring Patients' Level of Knowledge Regarding Kidney Transplantation in Eastern Hungary

Adequate knowledge is needed to make the correct decision regarding kidney transplantation. The purpose of this study was to measure the demographic, sociologic, economic, and cultural factors that may influence patients' decision-making regarding kidney transplantation and to explore patients' knowledge of renal replacement therapies. A total of 254 end-stage renal disease patients (predialysis, peritoneal dialysis, and hemodialysis) from 8 dialysis centers in eastern Hungary participated in our study. We developed a questionnaire that measures patients' knowledge of renal replacement therapies and the role of sociodemographic, economic, and cultural factors that may influence their knowledge. Factors influencing the knowledge scores were evaluated using a multivariate linear regression adjusted for 8 factors. We found a significant correlation between education level and knowledge score, where patients with greater education (greater than high school: β = 3.003; P < .001; high school: β = 1.906; P < .001) achieved higher knowledge scores than those without. Moreover, patients with a previous kidney transplant (β = -2.111; P < .001) had greater knowledge in the field. Our study identified a risk group where targeted, personalized patient education is essential.

An overview of frailty in kidney transplantation: measurement, management and future considerations

The construct of frailty was first developed in gerontology to help identify older adults with increased vulnerability when confronted with a health stressor. This article is a review of studies in which frailty has been applied to pre- and post-kidney transplantation (KT) populations. Although KT is the optimal treatment for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), KT candidates often must overcome numerous health challenges associated with ESKD before receiving KT. After KT, the impacts of surgery and immunosuppression represent additional health stressors that disproportionately impact individuals with frailty. Frailty metrics could improve the ability to identify KT candidates and recipients at risk for adverse health outcomes and those who could potentially benefit from interventions to improve their frail status. The Physical Frailty Phenotype (PFP) is the most commonly used frailty metric in ESKD research, and KT recipients who are frail at KT (~20% of recipients) are twice as likely to die as nonfrail recipients. In addition to the PFP, many other metrics are currently used to assess pre- and post-KT vulnerability in research and clinical practice, underscoring the need for a disease-specific frailty metric that can be used to monitor KT candidates and recipients. Although frailty is an independent risk factor for post-transplant adverse outcomes, it is not factored into the current transplant program risk-adjustment equations. Future studies are needed to explore pre- and post-KT interventions to improve or prevent frailty.

Functional independence, access to kidney transplantation and waitlist mortality

BACKGROUND

Approximately half of the patients who progress to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and undergo dialysis develop difficulties carrying out essential self-care activities, leading to institutionalization and mortality. It is unclear what percentage of kidney transplant (KT) candidates, a group of ESKD patients selected to be healthy enough to withstand transplantation, are functionally independent and whether independence is associated with better access to KT and reduced waitlist mortality.

METHODS

We studied a prospective cohort of 3168 ESKD participants (January 2009 to June 2018) who self-reported functional independence in more basic self-care Activities of Daily Living (ADL) (needing help with eating, dressing, walking, grooming, toileting and bathing) and more complex instrumental ADL (IADL) (needing help using a phone, shopping, cooking, housework, washing, using transportation, managing medications and managing money). We estimated adjusted associations between functional independence (separately) and listing (Cox), waitlist mortality (competing risks) and transplant rates (Poisson).

RESULTS

At KT evaluation, 92.4% were independent in ADLs, but only 68.5% were independent in IADLs. Functionally independent participants had a higher chance of listing for KT [ADL: adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 1.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30-1.87; IADL: aHR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.26-1.52]. Among KT candidates, ADL independence was associated with lower waitlist mortality risk [adjusted subdistribution HR (aSHR) = 0.66, 95% CI 0.44-0.98] and higher rate of KT [adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) = 1.58, 95% CI 1.12-2.22]; the same was not observed for IADL independence (aSHR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.65-1.12; aIRR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.97-1.19).

CONCLUSIONS

Functional independence in more basic self-care ADL was associated with better KT access and lower waitlist mortality. Nephrologists, geriatricians and transplant surgeons should screen KT candidates for ADLs, and identify interventions to promote independence and improve waitlist outcomes.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Kidney Transplant Access Within a Theoretical Context of Medical Eligibility

BACKGROUND

Non-Hispanic black (NHB) and Hispanic patients have lower access to kidney transplantation compared to non-Hispanic whites (NHWs). We examined whether differences in the prevalence of comorbidities that affect eligibility for transplant contribute to disparities in receipt of transplantation.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of 986 019 adults who started dialysis between 2005 and 2014, according to the United States Renal Data System. We compared prevalence of comorbidities that could influence transplant eligibility by race/ethnicity. We examined time to first transplant by race/ethnicity in this overall cohort and in a very healthy sub-cohort without conditions that could be contraindications to transplantation.

RESULTS

During 2.3 years of mean follow-up, 64 892 transplants occurred. NHBs and Hispanics had a lower prevalence of medical barriers to transplantation at the time of dialysis initiation than NHWs, including age >70 years (26% in NHB versus 47% in NHW) and malignancy (4% in Hispanics versus 10% in NHWs). Access to transplant was 65% lower (95% CI, 0.33-0.37) in NHBs and 43% lower (95% CI, 0.54-0.62) in Hispanics (versus NHWs) in the first year after end-stage renal disease, but by Year 4, access to transplantation was not statistically significantly different between Hispanics or NHBs (versus NHWs). In our very healthy cohort, racial and ethnic disparities in access to transplantation persisted up to Year 5 in NHBs and Year 4 in Hispanics after end-stage renal disease onset.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in medical eligibility do not appear to explain racial/ethnic disparities in receipt of kidney transplantation and may mask the actual magnitude of the inequities that are present.

Barriers to kidney transplantation in ESKD

Kidney transplantation is the ideal treatment option for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Since there is clear mortality benefit to receiving a transplant regardless of comorbidities and age, the gold standard of care should focus on attaining kidney transplantation and minimizing, or better yet eliminating, time on dialysis. Unfortunately, only a small percentage of patients with ESKD receive a kidney transplant. Several barriers to kidney transplantation have been identified. Barriers can largely be grouped into three categories: patient-related, physician/provider-related, and system-related. Several barriers fall into multiple categories and play a role at various levels within the healthcare system. Acknowledging and understanding these barriers will allow transplant centers and dialysis facilities to make the necessary interventions to mitigate these disparities, optimize the transplant evaluation process, and improve patient outcomes. This review will discuss these barriers and potential interventions to increase access to kidney transplantation.

Education Strategies in Dialysis Centers Associated With Increased Transplant Wait-listing Rates

BACKGROUND

Transplant education in dialysis centers can increase access to kidney transplant; however, dialysis center transplant barriers are common, and limited research identifies the most effective transplant education approaches.

METHODS

We surveyed transplant educators in 1694 US dialysis centers about their transplant knowledge, use of 12 education practices, and 8 identified education barriers. Transplant wait-listing rates were calculated using US Renal Data System data.

RESULTS

Fifty-two percent of educators orally recommended transplant to patients, 31% had in-center transplant discussions with patients, 17% distributed print educational resources, and 3% used intensive education approaches. Distribution of print education (incident rate ratio: 1.021.151.30) and using >1 intensive education practice (1.001.111.23) within dialysis centers were associated with increased wait-listing rates. Several dialysis center characteristics were associated with reduced odds of using education strategies leading to increased wait-listing. Centers with greater percentages of uninsured patients (odds ratio [OR]: 0.960.970.99), in rural locations (OR: 0.660.790.95), with for-profit ownership (OR: 0.640.770.91), and with more patients older than 65 years (OR: 0.050.110.23) had lower odds of recommending transplant, while centers with a higher patient-to-staff ratio were more likely to do so (OR: 1.011.031.04). Language barriers (OR: 0.480.640.86) and having competing work priorities (OR: 0.400.530.70) reduced the odds of distributing print education. Providers with greater transplant knowledge were more likely to use >1 intensive educational strategy (OR: 1.011.271.60) while providers who reported competing work priorities (OR: 0.510.660.84) and poor communication with transplant centers (OR: 0.580.760.98) were less likely to do so.

CONCLUSIONS

Educators should prioritize transplant education strategies shown to be associated with increasing wait-listing rates.

Amplifying the Patient Voice: Key Priorities and Opportunities for Improved Transplant and Living Donor Advocacy and Outcomes During COVID-19 and Beyond

Purpose of Review

To define patient advocacy and engagement for modern transplant and living donation care, particularly in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, describe the patient experience when transplant advocacy and engagement are optimized, and recommend opportunities for advocacy within three key areas: (1) including the patient voice in healthcare decisions and drug development, (2) access to the best evidence-based treatments and informed decision-making, and (3) present and future care innovations and policies.

Recent Findings

There are many avenues for transplant and living donation advocacy and engagement at the patient, provider, family, system, community, and policy levels. Key recommendations include the following: (1) simplifying education to be health literate, written at the appropriate reading level, culturally sensitive, and available in multiple languages and across many delivery platforms, (2) inviting transplant patients and donors to the conversation through advisory panels, consensus conferences, and new mediums like digital storytelling and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), (3) training all members of the health team to understand their role as advocates, and (4) advancing policies and programs that support the financial neutrality of living donation, and support recipients with the cost of immunosuppressive drugs. Key recommendations specific to the COVID-19 pandemic include providing up-to-date, health literate, concise information about preventing COVID-19 and accessing care including telehealth.

Summary

Enhancing advocacy and engagement for transplant patients and donors along the pre-to-post transplant/donation continuum can improve clinical outcomes and quality of life generally, and more so, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Effect of the ASCENT Intervention to Increase Knowledge of Kidney Allocation Policy Changes Among Dialysis Providers

INTRODUCTION

The Allocation System Changes for Equity in Kidney Transplantation (ASCENT) trial was a cluster-randomized pragmatic, effectiveness-implementation study designed to test whether a multicomponent educational intervention targeting leadership, clinic staff, and patients in dialysis facilities improved knowledge and awareness of the 2014 Kidney Allocation System (KAS) change.

METHODS

Participants included 690 dialysis facility medical directors, nephrologists, social workers, and other staff within 655 US dialysis facilities, with 51% (n = 334) in the intervention group and 49% (n = 321) in the control group. Intervention activities included a webinar targeting medical directors and facility staff, an approximately 10-minute educational video targeting dialysis staff, an approximately 10-minute educational video targeting patients, and a facility-specific audit and feedback report of transplant performance. The control group received a standard United Network for Organ Sharing brochure. Provider knowledge was a secondary outcome of the ASCENT trial and the primary outcome of this study; knowledge was assessed as a cumulative score on a 5-point Likert scale (higher score = greater knowledge). Intention-to-treat analysis was used.

RESULTS

At baseline, nonintervention providers had a higher mean knowledge score (mean ± SD, 2.45 ± 1.43) than intervention providers (mean ± SD, 2.31 ± 1.46). After 3 months, the average knowledge score was slightly higher in the intervention (mean ± SD, 3.14 ± 1.28) versus nonintervention providers (mean ± SD, 3.07 ± 1.24), and the estimated mean difference in knowledge scores between the groups at follow-up minus the mean difference at baseline was 0.25 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11-0.48; P = 0.039). The effect size (0.41) was low to moderate.

CONCLUSION

Dialysis facility provider education could help extend the impact of a national policy change in organ allocation.

Renal Replacement Knowledge and Preferences for African Americans With Chronic Kidney Disease

BACKGROUND

Renal replacement therapies (RRT) other than in-centre haemodialyses are underutilised by African Americans with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) even though they are associated with reduced costs, morbidity and mortality as well as improved quality of life for patients.

OBJECTIVES

To understand African American patients' knowledge of RRT options and how patient, provider and system-factors contribute to knowledge and preferences. Participants' interviews were conducted at the University of Chicago Medical Center with African American patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The final analysis included 28 interviews; 22 patients had CKD not yet on dialysis or having received a transplant, while 6 had reached ESRD and were receiving treatment for kidney failure. Approach Transcripts were uploaded into NVivo8 for coding. Thematic analysis was used for data interpretation.

RESULTS

Four themes were identified: (1) limited knowledge of home modalities and deceased donor options, (2) CKD patients gave little thought to choosing RRT options, (3) CKD patients relied on doctors for treatment decisions, and (4) while patients reported knowledge of living kidney donation transplants (LKDT), it did not translate to receiving an LKDT.

CONCLUSION

African Americans face significant knowledge and access barriers when deciding on their RRT treatment. Even patients with advanced CKD were still in the early stages of RRT selection. Understanding the knowledge gaps and barriers patients face will inform our subsequent intervention to educate and motivate patients to increase CKD self-care and improve communication between patients, their families and their providers about different RRT treatments.

Dialysis facility referral and start of evaluation for kidney transplantation among patients treated with dialysis in the Southeastern United States

Variability in transplant access exists, but barriers to referral and evaluation are underexplored due to lack of national surveillance data. We examined referral for kidney transplantation evaluation and start of the evaluation among 34 857 incident, adult (18-79 years) end-stage kidney disease patients from 690 dialysis facilities in the United States Renal Data System from January 1, 2012 through August 31, 2016, followed through February 2018 and linked data to referral and evaluation data from nine transplant centers in Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. Multivariable-adjusted competing risk analysis examined each outcome. The median within-facility cumulative percentage of patients referred for kidney transplantation within 1 year of dialysis at the 690 dialysis facilities in Network 6 was 33.7% (interquartile range [IQR]: 25.3%-43.1%). Only 48.3% of referred patients started the transplant evaluation within 6 months of referral. In multivariable analyses, factors associated with referral vs evaluation start among those referred at any time differed. For example, black, non-Hispanic patients had a higher rate of referral (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.18-1.27), but lower evaluation start among those referred (HR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.88-0.98), vs white non-Hispanic patients. Barriers to transplant varied by step, and national surveillance data should be collected on early transplant steps to improve transplant access.

Epistemic Authority and Trust in Shared Decision Making About Organ Transplantation

Patient epistemic authority acknowledges respect for a patient's knowledge claims, an important manifestation of patient autonomy that facilitates shared decision making in medicine. Given the scarcity of deceased donor organs, transplantation programs state that patient promises of compliance cannot be taken at face value and exclude candidates deemed untrustworthy. This article argues that transplant programs frequently lack the data to make this utilitarian calculation accurately, with the result that, in practice, the psychosocial evaluation of potential transplant candidates is discriminatory and unfair. Historically excluded candidates, such as patients suffering from alcohol use, have turned out to benefit highly from transplantation. Transplant programs should tend to trust patients when they claim to be good potential organ stewards, thereby respecting patient autonomy, advancing justice, and saving more lives.

Policies to promote timely referral for kidney transplantation

There are numerous patient, provider, and health system barriers to accessing kidney transplantation. Patient barriers such as sociocultural and clinical characteristics and provider factors such as provider knowledge and awareness of transplantation play important roles in facilitating transplant. Health system factors like misaligned incentives and quality metrics for dialysis facilities and transplant centers also influence transplant access. While numerous studies have documented the impact of these barriers on wait-listing and transplant, few studies have examined referral from a dialysis facility to a transplant center and start of the transplant evaluation process. While the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) require that dialysis facilities educate patients about transplant, there are no guidelines for the content and objectives for this education. In addition, policies to require timely referral for transplantation have been considered by CMS but are difficult to implement without national data on referral. Federal policies should be amended to mandate transplant center submission of referral data-while decreasing the unfunded mandate to collect other unusable data currently collected as part of regulatory monitoring of transplant centers-to promote timely access to transplant, increased transplant rates, and to better understand the multilevel barriers and facilitators to transplant referral.

Role of Physical Performance Assessments and Need for a Standardized Protocol for Selection of Older Kidney Transplant Candidates

The older adult population (65 years or older) with advanced or end-stage kidney disease is steadily growing, but rates of transplantation within this cohort have not increased in a similar fashion. Physical deconditioning, resulting in poor post-transplantation outcomes, is a primary concern among older renal patients. The assessment of physical function often holds more weight in the selection process for older candidates, despite evidence showing benefits of transplantation to this vulnerable population. Although several frailty assessment tools are being used increasingly to assess functional status, there is no standardized selection process for older candidates based on these assessment results. Also, it is unknown if timely targeted physical therapy interventions in older patients result in significant improvement of functioning capacity, translating to higher listing and transplantation rates, and improved post-transplantation outcomes. It is therefore of upmost importance not only to incorporate an effective objective functional status assessment process into selection and waitlist evaluation protocols, but also to have targeted interventions in place to maintain and improve physical conditioning among older renal patients. This paper reviews the commonly utilized assessment tools, and their applicability to older patients with renal disease. We also propose the need for definitive selection and waitlist management guidelines to formulate a streamlined assessment of functional capacity and transplant eligibility, as well as a process to maintain functional status, thereby increasing the access of older patients to renal transplantation.

Association Between Dialysis Facility Ownership and Access to Kidney Transplantation

Importance

For-profit (vs nonprofit) dialysis facilities have historically had lower kidney transplantation rates, but it is unknown if the pattern holds for living donor and deceased donor kidney transplantation, varies by facility ownership, or has persisted over time in a nationally representative population.

Objective

To determine the association between dialysis facility ownership and placement on the deceased donor kidney transplantation waiting list, receipt of a living donor kidney transplant, or receipt of a deceased donor kidney transplant.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Retrospective cohort study that included 1 478 564 patients treated at 6511 US dialysis facilities. Adult patients with incident end-stage kidney disease from the US Renal Data System (2000-2016) were linked with facility ownership (Dialysis Facility Compare) and characteristics (Dialysis Facility Report).

Exposures

The primary exposure was dialysis facility ownership, which was categorized as nonprofit small chains, nonprofit independent facilities, for-profit large chains (>1000 facilities), for-profit small chains (<1000 facilities), and for-profit independent facilities.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Access to kidney transplantation was defined as time from initiation of dialysis to placement on the deceased donor kidney transplantation waiting list, receipt of a living donor kidney transplant, or receipt of a deceased donor kidney transplant. Cumulative incidence differences and multivariable Cox models assessed the association between dialysis facility ownership and each outcome.

Results

Among 1 478 564 patients, the median age was 66 years (interquartile range, 55-76 years), with 55.3% male, and 28.1% non-Hispanic black patients. Eighty-seven percent of patients received care at a for-profit dialysis facility. A total of 109 030 patients (7.4%) received care at 435 nonprofit small chain facilities; 78 287 (5.3%) at 324 nonprofit independent facilities; 483 988 (32.7%) at 2239 facilities of large for-profit chain 1; 482 689 (32.6%) at 2082 facilities of large for-profit chain 2; 225 890 (15.3%) at 997 for-profit small chain facilities; and 98 680 (6.7%) at 434 for-profit independent facilities. During the study period, 121 680 patients (8.2%) were placed on the deceased donor waiting list, 23 762 (1.6%) received a living donor kidney transplant, and 49 290 (3.3%) received a deceased donor kidney transplant. For-profit facilities had lower 5-year cumulative incidence differences for each outcome vs nonprofit facilities (deceased donor waiting list: -13.2% [95% CI, -13.4% to -13.0%]; receipt of a living donor kidney transplant: -2.3% [95% CI, -2.4% to -2.3%]; and receipt of a deceased donor kidney transplant: -4.3% [95% CI, -4.4% to -4.2%]). Adjusted Cox analyses showed lower relative rates for each outcome among patients treated at all for-profit vs all nonprofit dialysis facilities: deceased donor waiting list (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.36]); receipt of a living donor kidney transplant (HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.51 to 0.54]); and receipt of a deceased donor kidney transplant (HR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.45]).

Conclusions and Relevance

Among US patients with end-stage kidney disease, receiving dialysis at for-profit facilities compared with nonprofit facilities was associated with a lower likelihood of accessing kidney transplantation. Further research is needed to understand the mechanisms behind this association.

Measurement Characteristics of the Knowledge Assessment of Renal Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplant is the best treatment for most end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients, but proportionally few ESRD patients receive kidney transplant. To make an informed choice about whether to pursue kidney transplant, patients must be knowledgeable of its risks and benefits. To reliably and validly measure ESRD patients' kidney transplant knowledge, rigorously tested measures are required. This article describes the development and psychometric testing of the Knowledge Assessment of Renal Transplantation (KART).

METHODS

We administered 17 transplant knowledge items to a sample of 1294 ESRD patients. Item characteristics and scale scores were estimated using an Item Response Theory graded response model. Construct validity was tested by examining differences in scale scores between patients who had spent less than 1 and 1 hour or longer receiving various types of transplant education.

RESULTS

Item Response Theory modeling suggested that 15 items should be retained for the KART. This scale had a marginal reliability of 0.75 and evidenced acceptable reliability (>0.70) across most of its range. Construct validity was supported by the KART's ability to distinguish patients who had spent less than 1 and 1 hour or longer receiving different types of kidney transplant education, including talking to doctors/medical staff (effect size [ES], 0.61; P < 0.001), reading brochures (ES, 0.45; P < 0.001), browsing the internet (ES, 0.56; P < 0.001), and watching videos (ES, 0.56; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The final 15-item KART can be used to determine the kidney transplant knowledge levels of ESRD patients and plan appropriate interventions to ensure informed transplant decision making occurs.

Impact of Rural Residence on Kidney Transplant Rates Among Waitlisted Candidates in the VA Transplant Programs

BACKGROUND

Although proportionally more veterans live in rural areas compared to nonveterans, the impact of rurality status on kidney transplantation (KTP) access among veterans is unknown. Our objective was to study KTP rates among veterans listed for KTP and to compare the impact of rurality status on KTP rates among veterans and nonveterans.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of adult patients waitlisted per the United Network for Organ Sharing from January 2000 to December 2014. Patient characteristics were compared using Chi-square or t tests, as appropriate, by veteran status and patient rurality. Multivariable competing-risks Cox regression was performed.

RESULTS

The study sample included 3281 veterans receiving care in Veteran Health Administration transplant programs and 445 177 nonveterans. Veterans, compared to nonveterans, were older (57 versus 50 y; P < 0.001), more likely to be male (96% versus 60%; P < 0.001) or diabetic at waitlisting (51% versus 41%; P < 0.001), and less likely be an urban resident (79% versus 84%; P < 0.001). Among veterans, dialysis duration prior to registration was longer among urban compared to all other rurality types (810 ± 22.1 d versus 632 to 702 ± 41.6 to 77.6 d; P = 0.02). In multivariate competing risks models, there was no evidence that the hazard of transplant among veterans differs by residential rurality.

CONCLUSIONS

Among waitlisted veterans served by Veteran Health Administration transplant programs, residential rurality status does not portend longer waiting time for KTP.

Development and preliminary evaluation of ilearnKAS: An animated video about kidney allocation to support transplant decision-making

BACKGROUND

We aimed to develop and feasibility test an educational video culturally targeted to African American (AA) patients regarding kidney allocation.

METHODS

We iteratively refined an animated video for AAs with multiple stakeholder input and conducted a one-group, pre-post study with 50 kidney transplant candidates to assess video feasibility and acceptability. A mixed population was chosen to obtain race-specific acceptability data and efficacy estimates for a larger study.

RESULTS

Median participant age was 56 years, and 50% were AA. Comparing pre-post video scores, large knowledge effect sizes were found for the cohort (r = 0.7) and in the context of AA race (r = 0.8), low health literacy (r = 0.6), low educational achievement (r = 0.7), age >55 years (r = 0.6), dialysis vintage ≥1 year (r = 0.8), low income (r = 0.7) and low technology access (r = 0.8). Over 87% of participants provided positive ratings on each of the seven acceptability items. The frequency of positive responses increased pre-post video for kidney allocation understanding (78% vs 94%, P = 0.008), decisional self-efficacy (64% vs 88%, P < 0.001) and belief in fairness (76% vs 90%, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In collaboration with key stakeholders, a culturally targeted educational video was developed that was well received. Results are promising to impact kidney allocation knowledge among AA and non-AA kidney transplant candidates.

Maximising access to kidney transplantation: A single-centre audit of people receiving dialysis

BACKGROUND

Despite transplantation being well documented as the renal replacement therapy option that gives the best morbidity and mortality outcomes, the best quality of life and the best value for healthcare dollar, not all patients are on a kidney transplant waiting list.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were (1) to explore possible reasons for a demonstrated a higher rate of people being listed as suitable for transplant in a non-transplanting unit and (2) to describe a formal process of review and referral as a method for maximising the number of people gaining access to the transplant waiting list.

METHODS

We prospectively audited all patients who were undergoing dialysis in our metropolitan, non-transplanting renal unit annually over six years to determine whether not being on the transplant waiting list was in keeping with available eligibility guidelines of medical and behavioural criteria.

RESULTS

In every age group, the percentage of patients listed for transplant was higher than that seen in national data. The most common reasons for people not to be listed were malignancy, obesity and cardiovascular disease. This unit's patients had fewer smokers, less females and less Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders which may have contributed towards a higher rate of activation on the list.

CONCLUSION

In this dialysis patient population having a formal process of review for suitability and referral, as well as a specialist renal transplant coordinator nurse positively affected the number of patients being activated on the transplant waiting list.