Barriers to living donor kidney transplantation in the United Kingdom: a national observational study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Wu DA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5427518 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Barriers to living donor kidney transplantation in the United Kingdom: a national observational study.
Wu Diana A DA Robb Matthew L ML Watson Christopher J E CJE Forsythe John L R JLR Tomson Charles R V CRV Cairns John J Roderick Paul P Johnson Rachel J RJ Ravanan Rommel R Fogarty Damian D Bradley Clare C Gibbons Andrea A Metcalfe Wendy W Draper Heather H Bradley Andrew J AJ Oniscu Gabriel C GC
Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association 20170501 5
<h4>Background</h4>Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) provides more timely access to transplantation and better clinical outcomes than deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT). This study investigated disparities in the utilization of LDKT in the UK.<h4>Methods</h4>A total of 2055 adults undergoing kidney transplantation between November 2011 and March 2013 were prospectively recruited from all 23 UK transplant centres as part of the Access to Transplantation and Transplant Outcome M ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundLiving donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) has several advantages over deceased donor kidney transplantation. Yet rates of living donation are declining in Canada and there exists significant interprovincial variability. Efforts to improve living donation tend to focus on the patient and barriers identified at their level, such as not knowing how to ask for a kidney or lack of education. These efforts favor those who have the means and the support to find living donors. Thus, a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)-organized workshop recommended that education efforts to understand and remove barriers should focus on health professionals (HPs). Despite this, little attention has been paid to what they identify as barriers to discussing LDKT with their patients.ObjectiveOur aim was to explore HP-identified barriers to discuss living donation with patients in 3 provinces of Canada with low (Quebec), moderate (Ontario), and high (British Columbia) rates of LDKT.DesignThis study consists of an interpretive descriptive approach as it enables to move beyond description and inform clinical practice.SettingPurposive criterion and quota sampling were used to recruit HPs from Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia who are involved in the care of patients with kidney disease and/or with transplant coordination.PatientsNot applicable.MeasurementsSemistructured interviews were conducted. The interview guide was developed based on a preliminary analytical framework and a review of the literature.MethodsThematic analysis was used to analyze the data stemming from the interviews. The coding process comprised of a deductive and inductive approach, and the use of a qualitative analysis software (NVivo 11). Following this, themes were identified and developed. Interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was obtained. In total, we conducted 16 telephone interviews as thematic saturation was attained.ResultsSix predominant themes emerged: (1) lack of communication between transplant and dialysis teams, (2) absence of referral guidelines, (3) role perception and lack of multidisciplinary involvement, (4) HP's lack of information and training, (5) negative attitudes of some HP toward LDKT, (6) patient-level barriers as defined by the HP. HPs did mention patients' attitudes and some characteristics as the main barriers to discussions about living donation; this was noted in all provinces. HPs from Ontario and British Columbia indicated multiple strategies being implemented to address some of these barriers. Those from Ontario mentioned strategies that center on the core principles of provincial-level standardization, while those from British Columbia center on engaging the entire multidisciplinary team and improved role perception. We noted a dearth of such efforts in Quebec; however, efforts around education and promotion, while tentative, have emerged.LimitationsSocial desirability and selection bias. Our analysis might not be applicable to other provinces.ConclusionsHPs involved with the referral and coordination of transplantation play a major role in access to LDKT. We have identified challenges they face when discussing living donation with their patients that warrant further assessment and research to inform policy change.
| S-EPMC6376531 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionStudying existing health systems with variable living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) performance and understanding factors that drive these differences can inform comprehensive system-level approaches to improve LDKT. We aimed to quantify previously identified barriers and estimate their association with LDKT performance.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey of health professionals (HPs). Statements, rated on a Likert scale of "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree", captured themes related to communication; role perception; HP's education, training and comfort; attitudes; referral process; patient; as well as resources and infrastructure. The percentage who agreed with these statements was analyzed and compared by LDKT performance (living donation rates higher or lower than the national average) and participant characteristics.ResultsWe obtained 353 complete responses. Themes related to poor communication, poor role perception, and HPs education or training or comfort emerged as barriers to LDKT. When compared with HPs from high-performing provinces, those from low-performing provinces had lower odds of agreeing that their province promoted LDKT (adjusted odd ratio [aOR] = 0.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.16-0.48). They also had lower odds of initiating discussions about LDKT (aOR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.17-0.55), and higher odds of agreeing that the transplant team is best suited to discuss LDKT (aOR = 2.64, 95% CI: 1.60-4.33) and that more resources would increase LDKT discussions (aOR = 2.06, 95% CI: 1.25-3.40). Nonphysician role and less than 10 years of experience were associated with the level of agreement across several themes. Creating guidelines, streamlining evaluations, and improving communication were ranked as priorities to increase LDKT.ConclusionThere are system-level barriers to LDKT and some were more prevalent in low-performing provinces. Interventions to eliminate them should be implemented in conjunction with patient-level interventions as part of a comprehensive system-level approach to increase LDKT.
| S-EPMC9751709 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Kidney transplantation is the treatment of choice for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESKD). Kidney paired donation (KPD) provides the chance to match an incompatible donor/recipient pair with another donor and recipient in a similar condition. We aimed to compare the outcomes of pair exchange kidney transplantation with traditional live donor kidney transplantation in our context. Method A review of medical records of 62 patients (31 pairs) who underwent two-way conventional living kidney pair exchange from July 2016 to June 2021 was done. The control group was considered those 62 patients who had undergone classic live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) during the study period. The patient's demographics, intraoperative and postoperative variables including delayed graft function, length of hospital stay, graft survival, patient survival, and rejections rates were compared between the groups (KPD and LDKT). Results The majority of recipients were male (77.4 and 80.6%) while donors were female (77.4 and 69.4%) in KPD and the LDKT groups. Mean ages were 37 years (range: 19–59) and 37 years (range: 17–65) for the recipient's in KPD and the LDKT. KPD transplantation was performed in 62 recipients to avoid blood group incompatibility. There were no significant differences in outcomes comprising delayed graft function (1.6 and 3.2%), graft survival (100% in both groups), patient survival (95.2 and 96.8%), and rejections rates (1.6 and 1.6%) between KPD and LDKT group (P > 0.005). The length of stay was similar (5.9 and 5.7 days) in KPD and LDKT groups (P > 0.005). Conclusions The outcomes of KPD were comparable with classic LDKT in terms of delayed graft function, length of hospital stay, graft survival, patient survival, and rejections rates in our study. Therefore, the kidney paired donation program should be encouraged and promoted in centers where the ABO-incompatible transplant is expensive with added risk and the rate of deceased donor transplantation is very low. Highlights • Kidney paired donation (KPD) provides the chance to match for an incompatible donor/recipient pair with another donor and recipient in a similar condition.• The outcomes of KPD were comparable with classic live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) in this study.• KPD program should be promoted in centers where the ABO incompatible transplant is expensive with added risk and the rate of deceased donor transplantation is very low. Statistical software SPSS version 25.0 (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) was used for statistical analysis.Independent t-test test was considered for all quantitative variables while the Chi-square test was applied for all categorical variables during the data analysis. A P value < 0.005 was considered statistically significant.
| S-EPMC9206995 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLiving donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the best treatment option for patients with kidney failure and offers significant medical and economic advantages for both patients and health systems. Despite this, rates of LDKT in Canada have stagnated and vary significantly across Canadian provinces, the reasons for which are not well understood. Our prior work has suggested that system-level factors may be contributing to these differences. Identifying these factors can help inform system-level interventions to increase LDKT.ObjectiveOur objective is to generate a systemic interpretation of LDKT delivery across provincial health systems with variable performance. We aim to identify the attributes and processes that facilitate the delivery of LDKT to patients, and those that create barriers and compare these across systems with variable performance. These objectives are contextualized within our broader goal of increasing rates of LDKT in Canada, particularly in lower-performing provinces.MethodsThis research takes the form of a qualitative comparative case study analysis of 3 provincial health systems in Canada that have high, moderate, and low rates of LDKT performance (the percentage of LDKT to all kidney transplantations performed). Our approach is underpinned by an understanding of health systems as complex adaptive systems that are multilevel and interconnected, and involve nonlinear interactions between people and organizations, operating within a loosely bounded network. Data collection will comprise semistructured interviews, document reviews, and focus groups. Individual case studies will be conducted and analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Following this, our comparative analysis will operationalize resource-based theory to compare case study data and generate explanations for our research question.ResultsThis project was funded from 2020 to 2023. Individual case studies were carried out between November 2020 and August 2022. The comparative case analysis will begin in December 2022 and is expected to conclude in April 2023. Submission of the publication is projected for June 2023.ConclusionsBy investigating health systems as complex adaptive systems and making comparisons across provinces, this study will identify how health systems can improve the delivery of LDKT to patients with kidney failure. Our resource-based theory framework will provide a granular analysis of the attributes and processes that facilitate or create barriers to LDKT delivery across multiple organizations and levels of practice. Our findings will have practice and policy implications and help inform transferrable competencies and system-level interventions conducive to increasing LDKT.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/44172.
| S-EPMC10031444 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The effect of donor-recipient weight mismatch is not well established in ABO-incompatible living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT). A total of 2584 LDKT patients in the Korean Organ Transplantation Registry were classified into four groups according to the presence or absence of ABO incompatibility and donor-recipient weight mismatch (donor-to-recipient weight ratio (DRWR) < 0.8). In a multivariable Cox analysis, the combination of ABO incompatibility and DRWR incompatibility (n = 124) was an independent risk factor for graft survival (HR = 2.73, 95% CI = 1.11-6.70) and patient survival (HR = 3.55, 95% CI = 1.39-9.04), whereas neither factor alone was a significant risk factor for either outcome. The combination of ABO incompatibility and DRWR incompatibility was not an independent risk factor for biopsy-proven graft rejection (HR = 1.27, 95% CI = 0.88-1.82); however, it was an independent risk factor for pneumonia (HR = 2.94, 95% CI = 1.64-5.57). The mortality rate due to infection was higher among patients with both ABO incompatibility and DRWR incompatibility than among patients with neither factor or with either factor alone. The combination of ABO incompatibility and DRWR incompatibility was an independent risk factor for graft and patient survival after LDKT, whereas neither factor alone significantly affected graft or patient survival. Thus, donor-recipient weight matching should be cautiously considered in LDKT with ABO incompatibility.
| S-EPMC8658727 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn patients with kidney failure, living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the best treatment option; yet, LDKT rates have stagnated in Canada and vary widely across provinces. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to LDKT in a high-performing health system.MethodsThis study was conducted using a qualitative exploratory case study of British Columbia. Data collection, conducted between October 2020 and January 2021, entailed document review and semistructured interviews with key stakeholders, including provincial leadership, care teams and patients. We recruited participants via purposive sampling and snowballing technique. We generated themes using thematic analysis.ResultsAfter analysis of interviews conducted with 22 participants (5 representatives from provincial organizations, 7 health care providers at transplant centres, 8 health care providers from regional units and 2 patients) and document review, we identified the following 5 themes as facilitators to LDKT: a centralized infrastructure, a mandate for timely intervention, an equitable funding model, a commitment to collaboration and cultivating distributed expertise. The relationship between 2 provincial organizations (BC Transplant and BC Renal Agency) was identified as key to enabling the mandate and processes for LDKT. Five barriers were identified that arose from silos between provincial organizations and manifested as inconsistencies in coordinating LDKT along the spectrum of care. These were divided accountability structures, disconnected care processes, missed training opportunities, inequitable access by region and financial burden for donors and recipients.InterpretationWe found strong links between provincial infrastructure and the processes that facilitate or impede timely intervention and referral of patients for LDKT. Our findings have implications for policy-makers and provide opportunities for cross-jurisdictional comparative analyses.
| S-EPMC9022938 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In 2013, the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN)/ United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) mandated that transplant centers collect data on living kidney donors (LKDs) at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years postdonation, with policy-defined thresholds for the proportion of complete living donor follow-up (LDF) data submitted in a timely manner (60 days before or after the expected visit date). While mandated, it was unclear how centers across the country would perform in meeting thresholds, given potential donor and center-level challenges of LDF. To better understand the impact of this policy, we studied Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data for 31,615 LKDs between January 2010 and June 2015, comparing proportions of complete and timely LDF form submissions before and after policy implementation. We also used multilevel logistic regression to assess donor- and center-level characteristics associated with complete and timely LDF submissions. Complete and timely 2-year LDF increased from 33% prepolicy (January 2010 through January 2013) to 54% postpolicy (February 2013 through June 2015) (p < 0.001). In an adjusted model, the odds of 2-year LDF increased by 22% per year prepolicy (p < 0.001) and 23% per year postpolicy (p < 0.001). Despite these annual increases in LDF, only 43% (87/202) of centers met the OPTN/UNOS-required 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year LDF thresholds for LKDs who donated in 2013. These findings motivate further evaluation of LDF barriers and the optimal approaches to capturing outcomes after living donation.
| S-EPMC5690895 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Socioeconomically deprived individuals with renal disease are less likely to receive a live-donor kidney transplant than less-deprived individuals. This qualitative study aimed to identify reasons for the observed socioeconomic disparity in live-donor kidney transplantation.A qualitative study using face-to-face in-depth semistructured interviews.A UK tertiary renal referral hospital and transplant centre.Purposive sampling was used to select deceased-donor transplant recipients from areas of high socioeconomic deprivation (SED) (19 participants), followed by a low SED comparison group (13 participants), aiming for maximum diversity in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, primary renal disease and previous renal replacement therapy.Participants were interviewed following their routine transplant clinic review. Interviews were digitally audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded using NVivo software and analysed using the constant comparison method described in Grounded Theory.Themes common and distinct to each socioeconomic group emerged. 6 themes appeared to distinguish between individuals from areas of high and low SED. 4 themes were distinct to participants from areas of high SED: (1) Passivity, (2) Disempowerment, (3) Lack of social support and (4) Short-term focus. 2 themes were distinct to the low SED group: (1) Financial concerns and (2) Location of donor.Several of the emerging themes from the high SED individuals relate to an individual's lack of confidence and skill in managing their health and healthcare; themes that are in keeping with low levels of patient activation. Inadequate empowerment of socioeconomically deprived individuals by healthcare practitioners was also described. Financial concerns did not emerge as a barrier from interviews with the high SED group. Interventions aiming to redress the observed socioeconomic inequity should be targeted at both patients and clinical teams to increase empowerment and ensure shared decision-making.
| S-EPMC4785291 | biostudies-other
Project description:Urine was obtained from healthy kidney donors, from transplanted kidneys intrasurgery, at postoperative day 1 and at later timepoints. Exosomes were isolated and measured using nLC-MS/MS. For details, see the accompanying manuscript.
2021-08-30 | PXD005219 | Pride
Project description:IntroductionOwing to organ shortage, the number of kidney transplantation (KT) involving older adult living donors is increasing. We aimed to investigate the effects of living-donor age and donor-recipient age differences on KT outcomes.MethodsThis single-center, retrospective cohort study involved 853 adult LDKTs performed between January 2008 and December 2018. Recipients were stratified into the following 5 groups based on donor age and donor-recipient age difference: donor age, 30 to 49 years and age difference, -10 to 15 years; donor age, 50 to 69 years and age difference, -10 to 15 years; donor age, 50 to 69 years and age difference, 15 to 40 years; donor age, 70 to 89 years and age difference, -10 to 15 years; and donor age, 70 to 89 years and age difference, 15 to 40 years (groups 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively). As a primary outcome, the risk of graft loss was investigated. The secondary outcomes were postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs) and mortality rates of recipients.ResultsGroup 4, representing KT between older adult donors and older adult recipients, had the highest graft loss risk and mortality. The eGFRs of the recipients from donors aged 70 to 89 years (groups 4 and 5) were significantly lower than those from donors in the other groups. Although the differences in the eGFR between groups 4 and 5 were not significant, the eGFR of group 4 was lower than that of group 5 at 6 months post-KT.ConclusionLDKTs from older adult donors to older adult recipients resulted in the worst graft survival and mortality rates.
| S-EPMC8640566 | biostudies-literature