Maintaining Equity and Access: Successful Implementation of a Virtual Kidney Transplantation Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Maintaining access to kidney transplantation during a pandemic is a challenge, particularly for centers that serve a large rural and minority patient population with an additional burden of travel. The aim of this article was to describe our experience with the rollout and use of a virtual pretransplantation evaluation platform to facilitate ongoing transplant waitlisting during the early peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis of the process improvement project implemented to continue the evaluation of potential kidney transplantation candidates and ensure waitlist placement during the COVID-19 pandemic. Operational metrics include transplantation volume per month, referral volume per month, pretransplantation patients halted before completing an evaluation per month, evaluations completed per month, and patients waitlisted per month. RESULTS: Between April and September 2020, a total of 1,258 patients completed an evaluation. Two hundred and forty-seven patients were halted during this time period before completing a full evaluation. One hundred and fifty-two patients were presented at selection and 113 were placed on the waitlist. In addition, the number of patients in the active referral phase was able to be reduced by 46%. More evaluations were completed within the virtual platform (n = 930 vs n = 880), yielding similar additions to the waitlist in 2020 (n = 282) vs 2019 (n = 308) despite the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The virtual platform allowed continued maintenance of a large kidney transplantation program despite the inability to have in-person visits. The value of this platform will likely transform our approach to the pretransplantation process and provides an additional valuable method to improve patient equity and access to transplantation.

Presymptomatic genetic testing in children for neurofibromatosis 2.

Genetic testing in children, when there is a question of whether or not there is a clear medical benefit that will accrue to the child, is a controversial topic within the health care community. A convenience sample of 10 parents from nine families who had made the decision whether or not to test their children for the neurofibromatosis 2 gene mutation was asked in interviews to describe why they made their choice about presymptomatic testing for this late-onset disease. Findings from a narrative analysis revealed how the nine parents who tested or intended to test their young children saw the decision as a pathway to knowledge that would help the family unit. All parents interviewed noted that their decision was informed by their health team and was not difficult to make. Implications of these findings for bioethical analysis are presented.