Kidney transplant program waitlisting rate as a metric to assess transplant access.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Paul S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7980228 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Racial disparities persist in the United States renal transplantation process. Previous studies suggest that the distance between a patient's residence and the transplant facility may associate with disparities in transplant waitlisting. We examined this possibility in a cohort study using data for incident, adult ESRD patients (1998 to 2002) from the ESRD Network 6, which includes Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. We linked data with the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) transplant registry through 2005 and with the 2000 U.S. Census geographic data. Of the 35,346 subjects included in the analysis, 12% were waitlisted, 57% were black, 50% were men, 20% were impoverished, 45% had diabetes as the primary etiology of ESRD, and 73% had two or more comorbidities. The median distance from patient residence to the nearest transplant center was 48 mi. After controlling for multiple covariates, distance from patient residence to transplant center did not predict placement on the transplant waitlist. In contrast, race, neighborhood poverty, gender, age, diabetes, hypertension, body mass index, albumin, and the use of erythropoietin at dialysis initiation was associated with waitlisting. As neighborhood poverty increased, the likelihood of waitlisting decreased for blacks compared with whites in each poverty category; in the poorest neighborhoods, blacks were 57% less likely to be waitlisted than whites. This study suggests that improving the allocation of kidneys may require a focus on poor communities.
| S-EPMC2689891 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Many patients with ESKD face barriers in completing the steps required to obtain a transplant. These eight sequential steps are medical suitability, interest in transplant, referral to a transplant center, first visit to center, transplant workup, successful candidate, waiting list or identify living donor, and receive transplant. This study sought to determine the effect of navigators on helping patients complete these steps. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS:Our study was a cluster randomized, controlled trial involving 40 hemodialysis facilities and four transplant centers in Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2016. Four trained kidney transplant recipients met regularly with patients on hemodialysis at 20 intervention facilities, determined their step in the transplant process, and provided tailored information and assistance in completing that step and subsequent steps. Patients at 20 control facilities continued to receive usual care. Primary study outcomes were waiting list placement and receipt of a deceased or living donor transplant. An exploratory outcome was first visit to a transplant center. RESULTS:Before the trial, intervention (1041 patients) and control (836 patients) groups were similar in the proportions of patients who made a first visit to a transplant center, were placed on a waiting list, and received a deceased or living donor transplant. At the end of the trial, intervention and control groups were also similar in first visit (16.1% versus 13.8%; difference, 2.3%; 95% confidence interval, -0.8% to 5.5%), waitlisting (16.3% versus 13.8%; difference, 2.5%; 95% confidence interval, -1.2% to 6.1%), deceased donor transplantation (2.8% versus 2.2%; difference, 0.6%; 95% confidence interval, -0.8% to 2.1%), and living donor transplantation (1.2% versus 1.0%; difference, 0.1%; 95% confidence interval, -0.9% to 1.1%). CONCLUSIONS:Use of trained kidney transplant recipients as navigators did not increase first visits to a transplant center, waiting list placement, and receipt of deceased or living donor transplants.
| S-EPMC6218827 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background & aimsSex disparities in liver transplantation (LT) for chronic liver disease have been described. It is unclear if similar disparities exist for acute liver failure (ALF).MethodsAdults waitlisted for LT from 2002 to 2016 with ALF were investigated using the United Network of Organ Sharing database. Clinical characteristics and causative aetiologies were compared between men and women who were waitlisted Status-1. Differences in LT, waitlist removal, and 1-year post-transplant survival were explored.ResultsOf 8,408 patients waitlisted for LT with ALF, 41.3% of men and 63.9% of women were waitlisted Status-1 (p <0.001). Women had significantly higher international normalised ratio, higher frequency of grade 3-4 hepatic encephalopathy, and different aetiologies of ALF than men. On univariable analysis, women were less likely to undergo LT (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] 0.90; 95% CI 0.84-0.97) and were more likely to die or be removed from the waitlist as a result of clinical deterioration (SHR 1.14; 95% CI 1.002-1.30) than men. The disparities in LT (HR 0.95; 95% CI 0.87-1.03) and death/clinical deterioration (SHR 1.13; 95% CI 0.99-1.29) were no longer significant on multivariable analysis. On multivariable analysis, there was no difference in 1-year post-transplant survival between men and women.ConclusionsWomen with ALF are more likely to be waitlisted Status-1 than men. There were no clear disparities in LT or waitlist removal. Sex differences in LT and waitlist removal were attenuated on fully adjusted models, suggesting that these disparities may in part be mitigated by Status-1 listing.Lay summaryWomen with acute liver failure appear to be sicker than men and more often require urgent Status-1 waitlisting. There were no sex disparities in waitlist removal because of clinical deterioration or liver transplantation. This is in contrast to chronic liver disease, where sex disparities exist. The Status-1 waitlisting that women with acute liver failure receive may in part mitigate sex disparities in liver transplantation.
| S-EPMC7817503 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) implemented a new Kidney Allocation System (KAS) in December 2014 that is expected to substantially reduce racial disparities in kidney transplantation among waitlisted patients. However, not all dialysis facility clinical providers and end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients are aware of how the policy change could improve access to transplant.MethodsWe describe the ASCENT (Allocation System Changes for Equity in KidNey Transplantation) study, a randomized controlled effectiveness-implementation study designed to test the effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention to improve access to the early steps of kidney transplantation among dialysis facilities across the United States. The multicomponent intervention consists of an educational webinar for dialysis medical directors, an educational video for patients and an educational video for dialysis staff, and a dialysis-facility specific transplant performance feedback report. Materials will be developed by a multidisciplinary dissemination advisory board and will undergo formative testing in dialysis facilities across the United States.ResultsThis study is estimated to enroll ~600 U.S. dialysis facilities with low waitlisting in all 18 ESRD Networks. The co-primary outcomes include change in waitlisting, and waitlist disparity at 1 year; secondary outcomes include changes in facility medical director knowledge about KAS, staff training regarding KAS, patient education regarding transplant, and a medical director's intent to refer patients for transplant evaluation.ConclusionThe results from the ASCENT study will demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention designed to increase access to the deceased-donor kidney waitlist and reduce racial disparities in waitlisting.
| S-EPMC5568836 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study aimed to determine whether the closure of a functioning arteriovenous (AV) access affects the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and to compare outcomes according to the timing of AV access closure after kidney transplantation (KT). From 2009 to 2015, medical records were retrospectively reviewed for 142 kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) who underwent AV access closure. The 142 KTRs were categorized into three groups: AV access closure was performed within 6 months after KT in Group 1 (n = 45), at 6-12 months after KT in Group 2 (n = 49), and at 12-24 months after KT in Group 3 (n = 48). The baseline (at the time of AV access closure) and follow-up eGFR values during the 3-year follow-up period were compared. Linear mixed model analysis revealed no significant association between longitudinally observed eGFR values and the amount of time elapsed after AV access closure in the study population (P = 0.36). There was no significant association between 3-year eGFR values and the timing of AV access closure (P = 0.58). In conclusion, after successful KT, AV access closure did not affect the eGFR significantly, and the timing of AV access closure was not significantly associated with outcomes.
| S-EPMC6905568 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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.Research expertise of the lead authors and Medline search of studies assessing the impact of education interventions on access to KT and LDKT.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.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.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.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.
| S-EPMC6058418 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about the impact of dialysis facility treatment philosophy on access to transplant. The aim of our study was to determine the relationship between the dialysis facility transplant philosophy and facility-level access to kidney transplant waitlisting.MethodsA 25-item questionnaire administered to Southeastern dialysis facilities (n = 509) in 2012 captured the facility transplant philosophy (categorized as 'transplant is our first choice', 'transplant is a great option for some', and 'transplant is a good option, if the patient is interested'). Facility-level waitlisting and facility characteristics were obtained from the 2008-2011 Dialysis Facility Report. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association between the dialysis facility transplant philosophy and facility waitlisting performance (dichotomized using the national median), where low performance was defined as fewer than 21.7% of dialysis patients waitlisted within a facility.ResultsFewer than 25% (n = 124) of dialysis facilities reported 'transplant is our first option'. A total of 131 (31.4%) dialysis facilities in the Southeast were high-performing facilities with respect to waitlisting. Adjusted analysis showed that facilities who reported 'transplant is our first option' were twice (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.0-3.9) as likely to have high waitlisting performance compared to facilities who reported that 'transplant is a good option, if the patient is interested'.ConclusionsFacilities with staff who had a more positive transplant philosophy were more likely to have better facility waitlisting performance. Future prospective studies are needed to further investigate if improving the kidney transplant philosophy in dialysis facilities improves access to transplantation.
| S-EPMC4560967 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Rationale & objectiveIntact cognition is generally a prerequisite for navigating through and completing evaluation for kidney transplantation. Despite kidney transplantation being contraindicated for those with severe dementia, screening for more mild forms of cognitive impairment before referral is rare. Candidates may have unrecognized cognitive impairment, which may prolong evaluation, elevate mortality risk, and hinder access to kidney transplantation. We estimated the burden of cognitive impairment and its association with access to kidney transplantation and waitlist mortality.Study designProspective cohort study.Setting & participants3,630 participants (January 2009 to June 2018) with cognitive function measured (by the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination [3MS]) at kidney transplantation evaluation at 1 of 2 transplantation centers.PredictorsCognitive impairment (3MS score<80).OutcomesListing, waitlist mortality, and kidney transplantation.Analytical approachWe estimated the adjusted chance of listing (Cox regression), risk for waitlist mortality (competing-risks regression), and kidney transplantation rate (Poisson regression) by cognitive impairment. Given potential differences in cause of cognitive impairment among those with and without diabetes, we tested whether these associations differed by diabetes status using a Wald test.ResultsAt evaluation, 6.4% of participants had cognitive impairment, which was independently associated with 25% lower chance of listing (adjusted HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61-0.91); this association did not differ by diabetes status (Pinteraction=0.07). There was a nominal difference by diabetes status for the association between cognitive impairment and kidney transplantation rate (Pinteraction=0.05), while the association between cognitive impairment and waitlist mortality differed by diabetes status kidney transplantation rates (Pinteraction=0.02). Among candidates without diabetes, those with cognitive impairment were at 2.47 (95% CI, 1.31-4.66) times greater risk for waitlist mortality; cognitive impairment was not associated with this outcome among candidates with diabetes.LimitationsSingle measure of cognitive impairment.ConclusionsCognitive impairment is associated with a lower chance of being placed on the waitlist, and among patients without diabetes, with increased mortality on the waitlist. Future studies should investigate whether implementation of screening for cognitive impairment improves these outcomes.
| S-EPMC7311233 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimating equation incorporating both cystatin C and creatinine perform better than those using creatinine or cystatin C alone in patients with reduced GFR. Whether this equation performs well in kidney transplant recipients cross-sectionally, and more importantly, over time has not been addressed.We analyzed four GFR estimating equations in participants of the Angiotensin II Blockade for Chronic Allograft Nephropathy Trial (NCT 00067990): Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equations based on serum cystatin C and creatinine (eGFR (CKD-EPI-Creat+CysC)), cystatin C alone (eGFR (CKD-EPI-CysC)), creatinine alone (eGFR (CKD-EPI-Creat)) and the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease study equation (eGFR (MDRD)). Iothalamate GFR served as a standard (mGFR).mGFR, serum creatinine, and cystatin C shortly after transplant were 56.1 ± 17.0 ml/min/1.73 m(2), 1.2 ± 0.4 mg/dl, and 1.2 ± 0.3 mg/l respectively. eGFR (CKD-EPI-Creat+CysC) was most precise (R(2) = 0.50) but slightly more biased than eGFR (MDRD); 9.0 ± 12.7 versus 6.4 ± 15.8 ml/min/1.73 m(2), respectively. This improved precision was most evident in recipients with mGFR >60 ml/min/1.73 m(2). For relative accuracy, eGFR (MDRD) and eGFR (CKD-EPI-Creat+CysC) had the highest percentage of estimates falling within 30% of mGFR; 75.8 and 68.9%, respectively. Longitudinally, equations incorporating cystatin C most closely paralleled the change in mGFR.eGFR (CKD-EPI-Creat+CysC) is more precise and reflects GFR change over time reasonably well. eGFR (MDRD) had superior performance in recipients with mGFR between 30 and 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2).
| S-EPMC4026030 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceInactive patients on the kidney transplant wait-list have a higher mortality. The implications of this status change on transplant outcomes between racial/ethnic groups are unknown.ObjectivesTo determine if activity status changes differ among races/ethnicities and levels of sensitization, and if these differences are associated with transplant probability after implementation of the Kidney Allocation System.Design, setting, and participantsA multistate model was constructed from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network kidney transplant database (December 4, 2014, to September 8, 2016). The time interval followed Kidney Allocation System implementation and provided at least 1-year follow-up for all patients. The model calculated probabilities between active and inactive status and the following competing risk outcomes: living donor transplant, deceased donor transplant, and death/other. This retrospective cohort study included 42 558 patients on the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network kidney transplant wait-list following Kidney Allocation System implementation. To rule out time-varying confounding from relisting, analysis was limited to first-time registrants. Owing to variations in listing practices, primary center listing data were used for dually listed patients. Individuals listed for another organ or pancreatic islets were excluded. Analysis began July 2017.Main outcome and measuresProbabilities were determined for transitions between active and inactive status and the following outcome states: active to living donor transplant, active to deceased donor transplant, active to death/other, inactive to living donor transplant, inactive to deceased donor transplant, and inactive to death/other.ResultsThe median (interquartile range) age at listing was 55.0 (18.0-89.0) years, and 26 535 of 42 558 (62.4%) were men. White individuals were 43.3% (n = 18 417) of wait-listed patients, while black and Hispanic individuals made up 27.8% (n = 11 837) and 19.5% (n = 8296), respectively. Patients in the calculated plasma reactive antibody categories of 0% or 1% to 79% showed no statistically significant difference in transplant probability among races/ethnicities. White individuals had an advantage in transplant probability over black individuals in calculated plasma reactive antibody categories of 80% to 89% (hazard ratio [HR], 1.8 [95% CI, 1.4-2.2]) and 90% or higher (HR, 2.4 [95% CI, 2.1-2.6]), while Hispanic individuals had an advantage over black individuals in the calculated plasma reactive antibody group of 90% or higher (HR, 2.5 [95% CI, 2.1-2.8]). Once on the inactive list, white individuals were more likely than Hispanic individuals (HR, 1.2 [95% CI, 1.17-1.3]) or black individuals (HR, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.3-1.4]) to resolve issues for inactivity resulting in activation.Conclusions and relevanceFor patients who are highly sensitized, there continues to be less access to kidney transplant in the black population after the implementation of the Kidney Allocation System. Health disparities continue after listing where individuals from minority groups have greater difficulty in resolving issues of inactivity.
| S-EPMC6583835 | biostudies-literature