Marketing yourself in social media as a global health organization: lessons to be learned.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether X, formerly known as Twitter, is being used effectively to advance the goals of International Volunteers in Urology (IVUmed). How is X activity associated with end-user engagement? METHODS: Monthly analytics of the X account @IVUmed were reviewed between September 2014 and November 2022 using https://analytics.twitter.com/ . Outcomes included tweets, mentions, impressions, engagements, interactions, followers, and profile visits. Statistical analysis using Mann-Whitney U test and Spearman's rank-order correlation was performed. Top tweet content between December 2020 and November 2022 was also analyzed and assigned one of seven different categories: research, workshops, mission statement, educational materials, fundraising, individual spotlight, and other. RESULTS: Of @IVUmed's 1668 followers, 1334 (80.0%) were individuals. One thousand one hundred twenty-six (84.4%) individuals listed their locations with the majority (79.8%) residing in high-income countries. Tweet impressions have increased over time; they were significantly higher (p < 0.01) on average after the onset of COVID-19 in March 2020. From December 2020 to November 2022, new followers were positively correlated with tweet impressions (p < 0.01), total mentions (p < 0.01), and profile visits (p < 0.01). Profile visits were positively correlated with total tweets (p < 0.01). The content categories for monthly top tweets that proportionally garnered the most engagements were workshops (50%) and individual spotlight (29%), despite not being the most tweeted about content categories. CONCLUSION: Non-profit organizations wishing to increase their web-based outreach can benefit from increased primary X activity. While not evaluated in this study, it may also improve fundraising capabilities. Nevertheless, periodic review of account activity is important to ensure engagement of the targeted audience.

Significant improvements, but consistent disparities in survival for African Americans after liver transplantation.

Despite improvements in survival across races in the past 20 years, African Americans have worse liver transplant outcomes after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). This study aims at quantifying the change in disparities between African Americans and other races in survival after OLT. We retrospectively analyzed the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database for patient data for candidates who received a liver transplant between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2017. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression indicated similar decreases in mortality over time for each race with a decrease in mortality for African Americans: 2010-2012 (HR = .930), 2012-2015 (HR = .882), and 2015-2017 (HR = .883) when compared to 2007-2010. Risk of mortality for African Americans compared to Caucasians varied across the 4 eras: 2007-2010 (HR = 1.083), 2010-2012 (HR = 1.090), 2012-2015 (HR = 1.070), and 2015-2017 (HR = 1.125). While African Americans have seen increases in survival in the past decade, a similar increase in survival for other races leaves a significant survival disparity in African Americans.

Retrospective Analysis of the Impact of High- and Low-Quality Donor Livers for Patients with High-Acuity Illness.

BACKGROUND Patients with high-acuity liver failure have increased access to marginal and split liver options, owing to historically high waitlist mortality rates. While most research states that donor liver quality has no impact on patients with high-acuity illness, there have been inconsistencies in recent research on how liver quality impacts post-transplant outcomes for these patients. We aimed to quantify donor liver quality with various post-transplantation patient outcomes for patients with high-acuity illness. MATERIAL AND METHODS Using the liver donor risk index (LDRI), model for end stage liver disease (MELD), and clinically relevant recipient factors, we used multivariate logistic regression to analyze how donor liver quality affects varying measures of patient outcomes for 9923 high-acuity patients from June 18, 2013, to June 18, 2022. RESULTS Using LDRI, high-quality livers had a significant protective impact on high-acuity patient mortality, compared with low-quality livers (OR=0.695 [0.549, 0.879], P=0.002). High-quality livers also had significant impact on graft survival (OR=0.706 [0.558, 0.894], P=0.004). Two sensitivity patient mortality analyses, excluding patients with status 1A and hepatocellular carcinoma, showed significant protective findings for high-quality livers. High-quality livers had insignificant outcomes on long-term survivor mortality, length of hospitalization, and primary non-function outcomes, compared with low-quality donor livers. CONCLUSIONS While our findings suggest donor quality has an impact on high-acuity patient outcomes, these findings indicate further research is needed in intent-to-treat analysis on clinical offer data to provide a clearer finding of how donor quality affects patients with high-acuity illness.