Did Access to Ambulatory Care Moderate the Associations Between Visit Mode and Ancillary Services Utilization Across the COVID-19 Pandemic Period?

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: In recent years, 2 circumstances changed provider-patient interactions in primary care: the substitution of virtual (eg, video) for in-person visits and the COVID-19 pandemic. We studied whether access to care might affect patient fulfillment of ancillary services orders for ambulatory diagnosis and management of incident neck or back pain (NBP) and incident urinary tract infection (UTI) for virtual versus in-person visits. METHODS: Data were extracted from the electronic health records of 3 Kaiser Permanente Regions to identify incident NBP and UTI visits from January 2016 through June 2021. Visit modes were classified as virtual (Internet-mediated synchronous chats, telephone visits, or video visits) or in-person. Periods were classified as prepandemic [before the beginning of the national emergency (April 2020)] or recovery (after June 2020). Percentages of patient fulfillment of ancillary services orders were measured for 5 service classes each for NBP and UTI. Differences in percentages of fulfillments were compared between modes within periods and between periods within the mode to assess the possible impact of 3 moderators: distance from residence to primary care clinic, high deductible health plan (HDHP) enrollment, and prior use of a mail-order pharmacy program. RESULTS: For diagnostic radiology, laboratory, and pharmacy services, percentages of fulfilled orders were generally >70-80%. Given an incident NBP or UTI visit, longer distance to the clinic and higher cost-sharing due to HDHP enrollment did not significantly suppress patients' fulfillment of ancillary services orders. Prior use of mail-order prescriptions significantly promoted medication order fulfillments on virtual NBP visits compared with in-person NBP visits in the prepandemic period (5.9% vs. 2.0%, P=0.01) and in the recovery period (5.2% vs. 1.6%, P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Distance to the clinic or HDHP enrollment had minimal impact on the fulfillment of diagnostic or prescribed medication services associated with incident NBP or UTI visits delivered virtually or in-person; however, prior use of mail-order pharmacy option promoted fulfillment of prescribed medication orders associated with NBP visits.

Understanding Racial Disparities in COVID-19-Related Complications: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, the COVID-19 pandemic has magnified the disproportionate and long-standing health disparities experienced by Black communities. Although it is acknowledged that social determinants of health (SDOH) rather than biological factors likely contribute to this disparity, few studies using rigorous analytic approaches in large, information-rich community-based data sets are dedicated to understanding the underlying drivers of these racial disparities. OBJECTIVE: The overall aim of our study is to elucidate the mechanisms by which racial disparities in severe COVID-19 outcomes arise, using both quantitative and qualitative methods. METHODS: In this protocol, we outline a convergent parallel mixed methods approach to identifying, quantifying, and contextualizing factors that contribute to the dramatic disparity in COVID-19 severity (ie, hospitalization, mortality) in Black versus white COVID-19 patients within the integrated health care system of Kaiser Permanente Georgia (KPGA). Toward this end, we will generate two quantitative cohorts of KPGA members with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis between January 1, 2020, and September 30, 2021: (1) an electronic medical record (EMR) cohort including routinely captured data on diagnoses, medications, and laboratory values, and a subset of patients hospitalized at Emory Healthcare to capture additional in-hospital data; and (2) a survey cohort, where participants will answer a range of questions related to demographics (eg, race, education), usual health behaviors (eg, physical activity, smoking), impact of COVID-19 (eg, job loss, caregiving responsibilities), and medical mistrust. Key outcomes of interest for these two cohorts include hospitalization, mortality, intensive care unit admission, hospital readmission, and long COVID-19. Finally, we will conduct qualitative semistructured interviews to capture perceptions of and experiences of being hospitalized with COVID-19 as well as related interactions with KPGA health care providers. We will analyze and interpret the quantitative and qualitative data separately, and then integrate the qualitative and quantitative findings using a triangulation design approach. RESULTS: This study has been funded by a Woodruff Health Sciences grant from December 2020 to December 2022. As of August 31, 2022, 31,500 KPGA members diagnosed with COVID-19 have been included in the EMR cohort, including 3028 who were hospitalized at Emory Healthcare, and 482 KPGA members completed the survey. In addition, 20 KPGA members (10 Black and 10 white) have been interviewed about their experiences navigating care with COVID-19. Quantitative and qualitative data cleaning and coding have been completed. Data analysis is underway with results anticipated to be published in December 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this mixed methods pilot study in a diverse integrated care setting in the southeastern United States will provide insights into the mechanisms underpinning racial disparities in COVID-19 complications. The quantitative and qualitative data will provide important context to generate hypotheses around the mechanisms for racial disparities in COVID-19, and may help to inform the development of multilevel strategies to reduce the burden of racial disparities in COVID-19 and its ongoing sequelae. Incorporating contextual information, elucidated from qualitative interviews, will increase the efficacy, adoption, and sustainability of such strategies. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/38914.

Community Engagement to Improve Equity in Kidney Transplantation from the Ground Up: the Southeastern Kidney Transplant Coalition.

Purpose of review: The purpose of this review is to describe the Southeastern Kidney Transplant Coalition's mission, vision, goals, and Early Transplant Access registry as an example of a community/academic collaboration dedicated to improving access to transplantation and reducing inequities in transplant access. Recent findings: The barriers and facilitators to referral and evaluation for kidney transplantation are not necessarily the same as for waitlisting and transplantation. Recent findings suggest that inequities in transplant access are multilevel and multifactorial and require continued community engagement to improve access to kidney transplantation across patients, health systems, and populations. Summary: Community-engaged approaches are critical to ensuring that inequities in transplant access - which may vary across regions -- are not only described but are addressed in practice in a sustainable manner.

Effect of the ASCENT Intervention to Increase Knowledge of Kidney Allocation Policy Changes Among Dialysis Providers.

INTRODUCTION: The Allocation System Changes for Equity in Kidney Transplantation (ASCENT) trial was a cluster-randomized pragmatic, effectiveness-implementation study designed to test whether a multicomponent educational intervention targeting leadership, clinic staff, and patients in dialysis facilities improved knowledge and awareness of the 2014 Kidney Allocation System (KAS) change. METHODS: Participants included 690 dialysis facility medical directors, nephrologists, social workers, and other staff within 655 US dialysis facilities, with 51% (n = 334) in the intervention group and 49% (n = 321) in the control group. Intervention activities included a webinar targeting medical directors and facility staff, an approximately 10-minute educational video targeting dialysis staff, an approximately 10-minute educational video targeting patients, and a facility-specific audit and feedback report of transplant performance. The control group received a standard United Network for Organ Sharing brochure. Provider knowledge was a secondary outcome of the ASCENT trial and the primary outcome of this study; knowledge was assessed as a cumulative score on a 5-point Likert scale (higher score = greater knowledge). Intention-to-treat analysis was used. RESULTS: At baseline, nonintervention providers had a higher mean knowledge score (mean ± SD, 2.45 ± 1.43) than intervention providers (mean ± SD, 2.31 ± 1.46). After 3 months, the average knowledge score was slightly higher in the intervention (mean ± SD, 3.14 ± 1.28) versus nonintervention providers (mean ± SD, 3.07 ± 1.24), and the estimated mean difference in knowledge scores between the groups at follow-up minus the mean difference at baseline was 0.25 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11-0.48; P = 0.039). The effect size (0.41) was low to moderate. CONCLUSION: Dialysis facility provider education could help extend the impact of a national policy change in organ allocation.

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.

Association Between Dialysis Facility Ownership and Access to Kidney Transplantation.

Importance: For-profit (vs nonprofit) dialysis facilities have historically had lower kidney transplantation rates, but it is unknown if the pattern holds for living donor and deceased donor kidney transplantation, varies by facility ownership, or has persisted over time in a nationally representative population. Objective: To determine the association between dialysis facility ownership and placement on the deceased donor kidney transplantation waiting list, receipt of a living donor kidney transplant, or receipt of a deceased donor kidney transplant. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study that included 1 478 564 patients treated at 6511 US dialysis facilities. Adult patients with incident end-stage kidney disease from the US Renal Data System (2000-2016) were linked with facility ownership (Dialysis Facility Compare) and characteristics (Dialysis Facility Report). Exposures: The primary exposure was dialysis facility ownership, which was categorized as nonprofit small chains, nonprofit independent facilities, for-profit large chains (>1000 facilities), for-profit small chains (<1000 facilities), and for-profit independent facilities. Main Outcomes and Measures: Access to kidney transplantation was defined as time from initiation of dialysis to placement on the deceased donor kidney transplantation waiting list, receipt of a living donor kidney transplant, or receipt of a deceased donor kidney transplant. Cumulative incidence differences and multivariable Cox models assessed the association between dialysis facility ownership and each outcome. Results: Among 1 478 564 patients, the median age was 66 years (interquartile range, 55-76 years), with 55.3% male, and 28.1% non-Hispanic black patients. Eighty-seven percent of patients received care at a for-profit dialysis facility. A total of 109 030 patients (7.4%) received care at 435 nonprofit small chain facilities; 78 287 (5.3%) at 324 nonprofit independent facilities; 483 988 (32.7%) at 2239 facilities of large for-profit chain 1; 482 689 (32.6%) at 2082 facilities of large for-profit chain 2; 225 890 (15.3%) at 997 for-profit small chain facilities; and 98 680 (6.7%) at 434 for-profit independent facilities. During the study period, 121 680 patients (8.2%) were placed on the deceased donor waiting list, 23 762 (1.6%) received a living donor kidney transplant, and 49 290 (3.3%) received a deceased donor kidney transplant. For-profit facilities had lower 5-year cumulative incidence differences for each outcome vs nonprofit facilities (deceased donor waiting list: -13.2% [95% CI, -13.4% to -13.0%]; receipt of a living donor kidney transplant: -2.3% [95% CI, -2.4% to -2.3%]; and receipt of a deceased donor kidney transplant: -4.3% [95% CI, -4.4% to -4.2%]). Adjusted Cox analyses showed lower relative rates for each outcome among patients treated at all for-profit vs all nonprofit dialysis facilities: deceased donor waiting list (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.36]); receipt of a living donor kidney transplant (HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.51 to 0.54]); and receipt of a deceased donor kidney transplant (HR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.45]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among US patients with end-stage kidney disease, receiving dialysis at for-profit facilities compared with nonprofit facilities was associated with a lower likelihood of accessing kidney transplantation. Further research is needed to understand the mechanisms behind this association.

Racial disparities in preemptive referral for kidney transplantation in Georgia.

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities persist in access to kidney transplantation. Racial differences in preemptive referral, or referral prior to dialysis start, may explain this discrepancy. METHODS: Patient-level data on kidney transplant referrals (2005-2012) from all Georgia transplant centers were linked to the United States Renal Data System to examine racial disparities in preemptive referral, waitlisting, and living donor transplant. Adjusted logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models determined the associations between race (African American vs white) and preemptive referral, and placement on the waitlist and receipt of a living donor kidney, respectively. RESULTS: Among 7752 adults referred for transplant evaluation, 20.38% (n = 1580) were preemptively referred. The odds of African Americans being preemptively referred for transplant evaluation were 37% (OR = 0.63; [95% CI: 0.55 0.71]) lower than white patients. Among preemptively referred patients, there was no racial difference (African Americans compared to white patients. HR = 0.96; [95% CI: 0.88, 1.04]) in waitlisting. However, African Americans were 70% less likely than white patients to receive a living donor transplant (HR = 0.30; [95% CI: 0.21, 0.42]). CONCLUSION: Racial disparities in transplant receipt may be partially explained by disparities in preemptive referral. Interventions to reduce racial disparities in kidney transplant access may need to be targeted earlier in the disease process.

The ASCENT (Allocation System Changes for Equity in Kidney Transplantation) Study: a Randomized Effectiveness-Implementation Study to Improve Kidney Transplant Waitlisting and Reduce Racial Disparity.

INTRODUCTION: The 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. METHODS: We 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. RESULTS: This 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. CONCLUSION: The 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.

Addition of estimated cardiorespiratory fitness to the clinical assessment of 10-year coronary heart disease risk in asymptomatic men.

The Framingham Risk Score (FRS) was developed to quantify a patient's coronary heart disease (CHD) risk. Non-exercise estimated CRF (e-CRF) may provide a clinically practical method for describing cardiorespiratory fitness. We computed e-CRF and tested its association with the FRS and CHD. Male participants (n = 29,854) in the Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study (ACLS) who completed a baseline examination between 1979-2002 were followed for 12 years to determine incident CHD defined by self-report of myocardial infarction, revascularization, or CHD mortality. e-CRF was defined from a 7-item scale and categorized using age-specific tertiles. Multivariable survival analysis determined associations between FRS, e-CRF, and CHD. Interaction between e-CRF and FRS was tested by stratified analysis by 'low' and 'moderate or high' 10-year CHD risk. Men with high e-CRF were significantly (p-value < 0.0001) younger, and less likely to be smokers, compared to men with low e-CRF. Multivariable survival analysis reported men with high e-CRF were 29% (HR = 0.71; 95% 0.56, 0.88) less likely to experience a CHD event compared to men with low e-CRF. Stratified analyses showed men with 'low' 10-year FRS predicted CHD risk and high e-CRF had a 28% (HR = 0.72; 95% CI 0.57, 0.91) lower CHD-mortality risk compared to men with low e-CRF, no association was found in this group and men with moderate e-CRF. Men who were more fit had a decreased risk for CHD compared to men in the lowest third of fitness. Estimated CRF may add clinical value to the FRS and help clinicians better predict long-term CHD risk.

A Randomized Trial to Reduce Disparities in Referral for Transplant Evaluation.

Georgia has the lowest kidney transplant rates in the United States and substantial racial disparities in transplantation. We determined the effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention to increase referral of patients on dialysis for transplant evaluation in the Reducing Disparities in Access to kidNey Transplantation Community Study (RaDIANT), a randomized, dialysis facility-based, controlled trial involving >9000 patients receiving dialysis from 134 dialysis facilities in Georgia. In December of 2013, we selected dialysis facilities with either low transplant referral or racial disparity in referral. The intervention consisted of transplant education and engagement activities targeting dialysis facility leadership, staff, and patients conducted from January to December of 2014. We examined the proportion of patients with prevalent ESRD in each facility referred for transplant within 1 year as the primary outcome, and disparity in the referral of black and white patients as a secondary outcome. Compared with control facilities, intervention facilities referred a higher proportion of patients for transplant at 12 months (adjusted mean difference [aMD], 7.3%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 5.5% to 9.2%; odds ratio, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.36 to 2.26). The difference between intervention and control facilities in the proportion of patients referred for transplant was higher among black patients (aMD, 6.4%; 95% CI, 4.3% to 8.6%) than white patients (aMD, 3.7%; 95% CI, 1.6% to 5.9%; P<0.05). In conclusion, this intervention increased referral and improved equity in kidney transplant referral for patients on dialysis in Georgia; long-term follow-up is needed to determine whether these effects led to more transplants.

Variation in Dialysis Facility Referral for Kidney Transplantation Among Patients With End-Stage Renal Disease in Georgia.

IMPORTANCE: Dialysis facilities in the United States are required to educate patients with end-stage renal disease about all treatment options, including kidney transplantation. Patients receiving dialysis typically require a referral for kidney transplant evaluation at a transplant center from a dialysis facility to start the transplantation process, but the proportion of patients referred for transplantation is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To describe variation in dialysis facility-level referral for kidney transplant evaluation and factors associated with referral among patients initiating dialysis in Georgia, the US state with the lowest kidney transplantation rates. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Examination of United States Renal Data System data from a cohort of 15,279 incident, adult (18-69 years) patients with end-stage renal disease from 308 Georgia dialysis facilities from January 2005 to September 2011, followed up through September 2012, linked to kidney transplant referral data collected from adult transplant centers in Georgia in the same period. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Referral for kidney transplant evaluation within 1 year of starting dialysis at any of the 3 Georgia transplant centers was the primary outcome; placement on the deceased donor waiting list was also examined. RESULTS: The median within-facility percentage of patients referred within 1 year of starting dialysis was 24.4% (interquartile range, 16.7%-33.3%) and varied from 0% to 75.0%. Facilities in the lowest tertile of referral (<19.2%) were more likely to treat patients living in high-poverty neighborhoods (absolute difference, 21.8% [95% CI, 14.1%-29.4%]), had a higher patient to social worker ratio (difference, 22.5 [95% CI, 9.7-35.2]), and were more likely nonprofit (difference, 17.6% [95% CI, 7.7%-27.4%]) compared with facilities in the highest tertile of referral (>31.3%). In multivariable, multilevel analyses, factors associated with lower referral for transplantation, such as older age, white race, and nonprofit facility status, were not always consistent with the factors associated with lower waitlisting. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In Georgia overall, a limited proportion of patients treated with dialysis were referred for kidney transplant evaluation between 2005 and 2011, but there was substantial variability in referral among facilities. Variables associated with referral were not always associated with waitlisting, suggesting that different factors may account for disparities in referral.

Dialysis Facility Transplant Philosophy and Access to Kidney Transplantation in the Southeast.

BACKGROUND: Little 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. METHODS: A 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. RESULTS: Fewer 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'. CONCLUSIONS: Facilities 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.

The RaDIANT community study protocol: community-based participatory research for reducing disparities in access to kidney transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The Southeastern United States has the lowest kidney transplant rates in the nation, and racial disparities in kidney transplant access are concentrated in this region. The Southeastern Kidney Transplant Coalition (SEKTC) of Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina is an academic and community partnership that was formed with the mission to improve access to kidney transplantation and reduce disparities among African American (AA) end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients in the Southeastern United States. METHODS/DESIGN: We describe the community-based participatory research (CBPR) process utilized in planning the Reducing Disparities In Access to kidNey Transplantation (RaDIANT) Community Study, a trial developed by the SEKTC to reduce health disparities in access to kidney transplantation among AA ESRD patients in Georgia, the state with the lowest kidney transplant rates in the nation. The SEKTC Coalition conducted a needs assessment of the ESRD population in the Southeast and used results to develop a multicomponent, dialysis facility-randomized, quality improvement intervention to improve transplant access among dialysis facilities in GA. A total of 134 dialysis facilities are randomized to receive either: (1) standard of care or "usual" transplant education, or (2) the multicomponent intervention consisting of transplant education and engagement activities targeting dialysis facility leadership, staff, and patients within dialysis facilities. The primary outcome is change in facility-level referral for kidney transplantation from baseline to 12 months; the secondary outcome is reduction in racial disparity in transplant referral. DISCUSSION: The RaDIANT Community Study aims to improve equity in access to kidney transplantation for ESRD patients in the Southeast. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov number NCT02092727.