Cost-effectiveness and system-wide impact of using Hepatitis C-viremic donors for heart transplant.

BACKGROUND: The advent of direct-acting antiviral therapy for Hepatitis C (HCV) has made using HCV-viremic donors a viable strategy to address the donor shortage in heart transplantation. We employed a large-scale simulation to evaluate the impact and cost-effectiveness of using HCV-viremic donors for heart transplant. METHODS: We simulated detailed histories from time of listing until death for the real-world cohort of all adults listed for heart transplant in the United States from July 2014 to June 2019 (n = 19,346). This population was imputed using historical data and captures "real-world" heterogeneity in geographic and clinical characteristics. We estimated the impact of an intervention in which all candidates accept HCV+ potential donors (n = 472) on transplant volume, waitlist outcomes, and lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). RESULTS: The intervention produced 232 more transplants, 132 fewer delistings due to deterioration, and 50 fewer waitlist deaths within this 5-year cohort and reduced wait times by 3% to 11% (varying by priority status). The intervention was cost-effective, adding an average of 0.08 QALYs per patient at a cost of $124 million ($81,892 per QALY). DAA therapy and HCV care combined account for 11% this cost, with the remainder due to higher costs of transplant procedures and routine post-transplant care. The impact on transplant volume varied by blood type and region and was correlated with donor-to-candidate ratio (ρ = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: Transplanting HCV+ donor hearts is likely to be cost-effective and improve waitlist outcomes, particularly in regions and subgroups experiencing high donor scarcity.

Patient blood management and blood conservation - Complimentary concepts and solutions for blood establishments and clinical services in South Africa and beyond.

Blood transfusions come with risks and high costs, and should be utilized only when clinically indicated. Decisions to transfuse are however not always well informed, and lack of clinician knowledge and education on good clinical transfusion practices contribute to the inappropriate use of blood. Low and middle-income countries in particular take much strain in their efforts to address blood safety challenges, demand-supply imbalances, high blood costs as well as high disease burdens, all of which impact blood usage and blood collections. Patient blood management (PBM), which is a patient-focused approach aimed at improving patient outcomes by preemptively diagnosing and correcting anaemia and limiting blood loss by cell salvage, coagulation optimization and other measures, has become a major approach to addressing many of the challenges mentioned. The associated decrease in the use of blood and blood products may be perceived as being in competition with blood conservation measures, which is the more traditional, but primarily product-focused approach. In this article, we hope to convey the message that PBM and blood conservation should not be seen as competing concepts, but rather complimentary strategies with the common goal of improving patient care. This offers opportunity to improve the culture of transfusion practices with relief to blood establishments and clinical services, not only in South Africa and LMICs, but everywhere. With the COVID-19 pandemic impacting blood supplies worldwide, this is an ideal time to call for educational interventions and awareness as an active strategy to improve transfusion practices, immediately and beyond.

Early Allograft Dysfunction Increases Hospital Associated Costs After Liver Transplantation-A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

Concepts to ameliorate the continued mismatch between demand for liver allografts and supply include the acceptance of allografts that meet extended donor criteria (ECD). ECD grafts are generally associated with an increased rate of complications such as early allograft dysfunction (EAD). The costs of liver transplantation for the health care system with respect to specific risk factors remain unclear and are subject to change. We analyzed 317 liver transplant recipients from 2013 to 2018 for outcome after liver transplantation and hospital costs in a German transplant center. In our study period, 1-year survival after transplantation was 80.1% (95% confidence interval: 75.8%-84.6%) and median hospital stay was 33 days (interquartile rage: 24), with mean hospital costs of €115,924 (SD €113,347). There was a positive correlation between costs and laboratory Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (rs = 0.48, P < 0.001), and the development of EAD increased hospital costs by €26,229. ECD grafts were not associated with a higher risk of EAD in our cohort. When adjusting for recipient-associated risk factors such as laboratory Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, recipient age, and split liver transplantation with propensity score matching, only EAD and cold ischemia increased total costs. Conclusion: Our data show that EAD leads to significantly higher hospital costs for liver transplantation, which are primarily attributed to recipient health status. Strategies to reduce the incidence of EAD are needed to control costs in liver transplantation.

Cost-effectiveness of Using Kidneys From HCV-Viremic Donors for Transplantation Into HCV-Uninfected Recipients.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Less than 4% of patients with kidney failure receive kidney transplants. Although discard rates of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-viremic kidneys are declining, ~39% of HCV-viremic kidneys donated between 2018 and 2019 were discarded. Highly effective antiviral agents are now available to treat chronic HCV infection. Thus, our objective was to examine the cost-effectiveness of transplanting kidneys from HCV-viremic donors into HCV-uninfected recipients. STUDY DESIGN: Markov state transition decision model. Data sources include Medline search results, bibliographies from relevant English language articles, Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, and the US Renal Data System. SETTING & POPULATION: US patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis who are on kidney transplant waiting lists. INTERVENTION(S): Transplantation with an HCV-unexposed kidney versus transplantation with an HCV-viremic kidney and HCV treatment. OUTCOMES: Effectiveness measured in quality-adjusted life-years and costs measured in 2018 US dollars. MODEL, PERSPECTIVE, AND TIMEFRAME: We used a health care system perspective with a lifelong time horizon. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, transplantation with an HCV-viremic kidney was more effective and less costly than transplantation with an HCV-unexposed kidney because of the longer waiting times for HCV-unexposed kidneys, the substantial excess mortality risk while receiving dialysis, and the high efficacy of direct-acting antiviral agents for HCV infection. Transplantation with an HCV-viremic kidney was also preferred in sensitivity analyses of multiple model parameters. The strategy remained cost-effective unless waiting list time for an HCV-viremic kidney exceeded 3.1 years compared with the base-case value of 1.56 year. LIMITATIONS: Estimates of waiting times for patients willing to accept an HCV-viremic kidney were based on data for patients who received HCV-viremic kidney transplants. CONCLUSIONS: Transplanting kidneys from HCV-viremic donors into HCV-uninfected recipients increased quality-adjusted life expectancy and reduced costs compared with a strategy of transplanting kidneys from HCV-unexposed donors.

APOL1 Genotyping in Potential African American Living Kidney Donors: Utility and Cost-Effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Apolipoprotein L1 gene (APOL1) variants predispose to nondiabetic kidney disease in African American (AA) patients. Here, we share our experience with APOL1 genotyping of AA potential living kidney donors and offer a perspective on its utility and cost-effectiveness in this population. METHODS: Since May 2017, all potential AA living kidney donors at our center underwent APOL1 genotyping early in the donor evaluation process. APOL1 high-risk individuals were declined, whereas those with low-risk genotype continued with further evaluation and testing. RESULTS: One out of 26 potential donors had high-risk genotype and was therefore declined. The rest were eligible to continue the donor evaluation process and 7 of them underwent donor nephrectomy without any complications. A crude cost analysis utilizing our sample suggested probable cost-effectiveness of APOL1 genotyping as it can prevent earlier onset of chronic kidney disease in AA donors. CONCLUSION: We propose a role for systematically incorporating APOL1 genotyping in the evaluation and informed consent process of potential AA donors while acknowledging the controversial considerations associated with it.

Behavioral economics-A framework for donor organ decision-making in pediatric heart transplantation.

The high discard rate of pediatric donor hearts presents a major challenge for children awaiting heart transplantation. Recent literature identifies several factors that contribute to the disparities in pediatric donor heart usage, including regulatory oversight, the absence of guidelines on pediatric donor heart acceptance, and variation among transplant programs. However, a likely additional contributor to this issue are the behavioral factors influencing transplant team decisions in donor offer scenarios, a topic that has not yet been studied in detail. Behavioral economics and decision psychology provide an excellent foundation for investigating decision-making in the pediatric transplant setting, offering key insights into the behavior of transplant professionals. We conducted a systematic review of published literature in pediatric heart transplant related to behavioral economics and the psychology of decision-making. In this review, we draw on paradigms from these two domains in order to examine how existing aspects of the transplant environment, including regulatory oversight, programmatic variation, and allocation systems, may precipitate potential biases surrounding donor offer decisions. Recognizing how human decision behavior influences donor acceptance is a first step toward improving utilization of potentially viable pediatric donor hearts.

Equity-Efficiency Trade-offs Associated With Alternative Approaches to Deceased Donor Kidney Allocation: A Patient-level Simulation.

BACKGROUND: The number of patients waiting to receive a kidney transplant outstrips the supply of donor organs. We sought to quantify trade-offs associated with different approaches to deceased donor kidney allocation in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs, and access to transplantation. METHODS: An individual patient simulation model was developed to compare 5 different approaches to kidney allocation, including the 2006 UK National Kidney Allocation Scheme (NKAS) and a QALY maximization approach designed to maximize health gains from a limited supply of donor organs. We used various sources of patient-level data to develop multivariable regression models to predict survival, health state utilities, and costs. We simulated the allocation of kidneys from 2200 deceased donors to a waiting list of 5500 patients and produced estimates of total lifetime costs and QALYs for each allocation scheme. RESULTS: Among patients who received a transplant, the QALY maximization approach generated 48 045 QALYs and cost £681 million, while the 2006 NKAS generated 44 040 QALYs and cost £625 million. When also taking into consideration outcomes for patients who were not prioritized to receive a transplant, the 2006 NKAS produced higher total QALYs and costs and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £110 741/QALY compared with the QALY maximization approach. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the 2006 NKAS, a QALY maximization approach makes more efficient use of deceased donor kidneys but reduces access to transplantation for older patients and results in greater inequity in the distribution of health gains between patients who receive a transplant and patients who remain on the waiting list.

An assessment of the risk, cost-effectiveness, and perceived benefits of anti-parvovirus B19 tested blood products.

BACKGROUND: Parvovirus B19 (B19V) can cause severe anemia, hydrops foetalis, and even death in vulnerable patients. To prevent transfusion-transmitted B19V infection of at-risk patients, B19V antibody screening of blood donors was implemented. The cost-effectiveness of this intervention is unclear, as the likelihood of transmission through blood and subsequent complications for recipients are unknown. This study estimates the cost-effectiveness of anti-B19V donor screening in the Netherlands. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The estimates needed for the cost-effectiveness model were: the occurrence of B19V in Dutch blood donors, the number of anti-B19V tested products required by hospitals, the likelihood of morbidity and mortality given B19V infection, treatment costs, and screening costs. These estimates were obtained from literature and observational data. When data were unavailable, structured expert judgment elicitation and statistical modeling were applied. RESULTS: The costs of preventing one transfusion transmitted B19V infection are estimated at €68,942 (€42,045 - €102,080). On average, 1.25 cases of morbidity and 0.12 cases of mortality are prevented annually. Although the perceived risk of transfusion transmitted B19V infection was low, half of the treating physicians favored anti-B19V screening. CONCLUSION: The estimated mortality and morbidity caused by B19V infection was low in the risk groups. The cost-effectiveness ratio is similar to other blood safety screening measures. No guidance exists to evaluate the acceptability of this ratio. The explicit overview of costs and effects may further guide the discussion of the desirability of B19V safe blood products.

Virology Tests in Brain-Dead Donors: Let the Bills Run Up?

OBJECTIVES: In the organ donation process, screening for serologic markers for a selection of agents is essential to prevent infection transmission. The screening of donors for specific potential infections can never absolutely exclude the risk of transmission. For reevaluation of serology tests, we analyzed results of tests requested for all brain-dead donors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our study included all actual brain-dead donors who were seen from January 2017 to February 2018, received ancillary tests, and had final confirmation of brain death at our organ procurement unit. RESULTS: Most candidates for organ and tissue donation were seronegative for intended agents. We found that 14.4% of the samples were suspicious for infectious and needed further evaluation; 12.2% of donors had positive results corresponding to hepatitis B, and only 1.9% were rejected from donation. Requisiteness to DNA detection for hepatitis B virus infection was mainly related to age over 50 years. CONCLUSIONS: The process of donor screening must systemically assess the donor. At the final stage, essential biomarkers must be investigated. Application of more caution in evaluation of older donors, including more screening tests before transfer to the operating room, remains mandatory.

Cost-effectiveness of alternative changes to a national blood collection service.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of changing opening times, introducing a donor health report and reducing the minimum inter-donation interval for donors attending static centres. BACKGROUND: Evidence is required about the effect of changes to the blood collection service on costs and the frequency of donation. METHODS/MATERIALS: This study estimated the effect of changes to the blood collection service in England on the annual number of whole-blood donations by current donors. We used donors' responses to a stated preference survey, donor registry data on donation frequency and deferral rates from the INTERVAL trial. Costs measured were those anticipated to differ between strategies. We reported the cost per additional unit of blood collected for each strategy versus current practice. Strategies with a cost per additional unit of whole blood less than £30 (an estimate of the current cost of collection) were judged likely to be cost-effective. RESULTS: In static donor centres, extending opening times to evenings and weekends provided an additional unit of whole blood at a cost of £23 and £29, respectively. Introducing a health report cost £130 per additional unit of blood collected. Although the strategy of reducing the minimum inter-donation interval had the lowest cost per additional unit of blood collected (£10), this increased the rate of deferrals due to low haemoglobin (Hb). CONCLUSION: The introduction of a donor health report is unlikely to provide a sufficient increase in donation frequency to justify the additional costs. A more cost-effective change is to extend opening hours for blood collection at static centres.

Use of hepatitis C-positive grafts in hepatitis C-negative liver transplant recipients is cost effective.

BACKGROUND: The number of patients needing liver transplantation (LT) exceeds the number of available allografts. The current opioid epidemic in this country has increased the number of potential donors infected with hepatitis C (HCV). METHODS: We assessed the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) by comparing the costs and number of liver transplants performed using HCV-positive and HCV-negative grafts into patients without HCV infection in a decision analysis model with a 1-year time horizon. RESULTS: The use of HCV-positive grafts was found to have an ICER below $50 000 across all MELD scores. Using our baseline cohort with a model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score of 15-22, the ICER was $21 233/additional LT performed. As the MELD scores increased, the ICER decreased. Above a MELD score of 23, the use of HCV-positive grafts became cost saving (-$115 419). Our model was robust to all variables tested in the sensitivity analyses, except drug costs. CONCLUSION: The results of our decision analysis model highlight the potential pharmacoeconomic benefit of utilizing HCV-positive grafts in LT candidates who are not infected with HCV. The use of HCV-positive grafts is at least cost effective and even cost saving in patients with MELD scores above 23.

Understanding the sex disparity in living kidney donation.

Living donors are the preferred source of organs for kidney transplantation, which is the treatment modality of choice for end-stage kidney disease. Health care systems widely promote living kidney donation. However, women are consistently overrepresented among living donors. The reasons behind the sex-based disparity in living kidney donation remain poorly understood. Compared to women, men possess a greater amount of kidney function, and the higher deceased donation rate among men reflects their higher overall kidney quality. A plausible medical explanation for the sex-based disparity in living kidney donation includes an uncompromising emphasis on preserving donor health, with less emphasis placed on organ quality, which is the main criterion in deceased donor selection. On the other hand, consent to deceased donation is also greater in women, indicating their greater desire to donate even though fewer women actually become deceased donors. Therefore, nonmedical reasons for the sex disparity in living donation must be sought. Increased empathic distress or emotional memory; a greater sense of responsibility, urgency, and impulsiveness with increased reaction to empathy; a different body image; and a different social status may all contribute to greater living kidney donation in women. Economic inequity may be the singular explanation when personal worth links to economic worth. To better understand the sex disparity in living kidney donation, we need better data on the reasons behind both nondonation and donor rejection after evaluation in clinical practice. Nondirected living kidney donation provides unique opportunities to minimize factors such as emotional distress, empathy, and impulsiveness. More liberal acceptance criteria for donors with isolated medical abnormalities and testing legitimate donor reimbursement strategies based on actual income levels rather than a fixed amount can assist in both ascertaining the reasons behind the sex disparity in living kidney donation and increasing overall living kidney donation rates.

A literature-based cost analysis of tissue plasminogen activator for prevention of biliary stricture in donation after circulatory death liver transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: This study sought to approximate the cost-effectiveness of tPA utilization for prevention of biliary strictures (PTBS) in donation after circulatory death liver transplantation (DCD-LT). METHODS: Previously-reported PTBS rates in DCD-LT with and without tPA were used to calculate the number needed to treat (NNT) for prevention of one PTBS. The incremental cost of PTBS was then used to determine the cost effectiveness of tPA for prevention of PTBS. RESULTS: The incidence of PTBS in the setting of tPA administration was 20%, while incidence in patients without tPA use was 43% (p < 0.001). Meta-analysis demonstrated a risk reduction of 15.7%, which translated into a NNT of 6.4. Cost associated with treating 6.4 patients was $50,353. Based on an incremental cost of $81,888 associated with PTBS management, use of tPA in DCD-LT protocols was estimated to save $31,528 per PTBS prevented. CONCLUSION: Utilization of tPA in DCD-LT protocols represents one possible cost-effective strategy for prevention of PTBS in DCD-LT.

Value-Based Care in Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy: Challenges and Opportunities.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Improved tolerability and outcomes after hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), along with the availability of alternative donors, have expanded its use. With this growth, and the development of additional cellular therapies, we also aim to increase effectiveness, efficiency, and the quality of the care provided. Fundamentally, the goal of value-based care is to have better health outcomes with streamlined processes, improved patient experience, and lower costs for both the patients and the health care system. HCT and cellular therapy treatments are multiphase treatments which allow for interventions at each juncture. RECENT FINDINGS: We present a summary of the current literature with focus on program structure and overall system capacity, coordination of therapy across providers, standardization across institutions, diversity and disparities in care, patient quality of life, and cost implications. Each of these topics provides challenges and opportunities to improve value-based care for HCT and cellular therapy patients.

Testing for HTLV 1 and HTLV 2 among blood donors in Western Saudi Arabia: prevalence and cost considerations.

BACKGROUND: Screening all blood donors for human T-cell lymphotropic viruses 1 and 2 (HTLV 1 and HTLV 2) is mandatory in Saudi Arabia. The aim of this study is to evaluate the results and costs associated with the current testing policy for HTLV 1 and HTLV 2 in blood donors at King Abdulaziz University Hospital (KAUH), Jeddah. STUDY DESIGNS AND METHODS: Donor-testing results from Blood Transfusion Services at KAUH were reviewed over a 10-year period, from January 2006 through December 2015. All donors were screened using chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay. Reactive samples were then tested by Western blot for confirmation. Costs associated with testing were calculated. RESULTS: Data of 107 419 donations in the study period were reviewed. Saudi nationals constituted 51 168 donors (47·6%). Of 107 419 blood donors tested for HTLV 1 and HTLV 2 antibody, and 95 (0·088%) donors were reactive to screening tests. None of the samples found to be reactive to screening tests was positive by Western blot. The average cost of testing was US$ 171 870 per year. CONCLUSION: No donors were confirmed to have HTLV 1 and HTLV 2 in this cohort exceeding 100 000 donors. We propose changes to the policy mandating universal testing by replacing it with universal leukodepletion coupled with targeted screening to donors coming from endemic area or donors at risk. Such changes are expected to lead to a reduction of testing cost without affecting safety.

Use of Organs From Hepatitis C Virus-Positive Donors for Uninfected Recipients: A Potential Cost-Effective Approach to Save Lives?

BACKGROUND: Organs from hepatitis C virus (HCV) seropositive (HCVpos) individuals are seldom used for transplantation because of the risk of disease transmission. Because transmitted HCV is now amenable to effective treatment, we estimated the potential impact of using HCVpos deceased donor organs for transplantation. METHODS: The Potential Donor Audit of patients (<80 years) dying in UK critical care units and the UK Transplant Registry was searched to identify HCVpos potential and proceeding deceased donors. Donor organ quality was assessed using validated donor organ quality indices. Cost analysis was performed by comparing the cumulative cost of direct-acting antivirals with hemodialysis and renal transplantation. RESULTS: Between 2009 and 2016, 120 patients identified from the Potential Donor Audit were not considered as potential donors because of the presence of HCV. Between 2000 and 2015, 244 HCVpos potential deceased donors were identified from the UK Transplant Registry, and 76 (31%) proceeded to donation, resulting in 63 liver, 27 kidney, and 2 heart transplants. Recipient and graft survival was not adversely impacted by donor HCVpos status. Most (69%) offered organs were declined because of positive virology although their quality was similar to that of other transplanted organs. The additional costs of treating recipients exposed to HCV by receiving a HCVpos kidney was cost-neutral with dialysis 5 years from transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: HCVpos donors represent a potential source of organs for HCV seronegative recipients as many good quality HCVpos donor organs are not currently used for transplantation. This change in practice may increase access to transplantation without having an adverse effect on transplant outcome.

The Lived Experience of "Being Evaluated" for Organ Donation: Focus Groups with Living Kidney Donors.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Comprehensive evaluations are required to safeguard voluntarism and minimize harm to living kidney donors. This process is lengthy, invasive, and emotionally challenging, with up to one fifth of potential donors opting out. We aimed to describe donors' experiences of the evaluation process. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We conducted 14 focus groups involving 123 kidney donors who completed donation from three transplant centers (Australia and Canada). Transcripts were analyzed thematically. RESULTS: We identified six themes reflecting donors' experiences of evaluation. The themes that related to perseverance included emotional investment (prioritizing the recipient's health, desperation for a normal life, protecting eligibility, shame of disappointing others, and overcoming opposition), undeterred by low risks (medical confidence and protection, worthwhile gamble, inherent invincibility, and normalizing risks), and mental preparation (avoiding regret, resolving decisional ambivalence, and managing expectations of recovery). The challenges included underlying fears for health (processing alarming information, unsettling uncertainty, and preoperative panic), system shortfalls (self-advocacy in driving the process, stressful urgency, inconsistent framing of safety, unnerving bodily scrutiny, questioning risk information, and draining finances); and lifestyle interference (living in limbo, onerous lifestyle disruption, and valuing flexibility). CONCLUSIONS: Previous donors described an emotional investment in donating and determination to protect their eligibility, despite having concerns for their health, financial and lifestyle disruption, and opposition from their family or community. Our findings suggest the need to prepare donors for surgery and recovery, minimize anxiety and lifestyle burdens, ensure that donors feel comfortable expressing their fears and concerns, reduce unnecessary delays, and make explicit the responsibilities of donors in their assessment process.

Potential Impact of Risk and Loss Aversion on the Process of Accepting Kidneys for Transplantation.

Behavioral economic theory suggests that people make decisions based on maximizing perceived value; however, this may be influenced more by the risk of loss rather than of potential gain. Additionally, individuals may seek certainty over uncertainty. These are termed loss aversion and risk aversion, respectively. Loss aversion is particularly sensitive to how the decision is "framed." Thus, labeling a kidney as high Kidney Donor Profile Index results in higher discard rates because this creates a nonlinearity in perceived risk. There is also evidence that the perceived loss due to regulatory sanction results in increased organ discard rates. This may be due to the overuse of terminology that stresses regulatory sanctions and thus perpetuates fear of loss through a form of nudging. Our goal is to point out how these concepts of behavioral economics may negatively influence the decision process to accept these suboptimal organs. We hope to make the community more aware of these powerful psychological influences and thus potentially increase the utilization of these suboptimal organs. Further, we would urge regulatory bodies to avoid utilizing strategies that frame outcomes in terms of loss due to flagging and build models that are less prone to uncertain expected versus observed outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness of the screening of blood donations for hepatitis E virus in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of hepatitis E virus (HEV) has increased substantially in Europe recently, thereby threatening blood safety. A cost-effectiveness analysis for HEV screening of blood donations in the Netherlands was performed. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A simulation model was developed to mimic the process of donation, infections in the donor population, donation testing, and transmission to transfusion recipients. The variability of viral loads among donors was modeled using observed loads. The number of (incurable) chronic HEV infections among organ and stem cell transplant patients and the costs avoided by implementing blood screening were estimated. RESULTS: HEV screening of whole blood donations in pools of 24 would prevent 4.52 of the 4.94 transfusion-associated chronic HEV infections expected annually, at approximately €310,000 per prevented chronic case. Per case not curable by ribavirin prevention, costs are approximately 10 times higher. Selective screening, if logistically feasible, could reduce screening costs by 85%. Sensitivity analyses show that uncertainty in the HEV transmissibility and the frequency of HEV clearing greatly impact the estimated cost-effectiveness. Of all HEV infections nationwide one in 700 is estimated to be due to blood transfusion, while for chronic infections this is one in 3.5. CONCLUSION: Despite uncertainties in our estimates, preventing HEV transmission by screening of blood donations appears not excessively expensive compared to other blood-screening measures in the Netherlands. However, the impact on HEV disease burden may be relatively small as only a minority of all HEV cases is transmitted by blood transfusion.

Socioeconomic deprivation and barriers to live-donor kidney transplantation: a qualitative study of deceased-donor kidney transplant recipients.

OBJECTIVES: 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. DESIGN: A qualitative study using face-to-face in-depth semistructured interviews. SETTING: A UK tertiary renal referral hospital and transplant centre. PARTICIPANTS: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.