Cost-effectiveness of Interventions to Increase Utilization of Kidneys From Deceased Donors With Primary Brain Malignancy in an Australian Setting.

Kidneys from potential deceased donors with brain cancer are often foregone due to concerns of cancer transmission risk to recipients. There may be uncertainty around donors' medical history and their absolute transmission risk or risk-averse decision-making among clinicians. However, brain cancer transmissions are rare, and prolonging waiting time for recipients is harmful. Methods: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of increasing utilization of potential deceased donors with brain cancer using a Markov model simulation of 1500 patients waitlisted for a kidney transplant, based on linked transplant registry data and with a payer perspective (Australian government). We estimated costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for three interventions: decision support for clinicians in assessing donor risk, improved cancer classification accuracy with real-time data-linkage to hospital records and cancer registries, and increased risk tolerance to allow intermediate-risk donors (up to 6.4% potential transmission risk). Results: Compared with current practice, decision support provided 0.3% more donors with an average transmission risk of 2%. Real-time data-linkage provided 0.6% more donors (1.1% average transmission risk) and increasing risk tolerance (accepting intermediate-risk 6.4%) provided 2.1% more donors (4.9% average transmission risk). Interventions were dominant (improved QALYs and saved costs) in 78%, 80%, and 87% of simulations, respectively. The largest benefit was from increasing risk tolerance (mean +18.6 QALYs and AU$2.2 million [US$1.6 million] cost-savings). Conclusions: Despite the additional risk of cancer transmission, accepting intermediate-risk donors with brain cancer is likely to increase the number of donor kidneys available for transplant, improve patient outcomes, and reduce overall healthcare expenditure.

AcceSS and Equity in Transplantation (ASSET) New Zealand: Protocol for population-wide data linkage platform to investigate equity in access to kidney failure health services in New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplantation is considered the ideal treatment for most people with kidney failure, conferring both survival and quality of life advantages, and is more cost effective than dialysis. Yet, current health systems may serve some people better than others, creating inequities in access to kidney failure treatments and health outcomes. AcceSS and Equity in Transplantation (ASSET) investigators aim to create a linked data platform to facilitate research enquiry into equity of health service delivery for people with kidney failure in New Zealand. METHODS: The New Zealand Ministry of Health will use patients' National Health Index (NHI) numbers to deterministically link individual records held in existing registry and administrative health databases in New Zealand to create the data platform. The initial data linkage will include a study population of incident patients captured in the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA), New Zealand Blood Service Database and the Australia and New Zealand Living Kidney Donor Registry (ANZLKD) from 2006 to 2019 and their linked health data. Health data sources will include National Non-Admitted Patient Collection Data, National Minimum Dataset, Cancer Registry, Programme for the Integration of Mental Health Data (PRIMHD), Pharmaceutical Claims Database and Mortality Collection Database. Initial exemplar studies include 1) kidney waitlist dynamics and pathway to transplantation; 2) impact of mental illness on accessing kidney waitlist and transplantation; 3) health service use of living donors following donation. CONCLUSION: The AcceSS and Equity in Transplantation (ASSET) linked data platform will provide opportunity for population-based health services research to examine equity in health care delivery and health outcomes in New Zealand. It also offers potential to inform future service planning by identifying where improvements can be made in the current health system to promote equity in access to health services for those in New Zealand.

Equity and diversity in the nephrology workforce in Australia and New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Despite diversity initiatives, inequities persist in medicine with negative implications for the workforce and patients. Little is known about workplace inequity in nephrology. AIM: To describe perceptions and experiences of bias by health professionals in the Australian and New Zealand Society of Nephrology (ANZSN), focussing on gender and race. METHODS: A web-based survey of ANZSN members recorded degree of perceived inequity on a Likert scale, ranging from 1 (none) to 5 (complete). Groups were compared using Mann-Whitney U-test and logistic regression. Comments were synthesised using qualitative methods to explore themes of inequity and pathways to an inclusive future. RESULTS: Of the 620 members of the ANZSN, there were 134 (22%) respondents, of whom 57% were women and 67% were White. The majority (88%) perceived inequities in the workforce. Perceived drivers of inequity were gender (84/113; 75%), carer responsibilities (74/113; 65%) and race (64/113; 56%). Half (74/131) had personally experienced inequity, based on gender in 70% (52/74) and race in 39% (29/75) with perceived discrimination coming from doctors, patients, academics and health administrators. White males were least likely (odds ratio 0.39; 95% confidence interval 0.18-0.90) to experience inequity. Dominant themes from qualitative analysis indicated that the major impacts of inequity were limited opportunities for advancement and lack of formal assistance for those experiencing inequities. Proposed solutions to reduce inequity included normalising the discourse on inequity at an organisational level, with policy changes to ensure diverse representation on committees and in executive leadership positions. CONCLUSIONS: Inequity, particularly driven by gender and race, is common for nephrology health professionals in Australia and New Zealand and impacts career progression.

Survival and Quality of Life Impact of a Risk-based Allocation Algorithm for Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: To determine the incremental gains in graft and patient survival under a risk-based, deceased donor kidney allocation compared with the current Australian algorithm. METHODS: Risk-based matching algorithms were applied to first graft, kidney only recipients (n = 7513) transplanted in Australia between 1994 and 2013. Probabilistic models were used to compare the waiting time, life, and QALYs and graft years between the 8 risk-based allocation strategies against current practice. RESULTS: Compared with current practice, Kidney Donor Risk Index-Estimated Posttransplant Survival matching of the lowest 20% of scores reduced median waiting time by 0.64 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52-0.73) for recipients aged 30 years or younger, but increased waiting time by 0.94 years (95% CI, 0.79-1.09) for recipients older than 60 years. Among all age groups, the greatest gains occurred if Kidney Donor Risk Index-Estimated Posttransplant Survival matching of the lowest 30% of scores was used, incurring a median overall gain of 0.63 (95% CI, 0.03-1.25) life years and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.30-1.26) graft years compared with the current practice. A median gain in survival of 1.91 years for younger recipients (aged 30-45 years) was offset by a median reduction in survival (by 0.95 life years) among the older recipients. Prioritization of lower-quality donor kidneys for older candidates reduced the waiting time for recipients older than 45 years, but no changes in graft and patient survivals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Risk-based matching engendered a moderate, overall increase in graft and patient survivals, accrued through benefits for recipients 45 years or younger but disadvantage to recipients older than 60 years.