Breaking Barriers and Bridging Gaps: Advancing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Kidney Transplant Care for Black and Hispanic Patients in the United States.

Kidney transplantation offers better mortality and quality of life outcomes to patients with end-stage renal failure compared to dialysis. Specifically, living donor kidney transplantation is the best treatment for end-stage renal disease, since it offers the greatest survival benefit compared to deceased donor kidney transplant or dialysis. However, not all patients from all racial/ethnic backgrounds enjoy these benefits. While black and Hispanic patients bear the predominant disease burden within the United States, they represent less than half of all kidney transplants in the country. Other factors such as cultural barriers that proliferate myths about transplant, financial costs that impede altruistic donation, and even biological predispositions create a complex maze and can also perpetuate care inaccessibility. Therefore, blanket efforts to increase the overall donation pool may not extend access to vulnerable populations, who may require more targeted attention and interventions. This review uses US kidney transplantation data to substantiate accessibility differences amongst racial minorities as well as provides examples of successful institutional and national systemic level changes that have improved transplantation outcomes for all.

Declining Medicare reimbursement in abdominal transplantation from 2000 to 2021.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is a major payer for abdominal transplant services. Reimbursement reductions could have a major impact on the transplant surgical workforce and hospitals. Yet government reimbursement trends in abdominal transplantation have not been fully characterized. METHODS: We performed an economic analysis to characterize changes in inflation-adjusted trends in Medicare surgical reimbursement for abdominal transplant procedures. Using the Medicare Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool, we performed a procedure code-based surgical reimbursement rate analysis. Reimbursement rates were adjusted for inflation to calculate overall changes in reimbursement, overall year-over-year, 5-year year-over-year, and compound annual growth rate from 2000 to 2021. RESULTS: We observed declines in adjusted reimbursement of common abdominal transplant procedures, including liver (-32.4%), kidney with and without nephrectomy (-24.2% and -24.1%, respectively), and pancreas transplant (-15.2%) (all, P < .05). Overall, the yearly average change for liver, kidney with and without nephrectomy, and pancreas transplant were -1.54%, -1.15%, -1.15%, and -0.72%. Five-year annual change averaged -2.69%, -2.35%, -2.64%, and -2.43%, respectively. The overall average compound annual growth rate was -1.27%. CONCLUSION: This analysis depicts a worrisome reimbursement pattern for abdominal transplant procedures. Transplant surgeons, centers, and professional organizations should note these trends to advocate sustainable reimbursement policy and to preserve continued access to transplant services.

Financial Impact of a Culturally Sensitive Hispanic Kidney Transplant Program on Increasing Living Donation.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, Hispanic/Latinx patients receive disproportionately fewer living donor kidney transplants (LDKTs) than non-Hispanic White patients. Northwestern Medicine's culturally targeted Hispanic Kidney Transplant Program (HKTP) was found to increase LDKTs in Hispanic patients at 1 of 2 transplant programs with greater implementation fidelity. METHODS: We conducted a budget impact analysis to evaluate HKTP's impact on program financial profiles from changes in volume of LDKTs and deceased donor kidney transplants (DDKTs) in 2017 to 2019. We estimated HKTP programmatic costs, and kidney transplant (KT) program costs and revenues. We forecasted transplant volumes, HKTP programmatic costs, and KT program costs and revenues for 2022-2024. RESULTS: At both programs, HKTP programmatic costs had <1% impact on total KT program costs, and HKTP programmatic costs comprised <1% of total KT program revenues in 2017-2019. In particular, the total volume of Hispanic KTs and HKTP LDKTs increased at both sites. Annual KT program revenues of HKTP LDKTs and DDKTs increased by 226.9% at site A and by 1042.9% at site B when comparing 2019-2017. Forecasted HKTP LDKT volume showed an increase of 36.4% (site A) and 33.3% (site B) with a subsequent increase in KT program revenues of 42.3% (site A) and 44.3% (site B) among HKTP LDKTs and DDKTs. CONCLUSIONS: HKTP programmatic costs and KT evaluation costs are potentially recoverable by reimbursement of organ acquisition costs and offset by increases in total KT program revenues of LDKTs; transplant programs may find implementation of the HKTP financially manageable.

Disparities in the Use of Older Donation After Circulatory Death Liver Allografts in the United States Versus the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the differences between the United States and the United Kingdom in the characteristics and posttransplant survival of patients who received donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver allografts from donors aged >60 y. METHODS: Data were collected from the UK Transplant Registry and the United Network for Organ Sharing databases. Cohorts were dichotomized into donor age subgroups (donor >60 y [D >60]; donor ≤60 y [D ≤60]). Study period: January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2015. RESULTS: 1157 DCD LTs were performed in the United Kingdom versus 3394 in the United States. Only 13.8% of US DCD donors were aged >50 y, contrary to 44.3% in the United Kingdom. D >60 were 22.6% in the United Kingdom versus 2.4% in the United States. In the United Kingdom, 64.2% of D >60 clustered in 2 metropolitan centers. In the United States, there was marked inter-regional variation. A total of 78.3% of the US DCD allografts were used locally. One- and 5-y unadjusted DCD graft survival was higher in the United Kingdom versus the United States (87.3% versus 81.4%, and 78.0% versus 71.3%, respectively; P < 0.001). One- and 5-y D >60 graft survival was higher in the United Kingdom (87.3% versus 68.1%, and 77.9% versus 51.4%, United Kingdom versus United States, respectively; P < 0.001). In both groups, grafts from donors ≤30 y had the best survival. Survival was similar for donors aged 41 to 50 versus 51 to 60 in both cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the United Kingdom, older DCD LT utilization remained low in the United States, with worse D >60 survival. Nonetheless, present data indicate similar survivals for older donors aged ≤60, supporting an extension to the current US DCD age cutoff.

Kidney donor profile index and post-transplant health care utilization: Implications for value of transplant care delivery.

BACKGROUND: Centers discard high kidney donor profile index (KDPI) allografts, potentially related to delayed graft function and prolonged hospital use by kidney transplant recipients (KTR). We sought to determine whether high KDPI KTRs have excess health care utilization. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study from a high-volume center analyzing KTRs from January 3, 2011 to April 12, 2015 (n = 652). We measured differences in hospital use, emergency visits, and outpatient visits within the first 90 days between low (≤85%) versus high KDPI (>85%) KTRs, as well as long-term graft function and patient survival. RESULTS: High (n = 107) and low KDPI (n = 545) KTRs had similar length of stay (median = 3 days, P = .66), and readmission rates at 7, 30, and 90 days after surgery (all, P > .05). High KDPI kidneys were not associated with excess utilization of the hospital, emergency services, outpatient transplant clinics, or ambulatory infusion visits on univariate or multivariate analysis (all, P > .05). Low KDPI KTRs had significantly better eGFR at 2 years (Low vs. High KDPI: 60.35 vs. 41.54 ml/min, P < .001), but similar 3-year patient and graft survival (both, P > .09). CONCLUSIONS: High and low KDPI KTRs demonstrated similar 90-day risk-adjusted health care utilization, which should encourage use of high KDPI kidneys.

Effectiveness of a culturally competent care intervention in reducing disparities in Hispanic live donor kidney transplantation: A hybrid trial.

Hispanic patients receive disproportionately fewer living donor kidney transplants (LDKTs) than non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs). The Northwestern Medicine Hispanic Kidney Transplant Program (HKTP), designed to increase Hispanic LDKTs, was evaluated as a nonrandomized, implementation-effectiveness hybrid trial of patients initiating transplant evaluation at two intervention and two similar control sites. Using a mixed method, observational design, we evaluated the fidelity of the HKTP implementation at the two intervention sites. We tested the impact of the HKTP intervention by evaluating the likelihood of receiving LDKT comparing pre-intervention (January 2011-December 2016) and postintervention (January 2017-March 2020), across ethnicity and centers. The HKTP study included 2063 recipients. Intervention Site A exhibited greater implementation fidelity than intervention Site B. For Hispanic recipients at Site A, the likelihood of receiving LDKTs was significantly higher at postintervention compared with pre-intervention (odds ratio [OR] = 3.17 95% confidence interval [1.04, 9.63]), but not at the paired control Site C (OR = 1.02 [0.61, 1.71]). For Hispanic recipients at Site B, the likelihood of receiving an LDKT did not differ between pre- and postintervention (OR = 0.88 [0.40, 1.94]). The LDKT rate was significantly lower for Hispanics at paired control Site D (OR = 0.45 [0.28, 0.90]). The intervention significantly improved LDKT rates for Hispanic patients at the intervention site that implemented the intervention with greater fidelity. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov registered (retrospectively) on September 7, 2017 (NCT03276390).

Best practices to optimize utilization of the National Living Donor Assistance Center for the financial assistance of living organ donors.

Living organ donors face direct costs when donating an organ, including transportation, lodging, meals, and lost wages. For those most in need, the National Living Donor Assistance Center (NLDAC) provides reimbursement to defray travel and subsistence costs associated with living donor evaluation, surgery, and follow-up. While this program currently supports 9% of all US living donors, there is tremendous variability in its utilization across US transplant centers, which may limit patient access to living donor transplantation. Based on feedback from the transplant community, NLDAC convened a Best Practices Workshop on August 2, 2018, in Arlington, VA, to identify strategies to optimize transplant program utilization of this valuable resource. Attendees included team members from transplant centers that are high NLDAC users; the NLDAC program team; and Advisory Group members. After a robust review of NLDAC data and engagement in group discussions, the workgroup identified concrete best practices for administrative and transplant center leadership involvement; for individuals filing NLDAC applications at transplant centers; and to improve patient education about potential financial barriers to living organ donation. Multiple opportunities were identified for intervention to increase transplant programs' NLDAC utilization and reduce financial burdens inhibiting expansion of living donor transplantation in the United States.

Factors associated with adverse outcomes from cardiovascular events in the kidney transplant population: an analysis of national discharge data, hospital characteristics, and process measures.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplant (KT) patients presenting with cardiovascular (CVD) events are being managed increasingly in non-transplant facilities. We aimed to identify drivers of mortality and costs, including transplant hospital status. METHODS: Data from the 2009-2011 Nationwide Inpatient Sample, the American Hospital Association, and Hospital Compare were used to evaluate post-KT patients hospitalized for MI, CHF, stroke, cardiac arrest, dysrhythmia, and malignant hypertension. We used generalized estimating equations to identify clinical, structural, and process factors associated with risk-adjusted mortality and high cost hospitalization (HCH). RESULTS: Data on 7803 admissions were abstracted from 275 hospitals. Transplant hospitals had lower crude mortality (3.0% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.06), and higher un-adjusted total episodic costs (Median $33,271 vs. $28,022, p < 0.0001). After risk-adjusting for clinical, structural, and process factors, mortality predictors included: age, CVD burden, CV destination hospital, diagnostic cardiac catheterization without intervention (all, p < 0.001). Female sex, race, documented co-morbidities, and hospital teaching status were protective (all, p < 0.05). Transplant and non-transplant hospitals had similar risk-adjusted mortality. HCH was associated with: age, CVD burden, CV procedures, and staffing patterns. Hospitalizations at transplant facilities had 37% lower risk-adjusted odds of HCH. Cardiovascular process measures were not associated with adverse outcomes. CONCLUSION: KT patients presenting with CVD events had similar risk-adjusted mortality at transplant and non-transplant hospitals, but high cost care was less likely in transplant hospitals. Transplant hospitals may provide better value in cardiovascular care for transplant patients. These data have significant implications for patients, transplant and non-transplant providers, and payers.

Financial compensation for organ donors.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: With an increasing demand for donor organs, strategies to increase the number of available donor organs have become more focused. Compensating donors for donation is one strategy proposed to increase the availability of organs for transplant. This has been implemented in several systems internationally, but debate continues in the United States with respect to appropriate strategies. The National Organ Transplant Act (NOTA) currently prohibits the transfer of any human organ 'for valuable consideration' for transplantation, but allows for the removal of financial disincentives. RECENT FINDINGS: Several proposals currently exist for compensating patients for living donation. Recent data have focused on studying and creating mechanisms for reimbursement of costs incurred as part of the donation process, which is related to the removal of disincentives to living donation. Others have advocated for the provision of actual incentives to patients for the act of donating, in an attempt to further expand living donation. The current debate focuses on what measures can reasonably be taken to increase donation, and whether additional incentives will encourage more donation or reduce the motivation for altruistic donation. SUMMARY: Currently, the transplant community broadly supports the removal of disincentives for living donors, including reimbursement of expenses for travel, housing and lost wages incurred during evaluation, surgery and after care. Others have advocated for financial incentives to further increase the number of donor organs available for transplant. Although the removal of disincentives is currently allowed under the existing legal structure of NOTA, providing financial incentives for living donation would require further evaluation of the economics, law, ethics and public readiness for a significant policy shift.

Cardiorespiratory Fitness (Peak Oxygen Uptake): Safe and Effective Measure for Cardiovascular Screening Before Kidney Transplant.

BACKGROUND: Significant heterogeneity exists in practice patterns and algorithms used for cardiac screening before kidney transplant. Cardiorespiratory fitness, as measured by peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak), is an established validated predictor of future cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in both healthy and diseased populations. The literature supports its use among asymptomatic patients in abrogating the need for further cardiac testing. METHODS AND RESULTS: We outlined a pre-renal transplant screening algorithm to incorporate VO2peak testing among a population of asymptomatic high-risk patients (with diabetes mellitus and/or >50 years of age). Only those with VO2peak <17 mL/kg per minute (equivalent to <5 metabolic equivalents) underwent further noninvasive cardiac screening tests. We conducted a retrospective study of the a priori dichotomization of the VO2peak <17 versus ≥17 mL/kg per minute to determine negative and positive predictive value of future cardiac events and all-cause mortality. We report a high (>90%) negative predictive value, indicating that VO2peak ≥17 mL/kg per minute is effective to rule out future cardiac events and all-cause mortality. However, lower VO2peak had low positive predictive value and should not be used as a reliable metric to predict future cardiac events and/or mortality. In addition, a simple mathematical calculation documented a cost savings of ≈$272 600 in the cardiac screening among our study cohort of 637 patients undergoing evaluation for kidney and/or pancreas transplant. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that incorporating an objective measure of cardiorespiratory fitness with VO2peak is safe and allows for a cost savings in the cardiovascular screening protocol among higher-risk phenotype (with diabetes mellitus and >50 years of age) being evaluated for kidney transplant.

Return on investment for financial assistance for living kidney donors in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The National Living Donor Assistance Center (NLDAC) enables living donor kidney transplants through financial assistance of living donors, but its return on investment (ROI) through savings on dialysis costs remains unknown. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 2012-2015 data from NLDAC, the United States Renal Data System, and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients to construct 1-, 3-, and 5-year ROI models based on NLDAC applications and national dialysis and transplant cost data. ROI was defined as state-specific federal dialysis cost minus (NLDAC program costs plus state-specific transplant cost), adjusted for median waiting time (WT). RESULTS: A total of 2425 NLDAC applications were approved, and NLDAC costs were USD $6.76 million. Median donor age was 41 years, 66.1% were female, and median income was $33 759; 43.6% were evaluated at centers with WT >72 months. Median dialysis cost/patient-year was $81 485 (IQR $74 489-$89 802). Median kidney transplant cost/patient-year was $30 101 (IQR $26 832-$33 916). Overall, ROI varied from 5.1-fold (1-year) to 28.2-fold (5-year), resulting in $256 million in savings. Higher ROI was significantly associated with high WT, larger dialysis and transplant costs differences, and more NLDAC applicants completing the donation process. CONCLUSIONS: Financial support for donor out-of-pocket expenses produces dramatic federal savings through incremental living donor kidney transplants.

Hospitalizations for Cardiovascular Disease After Liver Transplantation in the United States.

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of post-liver transplant death, and variable care patterns may affect outcomes. We aimed to describe epidemiology and outcomes of inpatient CVD care across US hospitals. Using a merged data set from the 2002-2011 Nationwide Inpatient Sample and the American Hospital Association Annual Survey, we evaluated liver transplant patients admitted primarily with myocardial infarction (MI), stroke (cerebrovascular accident [CVA]), congestive heart failure (CHF), dysrhythmias, cardiac arrest (CA), or malignant hypertension. Patient-level data include demographics, Charlson comorbidity index, and CVD diagnoses. Facility-level variables included ownership status, payer-mix, hospital resources, teaching status, and physician/nursing-to-bed ratios. We used generalized estimating equations to evaluate patient- and hospital-level factors associated with mortality. There were 4763 hospitalizations that occurred in 153 facilities (transplant hospitals, n = 80). CVD hospitalizations increased overall by 115% over the decade (P < 0.01). CVA and MI declined over time (both P < 0.05), but CHF and dysrhythmia grew significantly (both P < 0.03); a total of 19% of hospitalizations were for multiple CVD diagnoses. Transplant hospitals had lower comorbidity patients (P < 0.001) and greater resource intensity including presence of cardiac intensive care unit, interventional radiology, operating rooms, teaching status, and nursing density (all P < 0.01). Transplant and nontransplant hospitals had similar unadjusted mortality (overall, 3.9%, P = 0.55; by diagnosis, all P > 0.07). Transplant hospitals had significantly longer overall length of stay, higher total costs, and more high-cost hospitalizations (all P < 0.05). After risk adjustment, transplant hospitals were associated with higher mortality and high-cost hospitalizations. In conclusion, CVD after liver transplant is evolving and responsible for growing rates of inpatient care. Transplant hospitals are associated with poor outcomes, even after risk adjustment for patient and hospital characteristics, which may be attributable to selective referral of certain patient phenotypes but could also be related to differences in quality of care. Further study is warranted.

The National Living Donor Assistance Center perspective on barriers to the use of federal travel grants for living donors.

Recent research has identified important barriers that potential living organ donors face in utilizing travel reimbursement funds from the National Living Donor Assistance Center (NLDAC). In this article, we provide clarification and comment on these potential barriers from the NLDAC program perspective. The goal of financial neutrality for living donors requires further action. We discuss recent developments and further steps that may help achieve this goal and ultimately affect the shortage of donor organs.

Hospital resource intensity and cirrhosis mortality in United States.

AIM: To determine whether hospital characteristics predict cirrhosis mortality and how much variation in mortality is attributable to hospital differences. METHODS: We used data from the 2005-2011 Nationwide Inpatient Sample and the American Hospital Association Annual survey to identify hospitalizations for decompensated cirrhosis and corresponding facility characteristics. We created hospital-specific risk and reliability-adjusted odds ratios for cirrhosis mortality, and evaluated patient and facility differences based on hospital performance quintiles. We used hierarchical regression models to determine the effect of these factors on mortality. RESULTS: Seventy-two thousand seven hundred and thirty-three cirrhosis admissions were evaluated in 805 hospitals. Hospital mean cirrhosis annual case volume was 90.4 (range 25-828). Overall hospital cirrhosis mortality rate was 8.00%. Hospital-adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for mortality ranged from 0.48 to 1.89. Patient characteristics varied significantly by hospital aOR for mortality. Length of stay averaged 6.0 ± 1.6 days, and varied significantly by hospital performance (P < 0.001). Facility level predictors of risk-adjusted mortality were higher Medicaid case-mix (OR = 1.00, P = 0.029) and LPN staffing (OR = 1.02, P = 0.015). Higher cirrhosis volume (OR = 0.99, P = 0.025) and liver transplant program status (OR = 0.83, P = 0.026) were significantly associated with survival. After adjusting for patient differences, era, and clustering effects, 15.3% of variation between hospitals was attributable to differences in facility characteristics. CONCLUSION: Hospital characteristics account for a significant proportion of variation in cirrhosis mortality. These findings have several implications for patients, providers, and health care delivery in liver disease care and inpatient health care design.

The Effect of Hospital Characteristics on Racial/Ethnic Variation in Cirrhosis Mortality.

BACKGROUND: Racial/ethnic disparities in liver disease and cirrhosis are well established. Cirrhosis mortality is improving overall despite vast differences between hospitals. We sought to understand the hospital characteristics where minorities seek care, whether disparities in cirrhosis mortality persist, and determine how hospital differences contribute to these differences. METHODS: We used data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample and the American Hospital Association to identify inpatient episodes of care for cirrhosis and structural characteristics at the parent hospital. We used multi-level hierarchical regression models to understand the effect of hospital structural characteristics on racial/ethnic variation in cirrhosis mortality. RESULTS: From 2007 to 2011, 51,260 patients were admitted to the hospital with cirrhosis (White 66.5 %, Black 7.6 %, Hispanic 19.7 %, Asian 2.0 %, other 4.2 %). The overall adjusted mortality rate was 7.8 %, which significantly differed by race/ethnicity. Hospitals varied significantly in resource intensity. Higher mortality hospitals had a lower proportion of White patients and a higher proportion of Black and Hispanic patients compared to average and low mortality hospitals (p < 0.0001). Compared to White patients, there was significant racial/ethnic variation in unadjusted odds of mortality (Black OR 1.17; Hispanic OR 0.90; Asian 0.77; other 0.96; all p < 0.01). After accounting for hospital and patient differences, there were no racial/ethnic differences in mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The increased risk of cirrhosis mortality in Black patients appears to be mediated by facility differences and clinical co-morbidities, suggesting that access to higher quality health services at several points in both the early and late management of liver disease may improve disparate population outcomes.

Understanding Inpatient Cost Variation in Kidney Transplantation: Implications for Payment Reforms.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the magnitude and sources of inpatient cost variation for kidney transplantation. METHODS: We used the 2005-2009 Nationwide Inpatient Sample to identify patients who underwent kidney transplantation. We first calculated the patient-level cost of each transplantation admission and then aggregated costs to the hospital level. We fit hierarchical linear regression models to identify sources of cost variation and to estimate how much unexplained variation remained after adjusting for case-mix variables commonly found in administrative datasets. RESULTS: We identified 8866 living donor (LDRT) and 5589 deceased donor (DDRT) renal transplantations. We found that higher costs were associated with the presence of complications (LDRT, 14%; P <.001; DDRT, 24%; P <.001), plasmapheresis (LDRT, 27%; P <.001; DDRT, 27%; P <.001), dialysis (LDRT, 4%; P <.001), and prolonged length of stay (LDRT, 84%; P <.001; DDRT, 82%; P <.001). Even after case-mix adjustment, a considerable amount of unexplained cost variation remained between transplant centers (DDRT, 52%; LDRT, 66%). CONCLUSION: Although significant inpatient cost variation is present across transplant centers, much of the cost variation for kidney transplantation is not explained by commonly used risk-adjustment variables in administrative datasets. These findings suggest that although there is an opportunity to achieve savings through payment reforms for kidney transplantation, policymakers should seek alternative sources of information (eg, clinical registry data) to delineate sources of warranted and unwarranted cost variation.

Association of hospital participation in a surgical outcomes monitoring program with inpatient complications and mortality.

IMPORTANCE: Programs that analyze and report rates of surgical complications are an increasing focus of quality improvement efforts. The most comprehensive tool currently used for outcomes monitoring in the United States is the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). OBJECTIVE: To compare surgical outcomes experienced by patients treated at hospitals that did vs did not participate in the NSQIP. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data from the University HealthSystem Consortium from January 2009 to July 2013 were used to identify elective hospitalizations representing a broad spectrum of elective general/vascular operations in the United States. Data on hospital participation in the NSQIP were obtained through review of semiannual reports published by the ACS. Hospitalizations at any hospital that discontinued or initiated participation in the NSQIP during the study period were excluded after the date on which that hospital's status changed. A difference-in-differences approach was used to model the association between hospital-based participation in NSQIP and changes in rates of postoperative outcomes over time. EXPOSURE: Hospital participation in the NSQIP. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Risk-adjusted rates of any complications, serious complications, and mortality during a hospitalization for elective general/vascular surgery. RESULTS: The cohort included 345,357 hospitalizations occurring in 113 different academic hospitals; 172,882 (50.1%) hospitalizations were in NSQIP hospitals. Hospitalized patients were predominantly female (61.5%), with a mean age of 55.7 years. The types of procedures performed most commonly in the analyzed hospitalizations were hernia repairs (15.7%), bariatric (10.5%), mastectomy (9.7%), and cholecystectomy (9.0%). After accounting for patient risk, procedure type, underlying hospital performance, and temporal trends, the difference-in-differences model demonstrated no statistically significant differences over time between NSQIP and non-NSQIP hospitals in terms of likelihood of complications (adjusted odds ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.97-1.03), serious complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.94-1.03), or mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.94-1.14). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: No association was found between hospital-based participation in the NSQIP and improvements in postoperative outcomes over time within a large cohort of patients undergoing elective general/vascular operations at academic hospitals in the United States. These findings suggest that a surgical outcomes reporting system does not provide a clear mechanism for quality improvement.

Variation in access to the liver transplant waiting list in the United States.

BACKGROUND: We sought to compare liver transplant waiting list access by demographics and geography relative to the pool of potential liver transplant candidates across the United States using a novel metric of access to care, termed a liver wait-listing ratio (LWR). METHODS: We calculated LWRs from national liver transplant registration data and liver mortality data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and the National Center for Healthcare Statistics from 1999 to 2006 to identify variation by diagnosis, demographics, geography, and era. RESULTS: Among patients with ALF and CLF, African Americans had significantly lower access to the waiting list compared with whites (acute: 0.201 versus 0.280; pre-MELD 0.201 versus 0.290; MELD era: 0.201 versus 0.274; all, P<0.0001) (chronic: 0.084 versus 0.163; pre-MELD 0.085 versus 0.179; MELD 0.084 versus 0.154; all, P<0.0001). Hispanics and whites had similar LWR in both eras (both P>0.05). In the MELD era, female subjects had greater access to the waiting list compared with male subjects (acute: 0.428 versus 0.154; chronic: 0.158 versus 0.140; all, P<0.0001). LWRs varied by three-fold by state (pre-MELD acute: 0.122-0.418, chronic: 0.092-0.247; MELD acute: 0.121-0.428, chronic: 0.092-0.243). CONCLUSIONS: The marked inequity in early access to liver transplantation underscores the need for local and national policy initiatives to affect this disparity.

Disparities in liver transplantation: the association between donor quality and recipient race/ethnicity and sex.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to examine the association between recipient race/ethnicity and sex, donor liver quality, and liver transplant graft survival. METHODS: Adult non-status 1 liver recipients transplanted between March 1, 2002, and December 31, 2008, were identified using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data. The factors of interest were recipient race/ethnicity and sex. Donor risk index (DRI) was used as a donor quality measure. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between race/ethnicity and sex in relation to the transplantation of low-quality (high DRI) or high-quality (low DRI) livers. Cox regression was used to assess the association between race/ethnicity and sex and liver graft failure risk, accounting for DRI. RESULTS: Hispanics were 21% more likely to receive low-quality grafts compared to whites (odds ratio [OR]=1.21, P=0.002). Women had greater odds of receiving a low-quality graft compared to men (OR=1.24, P<0.0001). Despite adjustment for donor quality, African American recipients still had higher graft failure rates compared to whites (hazard ratio [HR]=1.28, P<0.001). Hispanics (HR=0.89, P=0.023) had significantly lower graft failure rates compared to whites despite higher odds of receiving a higher DRI graft. Using an interaction model of DRI and race/ethnicity, we found that the impact of DRI on graft failure rates was significantly reduced for African Americans compared to whites (P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that while liver graft quality differed significantly by recipient race/ethnicity and sex, donor selection practices do not seem to be the dominant factor responsible for worse liver transplant outcomes for minority recipients.

Racial/ethnic disparities in access to care and survival for patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether controlling for differences in the use of invasive therapy affects racial/ethnic differences in survival of early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) HCC data. Invasive therapy was defined as tumor ablation, hepatectomy, or liver transplant. Race/ethnicity was defined as white, black, Asian, Hispanic, or other. Racial/ethnic differences in overall and treatment-adjusted survival were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and base- and treatment-stratified multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. PATIENTS: All patients diagnosed as having stage I or II HCC from January 1, 1995, through December 31, 2006 (N = 13 244). SETTING: Data were obtained from the National Cancer Institute's SEER registry. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Differences in survival by race/ethnicity accounting for the use of invasive therapy and treatment benefit. RESULTS: Overall, 32.8% of patients received invasive therapy. We found higher mortality rates in the base survival model for black (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-1.33) and Hispanic (1.08; 1.01-1.15) patients and lower mortality rates in Asian patients (0.87; 0.82-0.93) compared with whites. After treatment stratification, compared with white patients, blacks had a 12% higher mortality rate (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.03-1.20), Hispanics had a similar mortality rate (0.97; 0.91-1.04), and Asians had a 16% lower mortality rate (0.84; 0.79-0.89). CONCLUSIONS: For early-stage HCC, racial/ethnic disparities in survival between minority and white patients are notable. After accounting for differences in stage, use of invasive therapy, and treatment benefit, no racial/ethnic survival disparity is evident between Hispanics and whites, but blacks have persistently poor survival.