Referral and evaluation for kidney transplantation among patients with lupus nephritis-related end-stage kidney disease.

OBJECTIVE: For the majority of patients with lupus nephritis-related end-stage kidney disease (LN-ESKD), kidney transplant is associated with better outcomes than dialysis. Access to kidney transplant requires an initial referral to a transplant center and medical evaluation prior to waitlisting. The study's objective was to examine access to these early steps in the kidney transplant process among patients with LN-ESKD. METHODS: Adults who began treatment for ESKD in the Southeast, Northeast, New York, or Ohio River Valley U.S. regions from 1/1/2012 to 12/31/2019, followed through 6/30/2021, were identified from the United States Renal Data System. Referral and evaluation start data were collected from 28 of 48 transplant centers across these regions. The exposure was primary cause of ESKD (LN-ESKD vs other-ESKD). The outcomes were referral and evaluation start at a transplant center. Cox models quantified the association between LN-ESKD (vs other-ESKD) and referral and evaluation start. RESULTS: Among 192,318 patients initiating treatment for ESKD, 0.4% had LN-ESKD. Over half (58%) of LN-ESKD patients were referred before study end, and among those referred, 66% started the evaluation. In adjusted analyses, patients with LN-ESKD were referred (HR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.99, 1.19) and started the transplant evaluation (HR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.28) at a higher rate than patients with other-ESKD. Among referred patients with LN-ESKD, the median time from ESKD start to referral was 2.9 months (IQR: <1 to 11.7 months), which is similar to patients with other-ESKD (median 2.6 months, IQR: <1 to 8.8 months). CONCLUSIONS: Among incident patients with ESKD, having a primary diagnosis of LN-ESKD versus other-ESKD is associated with higher rates of early transplant access outcomes. Despite this, patients with LN-ESKD (vs other-ESKD) are less likely to be preemptively referred (i.e., referred prior to ESKD start) for kidney transplant. While providers may no longer be delaying the early steps in the kidney transplantation process among this patient population, there is still room for improvement in the rates of preemptive referral. Access to kidney transplant referral prior to ESKD could result in increased transplant rates and better transplant outcomes for patients with LN-ESKD.

Professional Fulfillment, Burnout, and Turnover Intention Among US Dialysis Patient Care Technicians: A National Survey.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: High professional fulfillment and low burnout and staff turnover are necessary for a stable dialysis workforce. We explored professional fulfillment, burnout, and turnover intention among US dialysis patient care technicians (PCTs). STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional national survey. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: National Association of Nephrology Technicians/Technologists (NANT) members in March-May 2022 (N=228; 42.6% aged 35-49 years, 83.9% female, 64.6% White, 85.3% non-Hispanic). EXPOSURE: Likert-scale items (range, 0-4) related to professional fulfillment and 2 domains of burnout (work exhaustion and interpersonal disengagement) and dichotomous items related to turnover intention. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Summary statistics (percentages, means, medians) were calculated for individual items and average domain scores. Burnout was defined by combined work exhaustion and interpersonal disengagement scores of≥1.3 and professional fulfillment by a score≥3.0. RESULTS: Most respondents (72.8%) worked ≥40 hours per week. Overall scores for work exhaustion, interpersonal disengagement, and professional fulfillment (median [IQR]) were 2.3 (1.3-3.0), 1.0 (0.3-1.8), and 2.6 (2.0-3.2), respectively; 57.5% reported burnout, and 37.3% reported professional fulfillment. Important contributors to burnout and professional fulfillment included salary (66.5%), supervisor support (64.0%), respect from other dialysis staff (57.8%), sense of purpose about work (54.5%), and hours worked per week (52.9%). Only 52.6% reported that they plan to be working as a dialysis PCT in 3 years. Free text responses reinforced perceived excessive work burden and lack of respect. LIMITATIONS: Limited generalizability to all US dialysis PCTs. CONCLUSIONS: More than half of dialysis PCTs reported burnout, driven by work exhaustion; only about one-third reported professional fulfillment. Even among this relatively engaged group of dialysis PCTs, only half intended to continue working as PCTs. Because of the critical, frontline role of dialysis PCTs in the care of patient receiving in-center hemodialysis, strategies to improve morale and reduce turnover are imperative.

Research Inclusion Across the Lifespan: A Good Start, but There Is More Work to Be Done.

While older adults account for a disproportionate amount of healthcare spending, they are often underrepresented in clinical research needed to guide clinical care. The purpose of this perspective is to make readers aware of new data on age at enrollment for participants included in National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded clinical research. We highlight key findings of relevance to general internal medicine and suggest ways readers could support the inclusion of older adults in clinical research. Data from the NIH Research Inclusion Statistics Report show that there were 881,385 participants enrolled in all NIH-funded clinical research in 2021, of whom 170,110 (19%) were 65 years and older. However, on average, studies included a far lower percentage of older adults. Additionally, there were many conditions for which overall enrollment rates for older adults were lower than would be expected. For example, while 10% of participants in studies related to diabetes were ≥ 65 years old, older individuals represent 43% of all prevalent diabetes in the USA. Researchers should work with clinicians to advocate for older adults and ensure their participation in clinical research. Best practices and resources for overcoming common barriers to the inclusion of older adults in research could also be disseminated.

Work Experiences of the Interdisciplinary Dialysis Workforce in the United States: A Cross-Sectional Survey.

INTRODUCTION: Suboptimal dialysis care may be in part due to staff issues such as job dissatisfaction, burnout, work overload, high staff turnover, and inconsistent training. Here, we leveraged data collected in a recent national survey to provide an initial, comprehensive description of current work experiences of US dialysis care providers. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 1,240 active US dialysis clinic staff members (physicians, advanced practice providers, nurse managers/clinic coordinators, nurses, social workers, dietitians, and patient care technicians), who were recruited via emails to society membership lists. Respondents were asked about a wide variety of work experiences, including job satisfaction, professional fulfillment, and burnout (Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index), work culture, experiences of hostility and violence, and self-reported medical errors. Responses were summarized overall and compared by clinic role. RESULTS: Most of the survey respondents, representing all 50 US states, were aged 35-49 years (58.3%) or ≥50 years (23.5%), female (60.7%), and white (59.8%; 23.1% black, and 10.0% Asian); 82.1% had been in their current role for at least 1 year. Most US dialysis staff responding to our survey reported being generally satisfied with their jobs (mean rating of 7.9 on 0-10 scale), but only 54.4% met criteria for professional fulfillment, and 32.8% met criteria for burnout, driven by high scores in the work exhaustion domain. Related issues, including high workloads, lack of respect (including experiences of violence and hostility), lack of autonomy, and suboptimal patient environments (in terms of both safety and patient centeredness), were commonly reported among dialysis care providers, although their prevalence often differed by provider type. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the dialysis workforce may be at a critical point. Preventing further staff burnout, which could lead to even greater staffing shortages and worse working conditions among those who continue to provide dialysis care, is essential.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Kidney Replacement Therapies Among Adults With Kidney Failure: An Observational Study of Variation by Patient Age.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients present with kidney failure at younger ages than White patients. Younger patients are also more likely to receive transplants and home dialysis than in-center hemodialysis (ICHD), but it is unknown whether racial and ethnic disparities in treatment differ by age. We compared use of kidney replacement therapies between racial and ethnic groups among patients with incident kidney failure overall and by age. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 830,402 US adult (age >21 years) patients initiating kidney failure treatment during the period of 2011-2018. EXPOSURES: Patient race and ethnicity (non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic White, Hispanic, or other) and age group (22-44, 45-64, 65-74, or 75-99 years). OUTCOME: Treatment modality (transplant, peritoneal dialysis [PD], home hemodialysis [HHD], or ICHD) as of day 90 of treatment. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Differences in treatment modalities were quantified for patient subgroups defined by race and ethnicity and by age. Log-binomial regression models were fit to estimate adjusted risk ratios. RESULTS: 81% of patients were treated with ICHD, 3.0% underwent transplants (85% preemptive, 57% living-donor), 10.5% were treated with PD, and 0.7% were treated with HHD. Absolute disparities in treatment were most pronounced among patients aged 22-44 years. Compared with non-Hispanic White patients, whose percentages of treatment with transplant, PD, and HHD were 10.9%, 19.0%, and 1.2%, respectively, non-Hispanic Black patients were less commonly treated with each modality (unadjusted percentages, 1.8%, 13.8%, and 0.6%, respectively), as were Hispanic patients (4.4%, 16.9%, and 0.5%, respectively; all differences P < 0.001). After adjustment, the largest relative disparities were observed for transplant among the 22-44-year age group; compared with non-Hispanic White patients, the adjusted risk ratios for non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients were 0.21 (95% CI, 0.19-0.23) and 0.47 (95% CI, 0.43, 0.51), respectively. LIMITATIONS: Race and ethnicity data not self-reported. CONCLUSIONS: Among adults with incident kidney failure, racial and ethnic disparities in transplant and home dialysis use are most pronounced among the youngest adult patient age group.

Variation in Racial Disparities in Liver Transplant Outcomes Across Transplant Centers in the United States.

Little is known about the role that transplant centers may play in perpetuating racial disparities after liver transplantation, which are unexplained by patient-level factors. We examined variation in between-center and within-center disparities among 34,114 Black and White liver transplant recipients in the United States from 2010 to 2017 using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipient (SRTR) data. We used Cox proportional hazards models to calculate transplant center-specific Black-White hazard ratios and hierarchical survival analysis to examine potential effect modification of the race-survival association by transplant center characteristics, including transplant volume, proportion of Black patients, SRTR quality rating, and region. Models were sequentially adjusted for clinical, socioeconomic, and center characteristics. After adjustment, Black patients experienced 1.11 excess deaths after liver transplant per 100 person-years compared with White patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-1.56), corresponding to a 21% increased mortality risk (95% CI, 1.12-1.31). Although there was substantial variation in this disparity across transplant centers, there was no evidence of effect modification by transplant center volume, proportion of minority patients seen, quality rating, or region. We found significant racial disparities in survival after transplant, with substantial variation in this disparity across transplant centers that was not explained by selected center characteristics. This is the first study to directly evaluate the role transplant centers play in racial disparities in transplant outcomes. Further assessment of the qualitative factors that may drive disparities, such as selection processes and follow-up care, is needed to create effective center-level interventions to address health inequity.

Improving Primary Care Delivery for Patients Receiving Maintenance Hemodialysis.

The beneficial impact of primary care, focused on all aspects of a patient's health (rather than a disease-specific focus) is well established. Recognized benefits include greater receipt of preventive care and counseling, lower use of emergency care and hospitalization for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions, and decreased early mortality. Although the importance of primary care and care coordination at the primary care/specialty interface is well recognized, the role of primary care within traditional and emerging care models for patients receiving in-center maintenance hemodialysis remains ill-defined. In this perspective article, we will describe: (1) the role of primary care for patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis and the current evidence regarding the receipt of primary care among these patients; (2) the key challenges to delivery of primary care in these complex cases, including suboptimal care coordination between nephrology and primary care providers, the intensity of dialysis care, and the limited capacity of nephrologists and primary care providers to meet the broad health needs of hemodialysis patients; (3) potential strategies for improving the delivery of primary care for patients receiving hemodialysis; and (4) future research requirements to improve primary care delivery for this high-risk population.

COVID-19 infection control measures and outcomes in urban dialysis centers in predominantly African American communities.

BACKGROUND: Emory Dialysis serves an urban and predominantly African American population at its four outpatient dialysis facilities. We describe COVID-19 infection control measures implemented and clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 in the Emory Dialysis facilities. METHODS: Implementation of COVID-19 infection procedures commenced in February 2020. Subsequently, COVID-19 preparedness assessments were conducted at each facility. Patients with COVID-19 from March 1-May 31, 2020 were included; with a follow-up period spanning March-June 30, 2020. Percentages of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 were calculated, and characteristics of COVID-19 patients were summarized as medians or percentage. Baseline characteristics of all patients receiving care at Emory Dialysis (i.e. Emory general dialysis population) were presented as medians and percentages. RESULTS: Of 751 dialysis patients, 23 (3.1%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. The median age was 67.0 years and 13 patients (56.6%) were female. Eleven patients (47.8%) were residents of nursing homes. Nineteen patients (82.6%) required hospitalization and 6 patients (26.1%) died; the average number of days from a positive SARS-CoV-2 (COVID) test to death was 16.8 days (range 1-34). Two patients dialyzing at adjacent dialysis stations and a dialysis staff who cared for them, were diagnosed with COVID-19 in a time frame that may suggest transmission in the dialysis facility. In response, universal masking in the facility was implemented (prior to national guidelines recommending universal masking), infection control audits and re-trainings of PPE were also done to bolster infection control practices. CONCLUSION: We successfully implemented recommended COVID-19 infection control measures aimed at mitigating the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Most of the patients with COVID-19 required hospitalizations. Dialysis facilities should remain vigilant and monitor for possible transmission of COVID-19 in the facility.

Making sense of DialysisConnect: a qualitative analysis of stakeholder viewpoints on a web-based information exchange platform to improve care transitions between dialysis clinics and hospitals.

BACKGROUND: U.S. hospitals and dialysis centers are penalized for 30-day hospital readmissions of dialysis patients, despite little infrastructure to facilitate care transitions between these settings. We are developing a third-party web-based information exchange platform, DialysisConnect, to enable clinicians to view and exchange information about dialysis patients during admission, hospitalization, and discharge. This health information technology solution could serve as a flexible and relatively affordable solution for dialysis facilities and hospitals across the nation who are seeking to serve as true partners in the improved care of dialysis patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the perceived coherence of DialysisConnect to key clinical stakeholders, to prepare messaging for implementation. METHODS: As part of a hybrid effectiveness-implementation study guided by Normalization Process Theory, we collected data on stakeholder perceptions of continuity of care for patients receiving maintenance dialysis and a DialysisConnect prototype before completing development and piloting the system. We conducted four focus groups with stakeholders from one academic hospital and associated dialysis centers [hospitalists (n = 5), hospital staff (social workers, nurses, pharmacists; n = 9), nephrologists (n = 7), and dialysis clinic staff (social workers, nurses; n = 10)]. Transcriptions were analyzed thematically within each component of the construct of coherence (differentiation, communal specification, individual specification, and internalization). RESULTS: Participants differentiated DialysisConnect from usual care variously as an information dashboard, a quick-exchange communication channel, and improved discharge information delivery; some could not differentiate it in terms of workflow. The purpose of DialysisConnect (communal specification) was viewed as fully coherent only for communicating outside of the same healthcare system. Current system workarounds were acknowledged as deterrents for practice change. All groups delegated DialysisConnect tasks (individual specification) to personnel besides themselves. Partial internalization of DialysisConnect was achieved only by dialysis clinic staff, based on experience with similar technology. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing DialysisConnect for clinical users in both settings will require presenting a composite picture of current communication processes from all stakeholder groups to correct single-group misunderstandings, as well as providing data about care transitions communication beyond the local context to ease resistance to practice change.

Burnout and Emotional Well-Being among Nephrology Fellows: A National Online Survey.

BACKGROUND: Physician burnout and emotional distress are associated with work dissatisfaction and provision of suboptimal patient care. Little is known about burnout among nephrology fellows. METHODS: Validated items on burnout, depressive symptoms, and well being were included in the American Society of Nephrology annual survey emailed to US nephrology fellows in May to June 2018. Burnout was defined as an affirmative response to two single-item questions of experiencing emotional exhaustion or depersonalization. RESULTS: Responses from 347 of 808 eligible first- and second-year adult nephrology fellows were examined (response rate=42.9%). Most fellows were aged 30-34 years (56.8%), male (62.0%), married or partnered (72.6%), international medical graduates (62.5%), and pursuing a clinical nephrology fellowship (87.0%). Emotional exhaustion and depersonalization were reported by 28.0% and 14.4% of the fellows, respectively, with an overall burnout prevalence of 30.0%. Most fellows indicated having strong program leadership (75.2%), positive work-life balance (69.2%), presence of social support (89.3%), and career satisfaction (73.2%); 44.7% reported a disruptive work environment and 35.4% reported depressive symptoms. Multivariable logistic regression revealed a statistically significant association between female gender (odds ratio [OR], 1.90; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.09 to 3.32), poor work-life balance (OR, 3.97; 95% CI, 2.22 to 7.07), or a disruptive work environment (OR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.48 to 4.66) and burnout. CONCLUSIONS: About one third of US nephrology fellows surveyed reported experiencing burnout and depressive symptoms. Further exploration of burnout-especially that reported by female physicians, as well as burnout associated with poor work-life balance or a disruptive work environment-is warranted to develop targeted efforts that may enhance the educational experience and emotional well being of nephrology fellows.

Dialysis facility referral and start of evaluation for kidney transplantation among patients treated with dialysis in the Southeastern United States.

Variability in transplant access exists, but barriers to referral and evaluation are underexplored due to lack of national surveillance data. We examined referral for kidney transplantation evaluation and start of the evaluation among 34 857 incident, adult (18-79 years) end-stage kidney disease patients from 690 dialysis facilities in the United States Renal Data System from January 1, 2012 through August 31, 2016, followed through February 2018 and linked data to referral and evaluation data from nine transplant centers in Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. Multivariable-adjusted competing risk analysis examined each outcome. The median within-facility cumulative percentage of patients referred for kidney transplantation within 1 year of dialysis at the 690 dialysis facilities in Network 6 was 33.7% (interquartile range [IQR]: 25.3%-43.1%). Only 48.3% of referred patients started the transplant evaluation within 6 months of referral. In multivariable analyses, factors associated with referral vs evaluation start among those referred at any time differed. For example, black, non-Hispanic patients had a higher rate of referral (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.18-1.27), but lower evaluation start among those referred (HR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.88-0.98), vs white non-Hispanic patients. Barriers to transplant varied by step, and national surveillance data should be collected on early transplant steps to improve transplant access.

Association of sociocultural factors with initiation of the kidney transplant evaluation process.

Although research shows that minorities exhibit higher levels of medical mistrust, perceived racism, and discrimination in healthcare settings, the degree to which these underlying sociocultural factors preclude end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients from initiating kidney transplant evaluation is unknown. We telephone surveyed 528 adult ESRD patients of black or white race referred for evaluation to a Georgia transplant center (N = 3) in 2014-2016. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine associations between sociocultural factors and evaluation initiation, adjusting for demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic characteristics. Despite blacks (n = 407) reporting higher levels of medical mistrust (40.0% vs 26.4%, P < .01), perceived racism (55.5% vs 18.2%, P < .01), and experienced discrimination (29.0% vs 15.7%, P < .01) than whites (n = 121), blacks were only slightly less likely than whites to initiate evaluation (49.6% vs 57.9%, P = .11). However, after adjustment, medical mistrust (odds ratio [OR]: 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39, 0.91), experienced discrimination (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.41, 0.95), and perceived racism (OR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.40, 0.92) were associated with lower evaluation initiation. Results suggest that sociocultural disparities exist in early kidney transplant access and occur despite the absence of a significant racial disparity in evaluation initiation. Interventions to reduce disparities in transplantation access should target underlying sociocultural factors, not just race.

Primary Care Physicians' Perceived Barriers to Nephrology Referral and Co-management of Patients with CKD: a Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Effective co-management of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) between primary care physicians (PCPs) and nephrologists is increasingly recognized as a key strategy to ensure the delivery of efficient and high-quality CKD care. However, the co-management of patients with CKD remains suboptimal. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify PCPs' perceptions of key barriers and facilitators to effective co-management of patients with CKD at the PCP-nephrology interface. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative study SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Community-based PCPs in four US cities: Baltimore, MD; St. Louis, MO; Raleigh, NC; and San Francisco, CA APPROACH: We conducted four focus groups of PCPs. Two members of the research team coded transcribed audio-recorded interviews and identified major themes. KEY RESULTS: Most of the 32 PCPs (59% internists and 41% family physicians) had been in practice for > 10 years (97%), spent ≥ 80% of their time in clinical care (94%), and practiced in private (69%) or multispecialty group practice (16%) settings. PCPs most commonly identified barriers to effective co-management of patients with CKD focused on difficulty developing working partnerships with nephrologists, including (1) lack of timely adequate information exchange (e.g., consult note not received or CKD care plan unclear); (2) unclear roles and responsibilities between PCPs and nephrologists; and (3) limited access to nephrologists (e.g., unable to obtain timely consultations or easily contact nephrologists with concerns). PCPs expressed a desire for "better communication tools" (e.g., shared electronic medical record) and clear CKD care plans to facilitate improved PCP-nephrology collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions facilitating timely adequate information exchange, clear delineation of roles and responsibilities between PCPs and nephrologists, and greater access to specialist advice may improve the co-management of patients with CKD.

Long-term outcomes among Medicare patients readmitted in the first year of hemodialysis: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Readmission within 30 days of hospital discharge is common and costly among end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. Little is known about long-term outcomes after readmission. We estimated the association between hospital admissions and readmissions in the first year of dialysis and outcomes in the second year. METHODS: Data on incident dialysis patients with Medicare coverage were obtained from the United States Renal Data System (USRDS). Readmission patterns were summarized as no admissions in the first year of dialysis (Admit-), at least one admission but no readmissions within 30 days (Admit+/Readmit-), and admissions with at least one readmission within 30 days (Admit+/Readmit+).We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the association between readmission pattern and mortality, hospitalization, and kidney transplantation, accounting for demographic and clinical covariates. RESULTS: Among the 128,593 Medicare ESRD patients included in the study, 18.5% were Admit+/Readmit+, 30.5% were Admit+/Readmit-, and 51.0% were Admit-. Readmit+/Admit+ patients had substantially higher long-term risk of mortality (HR = 3.32 (95% CI, 3.21-3.44)), hospitalization (HR = 4.46 (95% CI, 4.36-4.56)), and lower likelihood of kidney transplantation (HR = 0.52 (95% CI, 0.44-0.62)) compared to Admit- patients; these associations were stronger than those among Admit+/Readmit- patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with readmissions in the first year of dialysis were at substantially higher risk of poor outcomes than either patients who had no admissions or patients who had hospital admissions but no readmissions. Identifying strategies to both prevent readmission and mitigate risk among patients who had a readmission may improve outcomes among this substantial, high-risk group of ESRD patients.

Delivery of a patient-friendly functioning report to improve patient-centeredness of dialysis care: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Provider recognition of level of functioning may be suboptimal in the dialysis setting, and this lack of recognition may lead to less patient-centered care. We aimed to assess whether delivery of an app-based, individualized functioning report would improve patients' perceptions of patient-centeredness of care. METHODS: In this pre-post pilot study at three outpatient dialysis facilities in metropolitan Atlanta, an individualized functioning report-including information on physical performance, perceived physical functioning, and community mobility-was delivered to patients receiving hemodialysis (n = 43) and their providers. Qualitative and quantitative approaches were used to gather patient and provider feedback to develop and assess the report and app. Paired t test was used to test for differences in patient perception of patient-centeredness of care (PPPC) scores (range, 1 = most patient-centered to 4 = least patient-centered) 1 month after report delivery. RESULTS: Delivery of the reports to both patients and providers was not associated with a subsequent change in patients' perceptions of patient-centeredness of their care (follow-up vs. baseline PPPC scores of 2.35 vs. 2.36; P > 0.9). However, patients and providers generally saw the potential of the report to improve the patient-centeredness of care and reacted positively to the individualized reports delivered in the pilot. Patients also reported willingness to undergo future assessments. However, while two-thirds of surveyed providers reported always or sometimes discussing the reports they received, most (98%) participating patients reported that no one on the dialysis care team had discussed the report with them within 1 month. CONCLUSIONS: Potential lack of fidelity to the intervention precludes definitive conclusions about effects of the report on patient-centeredness of care. The disconnect between patients' and providers' perceptions of discussions of the report warrants future study. However, this study introduces a novel, individualized, multi-domain functional report that is easily implemented in the setting of hemodialysis. Our pilot study provides guidance for improving its use both clinically and in future pragmatic research studies, both within and beyond the dialysis population.

Racial/ethnic disparities in waitlisting for deceased donor kidney transplantation 1 year after implementation of the new national kidney allocation system.

The impact of a new national kidney allocation system (KAS) on access to the national deceased-donor waiting list (waitlisting) and racial/ethnic disparities in waitlisting among US end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients is unknown. We examined waitlisting pre- and post-KAS among incident (N = 1 253 100) and prevalent (N = 1 556 954) ESRD patients from the United States Renal Data System database (2005-2015) using multivariable time-dependent Cox and interrupted time-series models. The adjusted waitlisting rate among incident patients was 9% lower post-KAS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90-0.93), although preemptive waitlisting increased from 30.2% to 35.1% (P < .0001). The waitlisting decrease is largely due to a decline in inactively waitlisted patients. Pre-KAS, blacks had a 19% lower waitlisting rate vs whites (HR: 0.81; 95% CI, 0.80-0.82); following KAS, disparity declined to 12% (HR: 0.88; 95% CI, 0.85-0.90). In adjusted time-series analyses of prevalent patients, waitlisting rates declined by 3.45/10 000 per month post-KAS (P < .001), resulting in ≈146 fewer waitlisting events/month. Shorter dialysis vintage was associated with greater decreases in waitlisting post-KAS (P < .001). Racial disparity reduction was due in part to a steeper decline in inactive waitlisting among minorities and a greater proportion of actively waitlisted minority patients. Waitlisting and racial disparity in waitlisting declined post-KAS; however, disparity remains.

Awareness of the New Kidney Allocation System among United States Dialysis Providers with Low Waitlisting.

It is unknown whether dialysis facility staff are aware of the new kidney allocation system implemented in December 2014, which changed how deceased donor kidneys are allocated and waiting time is calculated. U.S. dialysis facilities with low annual waitlisting (<15.2%) were surveyed as part of a large randomized study. Among 653 facilities, 57.9% of staff were aware of the policy change, with medical directors (84.4%) being more aware than social workers (73.3%), facility administrators (53.1%), nurse managers (46.4%), and other staff (43.8%). Targeted education among dialysis facilities with low waitlisting may help extend the reach of the new policy.

Burden and correlates of readmissions related to pulmonary edema in US hemodialysis patients: a cohort study.

Background: Pulmonary edema is prevalent and may be a common cause of hospital readmissions in hemodialysis patients. We aimed to estimate the national burden of, and identify correlates of, readmissions related to pulmonary edema among hemodialysis patients. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study using national registry data, we identified prevalent US hemodialysis patients (n = 215 251) with index admissions while under Medicare primary coverage in 2011-13. We defined readmissions as admissions occurring within 30 days of the index discharge and pulmonary edema-related readmissions as readmissions with discharge diagnoses of fluid overload, heart failure or pulmonary edema. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine odds ratios (ORs) for pulmonary edema-related readmissions by patient and index admission characteristics. Results: About one-quarter (23%) of index hospital admissions were followed by a readmission, with nearly half (44%) of the readmissions being associated with pulmonary edema. The strongest independent correlate of pulmonary edema-related readmission was a pulmonary edema-related index admission [OR = 2.32; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.22-2.41]. With the exception of dialysis vintage <1 year (OR = 1.18; 95% CI 1.14-1.22), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR = 1.34; 95% CI 1.29-1.38), dialysis non-compliance (OR = 1.53; 95% CI 1.41-1.64) and congestive heart failure (OR = 1.85; 95% CI 1.77-1.93), patient characteristics were not generally associated with higher risk of pulmonary edema-related readmission. Conclusions: Readmissions related to pulmonary edema are common in hemodialysis patients. Interventions aimed at preventing such readmissions could have a substantial impact on readmissions overall, particularly targeted at incident hemodialysis patients with a prior history of heart failure and patients initially admitted for pulmonary edema.