Your Path to Transplant: a randomized controlled trial of a tailored computer education intervention to increase living donor kidney transplant

Referral and Beyond: Restructuring the Kidney Transplant Process to Support Greater Access in the United States

Advocates for improved equity in kidney transplants in the United States have recently focused their efforts on initiatives to increase referral for transplant evaluation. However, because donor kidneys remain scarce, increased referrals are likely to result in an increasing number of patients proceeding through the evaluation process without ultimately receiving a kidney. Unfortunately, the process of referral and evaluation can be highly resource-intensive for patients, families, transplant programs, and payers. Patients and families may incur out-of-pocket expenses and be required to complete testing and treatments that they might not have chosen in the course of routine clinical care. Kidney transplant programs may struggle with insufficient capacity, inefficient workflow, and challenging programmatic finances, and payers will need to absorb the increased expenses of upfront pretransplant costs. Increased referral in isolation may risk simply transmitting system stress and resulting disparities to downstream processes in this complex system. We argue that success in efforts to improve access through increased referrals hinges on adaptations to the pretransplant process more broadly. We call for an urgent re-evaluation and redesign at multiple levels of the pretransplant system in order to achieve the aim of equitable access to kidney transplantation for all patients with kidney failure.

Social network interventions to reduce race disparities in living kidney donation: Design and rationale of the friends and family of kidney transplant patients study (FFKTPS)

INTRODUCTION

Racial/ethnic disparities in living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) are a persistent challenge. Although nearly all directed donations are from members of patients' social networks, little is known about which social network members take steps toward living kidney donation, which do not, and what mechanisms contribute to racial/ethnic LDKT disparities.

METHODS

We describe the design and rationale of the Friends and Family of Kidney Transplant Patients Study, a factorial experimental fielding two interventions designed to promote LKD discussions. Participants are kidney transplant candidates at two centers who are interviewed and delivered an intervention by trained center research coordinators. The search intervention advises patients on which social network members are most likely to be LKD contraindication-free; the script intervention advises patients on how to initiate effective LKD discussions. Participants are randomized into four conditions: no intervention, search only, script only, or both search and script. Patients also complete a survey and optionally provide social network member contact information so they can be surveyed directly. This study will seek to enroll 200 transplant candidates. The primary outcome is LDKT receipt. Secondary outcomes include live donor screening and medical evaluations and outcomes. Tertiary outcomes include LDKT self-efficacy, concerns, knowledge, and willingness, measured before and after the interventions.

CONCLUSION

This study will assess the effectiveness of two interventions to promote LKD and ameliorate Black-White disparities. It will also collect unprecedented information on transplant candidates' social network members, enabling future work to address network member structural barriers to LKD.

Decisional Needs of People From Minority Ethnic Groups Around Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: A UK Healthcare Professionals' Perspective

Despite improved patient and clinical outcomes, living donor kidney transplantation is underutilized in the United Kingdom, particularly among minority ethnic groups, compared to deceased donor kidney transplantation. This may in part be due to the way in which kidney services present information about treatment options. With a focus on ethnicity, semi structured interviews captured the views of 19 kidney healthcare professionals from two renal centres in West Yorkshire, about the decisional needs and context within which people with advanced kidney disease make transplant decisions. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Themes were categorized into three groups: 1) Kidney healthcare professionals: language, cultural awareness, trusted personnel, and staff diversity, 2) Patient information resources: timing and setting of education and suitability of patient-facing information and, 3) People with advanced kidney disease: knowledge, risk perception, and cultural/religious beliefs. To our knowledge, this is the first study in the United Kingdom to investigate in depth, healthcare professionals' views on living donor kidney transplantation decision making. Six recommendations for service improvement/delivery to support decision making around living donor kidney transplantation among minority ethnic groups are described.

Patient information about living donor kidney transplantation across UK renal units: A critical review

BACKGROUND

Patient information about living donor kidney transplantation is used to supplement conversations between health professionals, people with advanced kidney disease and potential kidney donors. It is not known if the information is designed to support decision-making about renal replacement options and if it helps people discuss living kidney donation with family and friends.

OBJECTIVE

Critical review of resources used in outpatient kidney consultations to support patients' decision-making about living kidney donor transplantation.

DESIGN

Mixed methods including an audit questionnaire and critical analysis of patient information leaflets.

PARTICIPANTS AND MEASUREMENTS

All kidney transplant centres and renal units in United Kingdom received a questionnaire to elicit by whom, how, and when information about living kidney donation is delivered. Copies of leaflets were requested. A coding frame was utilised to produce a quality score for each leaflet.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine (54%) units participated. Patients discussed living donor kidney transplantation with nephrologists (100%), living donor nurse (94%), transplant co-ordinator (94%), and predialysis nurse (86%). Twenty-three leaflets were provided and reviewed, mean quality scores for inclusion of information known to support shared decision-making was m = 2.82 out of 10 (range = 0-6, SD = 1.53). Readability scores indicated they were 'fairly difficult to read' (M = 56.3, range = 0-100, SD = 9.4). Few included cultural and faith information. Two leaflets were designed to facilitate conversations with others about donation.

CONCLUSIONS

Leaflets are unlikely to adequately support decision-making between options and discussions about donation. Services writing and updating patient leaflets may benefit from our six principles to guide their development.

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.

Post-transplant education for kidney recipients and their caregivers

Successful outcomes in pediatric kidney transplantation require the involvement of the transplant team as well as recipients and their caregivers. Enhancing patient and family understanding of the disease and of post-transplant care can result in improved adherence and outcomes. Educational strategies should aim to be broad, understandable, innovative, and inclusive while maintaining a tailored approach to individualized care. Teaching should not be viewed as a one-time event but rather as an ongoing conversation throughout the duration of care, emphasizing different aspects throughout the patient's various developmental stages. The following review article discusses the content and methods of post-transplant education.

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.

Protocol for a Process Evaluation of the Quality Improvement Intervention to Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial

Background:

Many patients who would benefit from a kidney transplant never receive one. The Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) pragmatic, cluster-randomized clinical trial is testing whether a multi-component quality improvement intervention, provided in chronic kidney disease (CKD) programs (vs. usual care), can help patients with CKD with no recorded contraindications to kidney transplant complete more steps toward receiving a transplant (primary outcome of the trial). The EnAKT LKD intervention has 4 components: (1) quality Improvement teams and administrative support, (2) improved transplant education for patients and healthcare providers, (3) access to support and (4) program-level performance monitoring.

Objective:

To conduct a process evaluation of the EnAKT LKD quality improvement intervention to determine if the components were delivered, received, and enacted as designed (fidelity), and if the intervention addressed intended barriers (mechanisms of change).

Design:

A mixed-methods process evaluation informed by new practice implementation and theories of behavior change.

Setting:

Chronic kidney disease programs in Ontario, Canada, began receiving the EnAKT LKD intervention on November 1, 2017 and will continue to receive it until December 31, 2021. The process evaluation (interviews and surveys) will occur alongside the trial, between December 2020 to May 2021.

Participants:

Healthcare providers (eg, dialysis nurses, nephrologists, members of the multi-care kidney clinic team) at Ontario’s 27 CKD programs.

Methods:

We will survey and interview healthcare providers at each CKD program, and complete an intervention implementation checklist. Quantitative data from the surveys and the intervention implementation checklist will assess fidelity to the intervention, while quantitative and qualitative data from surveys and interviews will provide insight into the mechanisms of change.

Limitations:

The long trial period may result in poor participant recall.

Conclusion:

This process evaluation will enhance interpretation of the trial findings, guide improvements in the intervention components, and inform future implementation.

Trial registration:

Clinicaltrials.gov; identifier: NCT03329521.

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.

Targeting versus Tailoring Educational Videos for Encouraging Deceased Organ Donor Registration in Black-Owned Barbershops

In the U.S., black men are at highest risk for requiring kidney transplants but are among those least likely to register for organ donation. Prior outreach used videos culturally targeted for Black communities, yet registration rates remain insufficient to meet demand. Therefore, we assessed whether generic versus videos culturally targeted or personally tailored based on prior organ donation beliefs differentially increase organ donor registration. In a randomized controlled trial, 1,353 participants in Black-owned barbershops viewed generic, targeted, or tailored videos about organ donation. Logistic regression models assessed the relative impact of videos on: 1) immediate organ donor registration, 2) taking brochures, and 3) change in organ donation willingness stage of change from baseline. Randomization yielded approximately equal groups related to demographics and baseline willingness and beliefs. Neither targeted nor tailored videos differentially affected registration compared with the generic video, but participants in targeted and tailored groups were more likely to take brochures. Targeted (OR = 1.74) and tailored (OR = 1.57) videos were associated with incremental increases in organ donation willingness stage of change compared to the generic video. Distributing culturally targeted and individually tailored videos increased organ donor willingness stage of change among Black men in Black-owned barbershops but was insufficient for encouraging registration.Abbreviations: CI - confidence interval; DMV - Department of Motor Vehicles; BOBs - Black-owned barbershops; ODBI - organ donation belief index; ODWS - organ donation willingness stage of change; OR - odds ratio.

Video education to facilitate patient outreach about living kidney donation: A proof of concept

BACKGROUND

Increasing living-donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) requires education of transplant candidates and their social network. This pre-post study tested the feasibility and acceptability of KidneyTIME, an intervention which leverages LDKT video-based educational content designed for sharing.

METHODS

Adult kidney candidates undergoing transplant evaluation/re-evaluation and their caregivers at a single transplant center viewed different sets of KidneyTIME videos prior to evaluation. Change in LDKT knowledge, self-efficacy, and concerns was assessed before and immediately after exposure and 3 weeks later. Also assessed were post-exposure program feedback, online use, and living donor (LD) inquiry.

RESULTS

A total of 82 candidates and 79 caregivers participated. Viewers of KidneyTIME demonstrated increases in mean LDKT knowledge by +71% and communication self-efficacy by +48%, and reductions in concerns by -21%. The intervention was received positively, with over 95% of participants agreeing that the videos were understandable, credible, and engaging. By 3 weeks follow-up, 58% had viewed it again, 63% of family clusters had shared it, and 100% would recommend the program to a friend. Time to LD inquiry was similar to historic controls.

CONCLUSION

KidneyTime improved facilitators of LDKT, was rated as highly acceptable, and was highly shared, but did not impact LD inquiry during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Mental Health and Well-Being of Solid Organ Transplant Donors. The Forgotten Sacrifices

In light of a global organ shortage, living donor transplantation has become increasingly relevant as an alternative to deceased donor transplantation. While current research has revolved around the medical aspects of transplantation, there remains a paucity of literature regarding the quality of life (QOL) of living donors. Hence, this review aims to provide a comprehensive outline of the current landscape of living liver and kidney transplantation, with a focus on the mental health and wellbeing of donors. As highlighted in previous studies, organ donation has a significant impact on both physical and mental aspects of donor wellbeing, with marked deteriorations occurring in the short term. Furthermore, other qualitative aspects such as financial burden contribute greatly to donor distress, reflecting a need for improved donor care. To address these pertinent issues, recommendations for a successful transplant program are detailed in this review, which encompasses psychological and social aspects of donor care throughout the donation process. Further research can be done on the impact of recipient deaths on donor QOL and appropriate interventions. Overall, given the selfless sacrifices of living donors, the care of their mental wellbeing is essential. Therefore, greater emphasis should be placed on the provision of adequate psychosocial support for them.

Interventions for increasing solid organ donor registration

BACKGROUND

A solution for increasing the number of available organs for transplantation is to encourage more individuals to register a commitment for deceased organ donation. However, the percentage of the population registered for organ donation remains low in many countries.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of various interventions used to increase deceased organ donor registration.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 11 August 2020 through contact with an 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 Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs and quasi-RCTs of interventions to promote deceased organ donor registration. We included studies if they measured self-reported or verified donor registration, intention to donate, intention to register a decision or number of individuals signing donor cards as outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed retrieved studies and extracted data from included studies. We assessed studies for risk of bias. We obtained summary estimates of effect using a random-effects model and expressed results as risk ratios (RR) (95% confidence intervals; CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD; 95% CI) or standardised mean difference (SMD; 95% CI) for continuous outcomes. In multi-arm trials, data were pooled to create single pair-wise comparisons. Analyses were stratified by specific intervention setting where available.

MAIN RESULTS

Our search strategy identified 46 studies (47 primary articles, including one abstract) comprising 24 parallel RCTs, 19 cluster RCTs and 3 quasi-RCTs. Sample sizes ranged from 138 to 1,085,292 (median = 514). A total of 16 studies measured registration behaviour, 27 measured intention to register/donate and three studies measured both registration behaviour and intention to register. Interventions were delivered in a variety of different settings: schools (14 studies), driver's motor vehicle (DMV) centres (5), mail-outs (4), primary care centres (3), workplaces (1), community settings (7) and general public (12). Interventions were highly varied in terms of their content and included strategies such as educational sessions and videos, leveraging peer leaders, staff training, message framing, and priming. Most studies were rated as having high or unclear risk of bias for random sequence generation and allocation concealment and low risk for the remainder of the domains. Data from 34/46 studies (74%) were available for meta-analysis. Low certainty evidence showed organ donation registration interventions had a small overall effect on improving registration behaviour (16 studies, 1,294,065 participants: RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.43, I2 = 84%), intention to register/donate (dichotomous) (10 studies, 10,838 participants: RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.42, I2 = 91%) and intention to register/donate (continuous) (9 studies, 3572 participants: SMD 0.23, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.36, I2 = 67%). Classroom-based interventions delivered in a lecture format by individuals from the transplant community may be effective at increasing intention to register/donate (3 studies, 675 participants: RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.55, I² = 0%). Community interventions targeting specific ethnic groups were generally effective at increasing registration rates (k = 5, n = 4186; RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.35 to 3.40, I² = 85%), although heterogeneity was high. In particular, interventions delivered in the community by trained peer-leaders appear to be effective (3 studies, 3819 participant: RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.08 to 4.06, I² = 87%), although again, the data lacked robustness. There was some evidence that framing messages (e.g. anticipated regret) and priming individuals (e.g. reciprocity) in a certain way may increase intention to register/donate, however, few studies measured this effect on actual registration. Overall, the studies varied significantly in terms of design, setting, content and delivery. Selection bias was evident and a quarter of the studies could not be included in the meta-analysis due to incomplete outcome data reporting. No adverse events were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In our review, we identified a variety of approaches used to increase organ donor registration including school-based educational sessions and videos, leveraging peer leaders in the community, DMV staff training, targeted messaging and priming. The variability in outcome measures used and incompleteness in reporting meant that most data could not be combined for analysis. When data were combined, overall effect sizes were small in favour of intervention groups over controls, however, there was significant variability in the data. There was some evidence that leveraging peer-leaders in the community to deliver organ donation education may improve registration rates and classroom-based education from credible individuals (i.e. members of the transplant community) may improve intention to register/donate, however, there is no clear evidence favouring any particular approach. There was mixed evidence for simple, low-intensity interventions utilising message framing and priming. However, it is likely that interest in these strategies will persist due to their reach and scalability. Further research is therefore required to adequately address the question of the most effective interventions for increasing deceased organ donor registration.

Destination Transplant: Protocol for a Parallel-group Randomized Trial of an Educational Intervention to Increase Kidney Transplant Among Black People on the Transplant Waiting List

For most patients with kidney failure, living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) is their best treatment option. Compared with White people, Black people are more likely to have kidney failure but less likely to receive LDKTs. In this study, the investigators will test an educational intervention, Destination Transplant, designed to reduce this disparity, among Black people already listed for kidney transplant.

Your Path to Transplant: A randomized controlled trial of a tailored expert system intervention to increase knowledge, attitudes, and pursuit of kidney transplant

Individually tailoring education over time may help more patients, especially racial/ethnic minorities, get waitlisted and pursue deceased and living donor kidney transplant (DDKT and LDKT, respectively). We enrolled 802 patients pursuing transplant evaluation at the University of California, Los Angeles Transplant Program into a randomized education trial. We compared the effectiveness of Your Path to Transplant (YPT), an individually tailored coaching and education program delivered at 4 time points, with standard of care (SOC) education on improving readiness to pursue DDKT and LDKT, transplant knowledge, taking 15 small transplant-related actions, and pursuing transplant (waitlisting or LDKT rates) over 8 months. Survey outcomes were collected prior to evaluation and at 4 and 8 months. Time to waitlisting or LDKT was assessed with at least 18 months of follow-up. At 8 months, compared to SOC, the YPT group demonstrated increased LDKT readiness (47% vs 33%, P = .003) and transplant knowledge (effect size [ES] = 0.41, P < .001). Transplant pursuit was higher in the YPT group (hazard ratio: 1.44, 95% confidence interval: 1.15-1.79, P = .002). A focused, coordinated education effort can improve transplant-seeking behaviors and waitlisting rates. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT02181114.

Efficacy of Educational Interventions in Improving Measures of Living-donor Kidney Transplantation Activity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To address patient-level barriers to living-donor kidney transplantation (LDKT), centers have implemented educational interventions. Recently, some have highlighted several gaps in knowledge and lack of evidence of efficacy of these interventions. No review has synthesized the available data.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies conducted to increase measures of LDKT. Outcomes of interest were LDKT rates, donor evaluation, donor contact/inquiry, total transplantation rates, and change in knowledge scores and pursuit behaviors. A literature search was conducted across 7 databases from inception until 2017. Educational interventions were a decision/teaching aid alone or with personalized sessions. Comparator was another intervention or nonspecific education. Random effects meta-analysis was performed to pool risk ratios (RRs) across studies.

RESULTS

Of the 1813 references, 15 met the inclusion criteria; 9 were randomized control trials. When compared with nonspecific education, interventions increased LDKT rates (RR = 2.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49-4.35), donor evaluation (RR = 3.82; 95% CI, 1.91-7.64), and donor inquiry/contact (RR = 2.41; 95% CI, 1.53-3.80), but not total transplants (RR = 1.24; 95% CI, 0.96-1.61). Significant increased mean knowledge scores postintervention was noted, and most showed favorable trends in pursuit behaviors. Quality across the studies was mixed and sometimes difficult to assess. The biggest limitations were small sample size, selection bias, and short follow-ups.

CONCLUSIONS

Educational interventions improve measures of LDKT activity; however, current literature is heterogeneous and at risk of selection bias. Prospective studies with diverse patient populations, longer follow-ups, and robust outcomes are needed to inform clinical practice.

Development and Validation of a Socioeconomic Kidney Transplant Derailers Index

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Socioeconomic barriers can prevent successful kidney transplant (KT) but are difficult to measure efficiently in clinical settings. We created and validated an individual-level, single score Kidney Transplant Derailers Index (KTDI) and assessed its association with waitlisting and living donor KT (LDKT) rates.

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.

Ethnic background is associated with no live kidney donor identified at the time of first transplant assessment-an opportunity missed? A single-center retrospective cohort study

Patients from ethnocultural minorities have reduced access to live donor kidney transplant (LDKT). To explore early pretransplant ethnocultural disparities in LDKT readiness, and the impact of the interactions with the transplant program, we assessed if patients had a potential live donor (LD) identified at first pretransplant assessment, and if patients with no LD initially received LDKT subsequently. Single-center, retrospective cohort of adults referred for kidney transplant (KT) assessment. Multivariable logistic regression assessed the association between ethnicity and having a potential LD. Cox proportional hazard analysis assessed the association between no potential LD initially and subsequent LDKT. Of 1617 participants, 66% of Caucasians indicated having a potential LD, compared with 55% of South Asians, 44% of African Canadians, and 41% of East Asians (P < 0.001). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, the odds of having a potential LD identified was significantly lower for African, East and South Asian Canadians. No potential LD at initial KT assessment was associated with lower likelihood of LDKT subsequently (hazard ratio [HR], 0.14; [0.10-0.19]). Compared to Caucasians, African, East and South Asian and African Canadians are less likely to have a potential LD identified at first KT assessment, which predicts a lower likelihood of subsequent LDKT.

Decision support needs of kidney transplant candidates regarding the deceased donor waiting list: A qualitative study and conceptual framework

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplant candidates face complex decisions about transplant options such as living donation or acceptance of lower quality kidneys. We sought to characterize knowledge and decision support needs regarding kidney transplant outcomes and options.

METHODS

We conducted 10 interviews and four focus groups of 28 adult kidney transplant candidates from two centers in Minnesota. Transcripts were analyzed thematically using a grounded theory approach.

RESULTS

We identified four themes: First, candidates have a limited understanding of treatment options and demonstrate confusion or a lack of awareness about waiting list outcomes and prognosis. Second, candidates desired frank discussions about likely outcomes and individualized prognosis. Third, emotional barriers impact how patients make informed decisions. Finally, participants relied on the support of family and friends to help process information, and many favored the medical community engaging their family and friends in their medical decisions. These findings were incorporated into a conceptual model to support kidney transplant candidates in medical decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

Transplant candidates had limited understanding about treatment options and outcomes on the kidney transplant waiting list. Individualized risk information and cognitive approaches that recognize how patients process information and balance competing risks may improve informed decision making.

A randomized controlled trial of Explore Transplant at Home to improve transplant knowledge and decision-making for CKD 3-5 patients at Kaiser Permanente Southern California

Background

Five-year survival on dialysis is only 40%, compared to 74% with a deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT) and 87% with a living donor kidney transplant (LDKT). An American Society of Transplantation (AST) Consensus Conference recommended that patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) Stages 3–5 have the opportunity to learn about and decide which treatment option is right for them, particularly about LDKT. However, early education about LDKT and DDKT outside of transplant centers is inconsistent and often poor, with patients in CKD 3 and 4 and ethnic/racial minorities even less likely to receive it. A new randomized control trial (RCT), in partnership with Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC), will assess knowledge gaps and the effectiveness of a supplementary video-guided, print and technology-based education intervention for English- and Spanish-speaking patients in CKD Stages 3, 4, and 5 to increase LDKT knowledge and decision-making. To date, no published LDKT educational interventions have studied such a large and diverse CKD population.

Methods

In this RCT, 1200 English and Spanish-speaking CKD Stage 3–5 patients will be randomly assigned to one of two education conditions: ET@Home or KPSC standard of care education. Randomization will be stratified by CKD stage and primary language spoken. Those in the ET@Home condition will receive brochures, postcards, DVDs, and text messages delivering educational content in modules over a six-month period. Baseline data collection will measure demographics, transplant derailers, and the amount of previous CKD and transplant education they have received. Changes in CKD and transplant knowledge, ability to make an informed decision about transplant, and self-efficacy to pursue LDKT will be captured with surveys administered at baseline and at six months.

Discussion

At the conclusion of the study, investigators will understand key knowledge gaps for patients along the CKD continuum and between patients who speak different languages and have assessed the effectiveness of both English- and Spanish-language supplementary education in increasing KPSC patients’ knowledge about the opportunities for and risks and benefits of LDKT. We hope this program will reduce disparities in access to transplant.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03389932; date registered: 12/26/2017.

The Role of Media in Non-Directed (Altruistic) Living Kidney Donation

This study seeks to characterize how non-directed living kidney donors use media and informational resources over the course of their kidney donation journey. We conducted semi-structured interviews with non-directed donors (NDDs) who initiated kidney transplant chains. Interview transcripts were reviewed and references to media or informational resources were classified by type and pattern of use. More than half (57%) of NDDs reported that an identifiable media or informational resource resulted in their initial interest in donation. Two-thirds (67%) of NDDs cited the influence of stories and personal narratives on their decision to donate. After transplant, media and informational resources were used to promote organ donation, connect with other donors or recipients, and reflect on donation. From the study's findings, we conclude that media and informational resources play an important role in the process of donation for NDDs, including inspiring interest in donation through personal narratives. Media sources provide emotionally and intellectually compelling discussions that motivate potential donors. The results of this study may facilitate the development of more targeted outreach to potential donors through use of personal narratives in articles and television programming about donation.

Barriers to Education and Shared Decision Making in the Chronic Kidney Disease Population: A Narrative Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Provision of education to inform decision making for renal replacement therapy (RRT) is a key component in the management of chronic kidney disease (CKD), yet patients report suboptimal satisfaction with the process of selecting a dialysis modality. Our purpose is to review the influencers of RRT decision making in the CKD population, which will better inform the process of shared decision making between clinicians and patients.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

PubMed and Google Scholar.

METHODS

A narrative review was performed using the main terms "chronic kidney disease," "CKD," "dialysis," "review," "decision-making," "decision aids," "education," and "barriers." Only articles in English were accessed. The existing literature was critically analyzed from a theoretical and contextual perspective and thematic analysis was performed.

KEY FINDINGS

Eight common themes were identified as influencers for decision making. "Patient-focused" themes including social influence, values and beliefs, comprehension, autonomy and sociodemographics, and "clinician-focused" themes including screening, communication, and engagement. Early predialysis education and decision aids can effectively improve decision making. Patient-valued outcomes need to be more fully integrated into clinical guidelines.

LIMITATIONS

This is not a systematic review; therefore, no formal tool was utilized to evaluate the rigor and quality of studies included and findings may not be generalizable.

IMPLICATIONS

Standardized comprehensive RRT education programs through multidisciplinary health teams can help optimize CKD patient education and shared decision making. Involving patients in the research process itself and implementing patient values and preferences into clinical guidelines can help to achieve a patient-centered model of care.

Educational Support Around Dialysis Modality Decision Making in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are asked to choose a renal replacement therapy or conservative management. Education and knowledge transfer play key roles in this decision-making process, yet they remain a partially met need.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to understand the dialysis modality decision-making process through exploration of the predialysis patient experience to better inform the educational process.

DESIGN

Qualitative descriptive study.

SETTING

Kidney Care Centre of London Health Sciences Centre in London, Ontario, Canada.

PATIENTS

Twelve patients with CKD, with 4 patients on in-center hemodialysis, home hemodialysis, and peritoneal dialysis, respectively.

MEASUREMENTS

Not applicable.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with each participant, along with any family members who were present. Interviews were transcribed verbatim. Conventional content analysis was used to analyze the transcripts for common themes. Representative quotes were decided via team consensus. A patient collaborator was part of the research team.

RESULTS

Three themes influenced dialysis modality decision making: (i) Patient Factors: individualization, autonomy, and emotions; (ii) Educational Factors: tailored education, time and preparation, and available resources; and (iii) Support Systems: partnership with health care team, and family and friends.

LIMITATIONS

Sample not representative of wider CKD population. Limited number of eligible patients. Poor recall may affect findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Modality decision making is a complex process, influenced by the patient's health literacy, willingness to accept information, predialysis lifestyle, support systems, and values. Patient education requires the flexibility to individualize the delivery of a standardized CKD curriculum in partnership with a patient-health care team, to fulfill the goal of informed, shared decision making.

Explore Transplant Ontario: Adapting the Explore Transplant Education Program to Facilitate Informed Decision Making About Kidney Transplantation

Purpose:

In this article, we describe a province-wide collaborative project in which we adapted the Explore Transplant (ET) education program for use in Ontario, Canada, to develop Explore Transplant Ontario (ETO). Kidney transplantation (KT), especially living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT), is the best treatment for many patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), with the best patient survival and quality of life and also reduced health care costs. Yet KT and LDKT are underutilized both internationally and in Canada. Research has demonstrated that patients with ESKD who receive personalized transplant education are more likely to complete the transplant evaluation process and to receive LDKT compared with patients who do not receive this education.

Sources of information:

Research expertise of the lead authors and Medline search of studies assessing the impact of education interventions on access to KT and LDKT.

Methods:

The ET program, developed by Dr Amy Waterman, has been used in thousands of patients with ESKD in the United States to enhance KT and LDKT knowledge. To adapt this program for use in Ontario, we convened a working group, including patient representatives, nephrologists, transplant coordinators, dialysis nurses, and patient educators from all Ontario KT centers and selected dialysis units. In an iterative process concluding in a consensus workshop, the working group reviewed and edited the text of the original ET program and suggested changes to the videos.

Key findings:

The adapted program reflects the Ontario health care environment and responds to the specific needs of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) in the province. The videos feature Ontario transplant nephrologists, transplant coordinators, and patients, representative of the ethnic diversity in Ontario, sharing their transplant experience and expertise. Despite the changes, ETO is consistent with the quality and style of the original ET program. At the end of this article, we summarize subsequent steps to test and utilize ETO. Those projects, specifically the ETO pilot study and a multicomponent quality improvement initiative to increase utilization of KT and LDKT across Ontario, will be described in full in future papers.

Limitations:

This article describes a provincial initiative; therefore, our findings may not be fully generalizable without further considerations. The adapted education program has not yet been tested in large trial for effectiveness.

Implications:

As a program grounded in the theoretical model of behavior change, ETO places patients with ESKD at the center of a complex process of navigating renal replacement therapy modalities and acknowledges a broad range of patient values, priorities, and states of readiness to pursue KT.

Racial differences in completion of the living kidney donor evaluation process

Racial disparities in living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) persist but the most effective target to eliminate these disparities remains unknown. One potential target could be delays during completion of the live donor evaluation process. We studied racial differences in progression through the evaluation process for 247 African American (AA) and 664 non-AA living donor candidates at our center between January 2011 and March 2015. AA candidates were more likely to be obese (38% vs 22%: P < .001), biologically related (66% vs 44%: P < .001), and live ≤50 miles from the center (64% vs 37%: P < .001) than non-AAs. Even after adjusting for these differences, AAs were less likely to progress from referral to donation (aHR for AA vs non-AA: 0.26 0.47 0.83; P = .01). We then assessed racial differences in completion of each step of the evaluation process and found disparities in progression from medical screening to in-person evaluation (aHR: 0.41 0.620.94; P = .02) and from clearance to donation (aHR: 0.28 0.510.91; P = .02), compared with from referral to medical screening (aHR: 0.78 1.021.33; P = .95) and from in-person evaluation to clearance (aHR: 0.59 0.931.44; P = .54). Delays may be a manifestation of the transplant candidate's social network, thus, targeted efforts to optimize networks for identification of donor candidates may help address LDKT disparities.

An Explore Transplant Group Randomized Controlled Education Trial to Increase Dialysis Patients' Decision-Making and Pursuit of Transplantation

INTRODUCTION

Dialysis centers must provide transplant education to patients but often do not address the risks and benefits of living and deceased donor transplant.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

In a group randomized controlled trial of 20 dialysis centers and 253 patients, we assessed whether the Explore Transplant education program increased patients' readiness to pursue transplant, transplant knowledge, informed transplant decision-making, discussions about transplant with potential living donors, pursuit and receipt of living or deceased donor transplant, and whether these effects varied by race.

METHODS

Patients at participating dialysis centers were randomized to receive either (1) a 4-module Explore Transplant education program, including videos, printed materials, and transplant educator discussions or (2) standard-of-care transplant education provided by dialysis centers. The trial had 3 phases: (1) pre- and postsurveying and dialysis center education (2007-2008), (2) follow-up to determine whether patients restarted or began transplant evaluation (2008-2010), and (3) assessment of participants' receipt of a renal transplant (2012-2015).

RESULTS

Compared to patients in standard-of-care dialysis centers, patients who received the intervention were more likely to increase in their stage of readiness for living donor transplantation (odds ratio: 2.50; 95% confidence interval: 1.10-5.66), had greater increases in their transplant knowledge ( P < .001), and were more likely to call to restart/begin transplant evaluation (38% vs 24%, P = .006). When analyses were stratified by race, black patients were more likely to take several steps toward transplant in comparison to whites.

DISCUSSION

The Explore Transplant helps dialysis patients make informed decisions and increases their pursuit of transplant, particularly among black patients.

Strategies for Increasing Knowledge, Communication, and Access to Living Donor Transplantation: an Evidence Review to Inform Patient Education

Purpose of review

Inadequate knowledge of the benefits, risks and opportunities for living donation is an important, potentially modifiable barrier to living donor transplantation. We assessed the current state of the evidence regarding strategies to increase knowledge, communication and access to living donor transplantation, as reported in peer-reviewed medical literature.

Recent Findings

Nineteen studies were reviewed, categorized as programs evaluated in randomized controlled trials (8 studies) and programs supported by observational (non-randomized) studies (11 studies). Content extraction demonstrated that comprehensive education about living donation and living donor transplantation involves multiple learners - the transplant candidate, potential living donors, and social support networks - and requires communicating complex information about the risks and benefits of donation, transplantation and alternative therapies to these different audiences. Transplant centers can help transplant patients learn about living donor transplantation through a variety of formats and modalities, including center-based, home-based and remote technology-based education, outreach to dialysis centers, and social media. Evaluation of these strategies and program themes informed a new Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN)/United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) public education brochure.

Summary

Increasing transplant candidate knowledge and comfort in talking about living donation and transplantation can reduce educational barriers to pursuit of living donor transplants. Ongoing efforts are needed to develop, refine and disseminate educational programs to help improve transplant access for more patients in need of organ donors.

Health Disparities in Kidney Transplantation for African Americans

BACKGROUND

The persistent challenges of bridging healthcare disparities for African Americans (AAs) in need of kidney transplantation continue to be unresolved at the national level. This healthcare disparity is multifactorial: stemming from limited kidney donors suitable for AAs; inconsistent care coordination and suboptimal risk factor control; social determinants, low socioeconomic status, reduced access to care; and mistrust of clinicians and the healthcare system.

SUMMARY

There are numerous opportunities to significantly lessen the disparities in kidney transplantation for AAs through the following measures: the adoption of new care and patient engagement models that include education, enhanced practice-level cultural sensitivity, and timely referral as well as increased research on the impact of the environment on genetic risk, and implementation of new transplantation-related policies. Key Messages: This systematic review describes pretransplant concerns related to access to kidney transplantation, posttransplant complications, and policy interventions to address the challenging issues associated with kidney transplantation in AAs.

Linguistic Isolation and Access to the Active Kidney Transplant Waiting List in the United States

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Waitlist inactivity is a barrier to transplantation, because inactive candidates cannot receive deceased donor organ offers. We hypothesized that temporarily inactive kidney transplant candidates living in linguistically isolated communities would be less likely to achieve active waitlist status.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

We merged Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing data with five-digit zip code socioeconomic data from the 2000 US Census. The cumulative incidence of conversion to active waitlist status, death, and delisting before conversion among 84,783 temporarily inactive adult kidney candidates from 2004 to 2012 was determined using competing risks methods. Competing risks regression was performed to characterize the association between linguistic isolation, incomplete transplantation evaluation, and conversion to active status. A household was determined to be linguistically isolated if all members ≥14 years old speak a non-English language and also, speak English less than very well.

RESULTS

A total of 59,147 candidates (70% of the study population) achieved active status over the study period of 9.8 years. Median follow-up was 110 days (interquartile range, 42-276 days) for activated patients and 815 days (interquartile range, 361-1244 days) for candidates not activated. The cumulative incidence of activation over the study period was 74%, the cumulative incidence of death before conversion was 10%, and the cumulative incidence of delisting was 13%. After adjusting for other relevant covariates, living in a zip code with higher percentages of linguistically isolated households was associated with progressively lower subhazards of activation both in the overall population (reference: <1% linguistically isolated households; 1%-4.9% linguistically isolated: subhazard ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.86 to 0.93; 5%-9.9% linguistically isolated: subhazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.80 to 0.87; 10%-19.9% linguistically isolated: subhazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.72 to 0.80; and ≥20% linguistically isolated: subhazard ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.67 to 0.76) and among candidates designated temporarily inactive due to an incomplete transplant evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that candidates residing in linguistically isolated communities are less likely to complete candidate evaluations and achieve active waitlist status.

Decision aids to increase living donor kidney transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

For the more than 636,000 adults with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in the U.S., kidney transplantation is the preferred treatment compared to dialysis. Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) comprised 31% of kidney transplantations in 2015, an 8% decrease since 2004. We aimed to summarize the current literature on decision aids that could be used to improve LDKT rates.

RECENT FINDINGS

Decision aids are evidence-based tools designed to help patients and their families make difficult treatment decisions. LDKT decision aids can help ESRD patients, patients' family and friends, and healthcare providers engage in treatment decisions and thereby overcome multifactorial LDKT barriers.

SUMMARY

We identified 12 LDKT decision aids designed to provide information about LDKT, and/or to help ESRD patients identify potential living donors, and/or to help healthcare providers make decisions about treatment for ESRD or living donation. Of these, 4 were shown to be effective in increasing LDKT, donor inquiries, LDKT knowledge, and willingness to discuss LDKT. Although each LDKT decision aid has limitations, adherence to decision aid development guidelines may improve decision aid utilization and access to LDKT.

Communicating About Choices in Transplantation (COACH)

Introduction:

Previous research highlights the difficulties patients with end-stage renal disease awaiting kidney transplant experience while attempting to manage both the logistical and the content-related aspects of discussions about transplantation. This article presents pilot results of the behavioral communication intervention program, Communicating about Choices in Transplantation (COACH), designed to improve transplant candidates’ communication about transplantation.

Research Questions:

As compared to matched controls, increases in knowledge of deceased and living donor transplantation, communication self-efficacy, intentions to hold conversations about transplantation, and self-reported discussion were expected for pilot participants from pre- and postassessment; decreases in conversational difficulties were also posited.

Design:

Using a nonrandomized quasi-experimental design, we compared transplant knowledge and communication between patients completing a 2-hour COACH session (pilot sample) to a sample of matched controls (n = 10). Data were collected via semi-structured telephone interviews upon enrollment and 1 month after enrollment or attendance at a COACH program session.

Results:

The results revealed significant differences in knowledge from pre- to postassessment between the pilot and control samples ( P = .02). Although no other statistically significant between-group differences were found, paired-sample t tests revealed significant pre–post increases in transplant knowledge (7.6 [standard deviation, SD = 2.0] to 9.5 [SD =1.8]; P = .05) and communication self-efficacy (1255.8 [SD = 239.7] to 1513.8 [SD = 114.3]; P = .009) for pilot participants. Decreases in perceived conversational difficulties were also observed ( P = .53).

Discussion:

Results provide preliminary support for the program’s impact. Moreover, participant evaluations of the COACH were overwhelmingly positive. A more definitive program evaluation with a larger, more diverse sample is currently underway.

Predictors and Moderators of Educational Interventions to Increase the Likelihood of Potential Living Donors for Black Patients Awaiting Kidney Transplantation

Our aim was to identify predictors and moderators of the effects of a house calls (HC) educational intervention, relative to a group-based (GB) intervention and to individual counseling (IC), in a randomized controlled trial to increase the likelihood of having living donor (LD) evaluations initiated and live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT). Black adults wait listed for kidney transplantation (N = 152) were randomized into one of the three educational conditions. We examined demographic, clinical, psychosocial, and socio-contextual baseline characteristics as predictors and moderators of having a potential LD initiate evaluation. HC assignment (OR = 2.024.7311.05, P = 0.001), younger age (OR = 0.910.940.98, P = 0.001), more willingness to discuss donation with others (OR = 1.081.371.75, P = 0.01), and larger social network (OR = 1.011.091.18, P = 0.04) were significant multivariable predictors of having ≥1 LD initiate evaluation. Age (P = 0.03) and social network size (P = 0.02) moderated the effect of HC relative to IC and GB, but not GB relative to IC, on LD evaluation initiation. Our findings suggest that HC is most effective for patients <60 years old and those with average or large social network size.

Educating Prospective Kidney Transplant Recipients and Living Donors about Living Donation: Practical and Theoretical Recommendations for Increasing Living Donation Rates

A promising strategy for increasing living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) rates is improving education about living donation for both prospective kidney transplant recipients and living donors to help overcome the proven knowledge, psychological, and socioeconomic barriers to LDKT. A recent Consensus Conference on Best Practices in Live Kidney Donation recommended that comprehensive LDKT education be made available to patients at all stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, in considering how to implement this recommendation across different healthcare learning environments, the current lack of available guidance regarding how to design, deliver, and measure the efficacy of LDKT education programs is notable. In the current article, we provide an overview of how one behavior change theory, the Transtheoretical Model of Behavior Change, can guide the delivery of LDKT education for patients at various stages of CKD and readiness for LDKT. We also discuss the importance of creating educational programs for both potential kidney transplant recipients and living donors, and identify key priorities for educational research to reduce racial disparities in LDKT and increase LDKT rates.

Resilience and quality of life in 161 living kidney donors before nephrectomy and in the aftermath of donation: a naturalistic single center study

BACKGROUND

Due to the shortage of cadaveric organs, living kidney donation has begun to serve as the most crucial organ pool. Transplant centers have a legitimate interest in expanding the pool of donors. A psychosocial evaluation is established in transplantation centers to prevent donors from possible emotional harm in the aftermath of donation. We explored if the resilience questionnaire is an appropriate measure of the mental stability. To standardize procedures of psychosocial evaluation and to optimize donor recruitment, we present our evaluation protocol and analyze the causes of exclusion from donation.

METHOD

In a naturalistic design, we compared resilience and quality of life in eligible and excluded donors at the time point of donation. Potential living kidney donors (N = 161) participated in the obligatory psychosomatic evaluation. Quality of life (World Health Organization Quality of Life, WHOQOL-Bref) and resilience (Resilience Scale, RS-12) were measured. Three months after nephrectomy donors quality of life was screened in a follow-up.

RESULTS

In the evaluation interview donors were classified as eligible (n = 142) or excluded (n = 12). Nonrelated donors (n = 3) were excluded from donation significantly more often (p < .011). Eligible donors (M = 78.42, SD = 10.19) had higher values for resilience than excluded donors (M = 72.7, SD = 8.18, p < .04), who showed values comparable to the norm. In all domains of quality of life, eligible donors had significantly higher values than healthy normals (p < .001). After donation health-related quality of life decreased, but was comparable to the norm. A regression analysis showed that resilience was a significant predictor for all dimensions of quality of life before donation (R(2) = 10.2-24.6 %). Post-donation quality of life was significantly correlated with pre-donation resilience scores (p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The resilience score predicts high mental quality of life before and after donation. Therefor it can be implemented as a self-rating instrument to further objectify donor's mental stability. Despite the stressful life event of donation, donor candidates presented high resilience and high levels of quality of life. Therefor our findings support health care providers` intentions to improve living donation. In the group of excluded donors nonrelated persons were overrepresented. Guidelines for the admission of nonrelated donors are currently unclear and need to be optimized.

Invariance of measures to understand decision-making for pursuing living donor kidney transplant

Living donor kidney transplant is the ideal treatment option for end-stage renal disease; however, the decision to pursue living donor kidney transplant is complex and challenging. Measurement invariance of living donor kidney transplant Decisional Balance and Self-Efficacy across gender (male/female), race (Black/White), and education level (no college/college or higher) were examined using a sequential approach. Full strict invariance was found for Decisional Balance and Self-Efficacy for gender and partial strict invariance was found for Decisional Balance and Self-Efficacy across race and education level. This information will inform tailored feedback based on these constructs in future intervention studies targeting behavior change among specific demographic subgroups.

Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: Overcoming Disparities in Live Kidney Donation in the US--Recommendations from a Consensus Conference

Despite its superior outcomes relative to chronic dialysis and deceased donor kidney transplantation, live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is less likely to occur in minorities, older adults, and poor patients than in those who are white, younger, and have higher household income. In addition, there is considerable geographic variability in LDKT rates. Concomitantly, in recent years, the rate of living kidney donation (LKD) has stopped increasing and is declining, after decades of consistent growth. Particularly noteworthy is the decline in LKD among black, younger, male, and lower-income adults. The Live Donor Community of Practice within the American Society of Transplantation, with financial support from 10 other organizations, held a Consensus Conference on Best Practices in Live Kidney Donation in June 2014. The purpose of this meeting was to identify LKD best practices and knowledge gaps that might influence LDKT, with a focus on patient and donor education, evaluation efficiencies, disparities, and systemic barriers to LKD. In this article, we discuss trends in LDKT/LKD and emerging novel strategies for attenuating disparities, and we offer specific recommendations for future clinical practice, education, research, and policy from the Consensus Conference Workgroup focused on disparities.