Health Inequity in Likelihood and Time to Renal Recovery after Living Kidney Donation: Implications for Kidney Health in Black Americans.

BACKGROUND: Live donor kidney transplantation has been popularized to help mitigate the organ shortage crisis. At the time of living donor nephrectomy, living donors lose 50% of their kidney function or glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Studies have shown that in healthy living donors, the remaining kidney is able to adapt and recover 10% to 25% of postdonation lost GFR. GFR recovery is critical to long-term kidney health, particularly for Black Americans who disproportionately suffer from kidney disease with an incidence 2.5 times White Americans. To date, no study has examined whether health inequities in renal recovery postdonation exist. STUDY DESIGN: We retrospectively analyzed 100,121 living kidney donors reported to the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients between 1999 and 2021. We estimated GFR (eGFR) using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration 2021 equation and predicted the likelihood (logistic regression) and time (Cox regression) to recovery of 60% and 75% predonation eGFR. Models adjusted for age, sex, race, BMI, and predonation eGFR. RESULTS: Black patients were 47% (adjusted odds ratio 0.53, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.56, p < 0.001) and 43% (adjusted odds ratio 0.57, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.60, p < 0.001) less likely to recover 60% and 75% of predonation eGFR, respectively, compared with their White counterparts. The hazard ratio for time to renal recovery of 60% and 75% of predonation eGFR was 22% (adjusted hazard ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.80, p < 0.001) and 38% (adjusted hazard ratio 0.62, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.65, p < 0.001) lower, respectively, than White patients. CONCLUSIONS: Black living kidney donors were less likely to recover predonation eGFR, and time to renal recovery was significantly longer than their White counterparts. These data highlight the need for enhanced living kidney donor follow-up, particularly for Black living kidney donors who are at greatest future risk of end-stage kidney disease.

Quantifying the association of individual-level characteristics with disparities in kidney transplant waitlist addition among people with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Over 45% of people with HIV (PWH) in the United States at least 50 years old and are at heightened risk of aging-related comorbidities including end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), for which kidney transplant is the optimal treatment. Among ESKD patients, PWH have lower likelihood of waitlisting, a requisite step in the transplant process, than individuals without HIV. It is unknown what proportion of the inequity by HIV status can be explained by demographics, medical characteristics, substance use history, and geography. METHODS: The United States Renal Data System, a national database of all individuals ESKD, was used to create a cohort of people with and without HIV through Medicare claims linkage (2007-2017). The primary outcome was waitlisting. Inverse odds ratio weighting was conducted to assess what proportion of the disparity by HIV status could be explained by individual characteristics. RESULTS: Six thousand two hundred and fifty PWH were significantly younger at ESKD diagnosis and more commonly Black with fewer comorbidities. PWH were more frequently characterized as using tobacco, alcohol and drugs. Positive HIV-status was associated with 57% lower likelihood of waitlisting [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.46-0.48, P  < 0.001]. Controlling for demographics, medical characteristics, substance use and geography explained 39.8% of this observed disparity (aHR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.59-0.79, P  < 0.001). CONCLUSION: PWH were significantly less likely to be waitlisted, and 60.2% of that disparity remained unexplained. HIV characteristics such as CD4 + counts, viral loads, antiretroviral therapy adherence, as well as patient preferences and provider decision-making warrant further study.

Racial Disparities in Access to the Kidney Transplant Waitlist Among People with Human Immunodeficiency Virus.

The epidemiology of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has shifted such that Black individuals disproportionately represent incident HIV diagnoses. While risk of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) among people with HIV (PWH) has declined with effective antiretroviral therapies, a substantial racial disparity in ESKD burden exists with the greatest prevalence among Black PWH. Disparities in waitlisting for kidney transplantation, the optimal treatment for ESKD, exist for both PWH and Black individuals without HIV, but it is unknown whether these characteristics together exacerbate such disparities. Six hundred two thousand six ESKD patients were identified from the United States Renal Data System (January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2017), and HIV-status was determined through Medicare claims. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to determine waitlisting rates. Multiplicative interaction terms between HIV-status and race were examined. The 6250 PWH were significantly younger, more commonly Black, and less commonly female than those without HIV. HIV-status and race were independently associated with 50% and 12% lower likelihood of waitlisting, respectively [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.36-0.69, p < 0.001; aHR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.87-0.90, p < 0.001]. There was also a significant interaction present between HIV-status and Black race (aHR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.66-0.98, p < 0.001) such that, while HIV-status and Black race were independently associated with decreased waitlisting, the interaction of Black race and HIV-status exacerbated those disparities. While limited by lack of HIV-specific data that may impact inferences with respect to race, additional studies are urgently needed to understand the interplay between HIV risk factors, HIV-stigma, and racism, and how intersectionality may exacerbate disparities in transplantation among PWH.

Greater community vulnerability is associated with poor living donor navigator program fidelity.

BACKGROUND: Community-level factors contribute to living donor kidney transplantation disparities but may also influence the interventions aimed to mitigate these disparities. The Living Donor Navigator Program was designed to separate the advocacy role from the patient in need of transplantation-friends/family are encouraged to participate as the patients' advocates to identify living donors, though some of the patients participate alone as self-advocates. Self-advocates have a lower living donor kidney transplantation likelihood compared to the patients with an advocate. We sought to evaluate the relationship between the patients' community-level vulnerability and living donor navigator self-advocacy as a surrogate for program fidelity. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective study included 110 Living Donor Navigator participants (April 2017-June 2019). Program fidelity was assessed using the participants' advocacy status. Measures of community vulnerability were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Social Vulnerability Index. Modified Poisson regression was used to evaluate the association between community-level vulnerability and living donor navigator self-advocacy. RESULTS: Of the 110 participants, 19% (n = 21) were self-advocates. For every 10% increase in community-level vulnerability, patients had 17% higher risk of self-advocacy (adjusted relative risk 1.17, 95% confidence interval: 1.03-1.32, P = .01). Living in areas with greater unemployment (adjusted relative risk: 1.18, 95% confidence interval: 1.04-1.33, P = .01), single-parent households (adjusted relative risk: 1.23, 95% confidence interval: 1.06-1.42, P = .006), minority population (adjusted relative risk: 1.30, 95% confidence interval: 1.04-1.55, P = .02), or no-vehicle households (adjusted relative risk: 1.17, 95% confidence interval: 1.02-1.35, P = .02) were associated with increased risk of self-advocacy. CONCLUSION: Having a greater community-level vulnerability was associated with poor Living Donor Navigator Program fidelity. The potential barriers identified using the Social Vulnerability Index may direct resource allocation and program refinement to optimize program fidelity and efficacy for all participants.

Geographic Differences in Population Health and Expected Organ Supply in the Gulf Coast Region of the United States Compared to Non-Gulf States.

BACKGROUND: The Final Rule aimed to reduce geographic disparities in access to transplantation by prioritizing the need for transplant over donor proximity. However, disparities in waiting times persist for deceased donor kidney transplantation. The kidney allocation system implemented in 2014 does not account for potential local supply based on population health characteristics within a donation service area (DSA). We hypothesized that regions with traditionally high rates of comorbid disease, such as the states located along the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf States), may be disadvantaged by limited local supply secondary to poor population health. METHODS: Using data from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation County Health Rankings, the United States Renal Data System, and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we compared population-level characteristics and expected kidney donation rates by Gulf States location. RESULTS: Prevalence of African American ethnicity, end-stage renal disease, diabetes, fair/poor self-rated health, physical inactivity, food insecurity, and uninsurance were higher among Gulf State DSAs. On unadjusted analyses, Gulf State DSAs were associated with 3.52 fewer expected kidney donors per 100 eligible deaths than non-Gulf States. After adjustment, there was no longer a statistically significant difference in expected kidney donation rate. CONCLUSIONS: Although Gulf State DSAs have lower expected donation rates, these differences appear to be driven by the prevalence of health factors negatively associated with donation rate. These data suggest the need to discuss population health characteristics when examining kidney allocation policy, to account for potential lower supply of donors and to further address geographic disparities in access to kidney transplantation.

Enhanced Advocacy and Health Systems Training Through Patient Navigation Increases Access to Living-donor Kidney Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: To date, no living donation program has simultaneously addressed the needs of both transplant candidates and living donors by separating the advocacy role from the candidate and improving potential donor comfort with the evaluation process. We hypothesized that the development of a novel program designed to promote both advocacy and systems training among transplant candidates and their potential living kidney donors would result in sustained increases in living-donor kidney transplantation (LDKT). To this end, we developed and implemented a Living Donor Navigator (LDN) Program at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. METHODS: We included adult patients awaiting kidney-only transplant in a retrospective cohort analysis. Using time-varying Cox proportional hazards regression, we explored likelihood of living donor screening and approval by participation in the LDN program. RESULTS: There were 56 LDN participants and 1948 nonparticipants (standard of care). LDN was associated with a 9-fold increased likelihood of living donor screenings (adjusted hazard ratio, 9.27; 95% confidence interval, 5.97-14.41, P < 0.001) and a 7-fold increased likelihood of having an approved living donor (adjusted hazard ratio, 7.74; 95% confidence interval, 3.54-16.93; P < 0.001) compared with the standard of care. Analyses by participant race demonstrated higher likelihood of screened donors and a similar likelihood of having an approved donor among African Americans compared with Caucasians. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that both advocacy and systems training are needed to increase actual LDKT rates, and that LDN programs may mitigate existing racial disparities in access to LDKT.

A Qualitative Assessment of the Living Donor Navigator Program to Identify Core Competencies and Promising Practices for Implementation.

INTRODUCTION: The best strategy to increase awareness of and access to living kidney donation remains unknown. To build upon the existing strategies, we developed the Living Donor Navigator program, combining advocacy training of patient advocates with enhanced health-care systems training of patient navigators to address potential living donor concerns during the evaluation process. Herein, we describe a systematic assessment of the delivery and content of the program through focus group discussion. METHODS: We conducted focus groups with 9 advocate participants in the Living Donor Navigator program to identify knowledge, skills, and abilities needed for both advocates and navigators. We focused on 2 organizational levels: (1) the participant level or the advocacy training of the advocates and (2) the programmatic level or the support role provided by the navigators and administration of the program. FINDINGS: From 4 common themes (communication, education, support, and commitment), we identified several core competencies and promising practices, at both the participant and programmatic levels. These themes highlighted the potential for several improvements of program content and delivery, the importance of cultural sensitivity among the Living Donor navigators, and the opportunity for informal caregiver support and accountability provided by the program. DISCUSSION: These competencies and promising practices represent actionable strategies for content refinement, optimal training of advocates, and engagement of potential living donors through the Living Donor Navigator program. These findings may also assist with program implementation at other transplant centers in the future.

Does Medicaid expansion improve access to care for the first-time shoulder dislocator?

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of individual state Medicaid expansion status on access to care for shoulder instability. METHODS: Four pairs of Medicaid expanded (Louisiana, Kentucky, Iowa, and Nevada) and unexpanded (Alabama, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Utah) states in similar geographic locations were chosen for the study. Twelve practices from each state were randomly selected from the American Orthopedic Society for Sports Medicine directory, resulting in a sample size of 96 independent sports medicine offices. Each office was called twice to request an appointment for a fictitious 16-year-old first-time shoulder dislocator with either in-state Medicaid insurance or Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) private insurance. RESULTS: A total of 91 physician offices in 8 states were contacted by telephone. An appointment was obtained at 36 (39.6%) offices when calling with Medicaid and at 74 (81.3%) offices when calling with BCBS (P < .001). Thirty-five (38.5%) offices were able to make appointments for both types of insurance, 39 (42.9%) for only BCBS, 1 (1.1%) for only Medicaid, and 16 (17.5%) for neither. For Medicaid patients, an appointment was booked in 13 (27.7%) clinics from Medicaid expanded states and in 23 (52.3%) clinics from unexpanded states (P = .016). CONCLUSION: For a first-time shoulder dislocator, access to care is more difficult with Medicaid insurance compared with private insurance. Within Medicaid insurance, access to care is more difficult in Medicaid expanded states compared with unexpanded states. Medicaid patients in unexpanded states are twice as likely as those in expanded states to obtain an appointment.

Donation approval among obese living kidney donor candidates: The impact of metabolic syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The scarcity of organs available for transplantation has increased attempts to augment transplantation by utilizing obese living kidney donors. The literature has suggested that these donors have increased risks postdonation. Not surprising, the threshold for living kidney donor approval among obese persons is typically higher and the process more costly. Therefore, a screening tool to predict the likelihood of approval among obese living kidney donor candidates was created. METHODS: A single-center retrospective study was performed among obese (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) living kidney donor candidates evaluated in clinic (January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2017). Approved candidates were compared with those not approved using multivariable logistic regression, and a prediction tool was generated. RESULTS: Among 389 obese living kidney donor candidates, there were no significant differences in sex or race and ethnicity by approval status. However, nonapproved candidates had a higher prevalence of metabolic syndrome. In the prediction model, glucose impairment and hypertension were most predictive of nonapproval. CONCLUSION: Among obese living kidney donor candidates, several metabolic syndrome components were associated with decreased odds of approval. This tool may serve as a useful initial screening for obese living kidney donor candidates, permitting more cost-effective evaluation processes. The tool could also be used to promote expeditious interventions in the preclinical setting, including weight management programs, to improve the likelihood of donation and postdonation outcomes.

Mitigating Racial and Sex Disparities in Access to Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: Impact of the Nation's Longest Single-center Kidney Chain.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we sought to assess likelihood of living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) within a single-center kidney transplant waitlist, by race and sex, after implementation of an incompatible program. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Disparities in access to LDKT exist among minority women and may be partially explained by antigen sensitization secondary to prior pregnancies, transplants, or blood transfusions, creating difficulty finding compatible matches. To address these and other obstacles, an incompatible LDKT program, incorporating desensitization and kidney paired donation, was created at our institution. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed among our kidney transplant waitlist candidates (n = 8895). Multivariable Cox regression was utilized, comparing likelihood of LDKT before (era 1: 01/2007-01/2013) and after (era 2: 01/2013-11/2018) implementation of the incompatible program. Candidates were stratified by race [white vs minority (nonwhite)], sex, and breadth of sensitization. RESULTS: Program implementation resulted in the nation's longest single-center kidney chain, and likelihood of LDKT increased by 70% for whites [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.70; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.46-1.99] and more than 100% for minorities (aHR 2.05; 95% CI, 1.60-2.62). Improvement in access to LDKT was greatest among sensitized minority women [calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA) 11%-49%: aHR 4.79; 95% CI, 2.27-10.11; cPRA 50%-100%: aHR 4.09; 95% CI, 1.89-8.82]. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an incompatible program, and the resulting nation's longest single-center kidney chain, mitigated disparities in access to LDKT among minorities, specifically sensitized women. Extrapolation of this success on a national level may further serve these vulnerable populations.

Optimal timing of hepatitis C treatment among HIV/HCV coinfected ESRD patients: Pre- vs posttransplant.

Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) who are coinfected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) have access to effective treatment options for HCV infection. However, they also have access to HCV-infected kidneys, which historically afford shorter times to transplantation. Given the high waitlist mortality and rapid progression of liver fibrosis among coinfected kidney-only transplant candidates, identification of the optimal treatment strategy is paramount. Two strategies, treatment pre- and posttransplant, were compared using Monte Carlo microsimulation of 1 000 000 candidates. The microsimulation was stratified by liver fibrosis stage at waitlist addition and wait-time over a lifetime time horizon. Treatment posttransplant was consistently cost-saving as compared to treatment pretransplant due to the high cost of dialysis. Among patients with low fibrosis disease (F0-F1), treatment posttransplant also yielded higher life months (LM) and quality-adjusted life months (QALM), except among F1 candidates with wait times ≥ 18 months. For candidates with advanced liver disease (F2-F4), treatment pretransplant afforded more LM and QALM unless wait time was <18 months. Moreover, treatment pretransplant was cost-effective for F2 candidates with wait times >71 months and F3 candidates with wait times >18 months. Thus, optimal timing of HCV treatment differs based on liver disease severity and wait time, favoring pretransplant treatment when cirrhosis development prior to transplant seems likely.

Population level outcomes and cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C treatment pre- vs postkidney transplantation.

Direct-acting antivirals approved for use in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) now exist. HCV-positive (HCV+) ESRD patients have the opportunity to decrease the waiting times for transplantation by accepting HCV-infected kidneys. The optimal timing for HCV treatment (pre- vs posttransplant) among kidney transplant candidates is unknown. Monte Carlo microsimulation of 100 000 candidates was used to examine the cost-effectiveness of HCV treatment pretransplant vs posttransplant by liver fibrosis stage and waiting time over a lifetime time horizon using 2 regimens approved for ESRD patients. Treatment pretransplant yielded higher quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with posttransplant treatment in all subgroups except those with Meta-analysis of Histological Data in Viral Hepatitis stage F0 (pretransplant: 5.7 QALYs vs posttransplant: 5.8 QALYs). However, treatment posttransplant was cost-saving due to decreased dialysis duration with the use of HCV-infected kidneys (pretransplant: $735 700 vs posttransplant: $682 400). Using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000, treatment pretransplant was not cost-effective except for those with Meta-analysis of Histological Data in Viral Hepatitis stage F3 whose fibrosis progression was halted. If HCV+ candidates had access to HCV-infected donors and were transplanted ≥9 months sooner than HCV-negative candidates, treatment pretransplant was no longer cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]: $107 100). In conclusion, optimal timing of treatment depends on fibrosis stage and access to HCV+ kidneys but generally favors posttransplant HCV eradication.

Population Health, Ethnicity, and Rate of Living Donor Kidney Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Living donor kidney transplantation has declined in the United States since 2004, but the relationship between population characteristics and rate of living donation is unknown. The goal of our study was to use data on general population health and socioeconomic status to investigate the association with living donation. METHODS: This cross-sectional, ecological study used population health and socioeconomic status data from the CDC Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to investigate the association with living donation. Transplant centers performing 10 or greater kidney transplants reported to the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients in 2015 were included. Center rate of living donation was defined as the proportion of all kidney transplants performed at a center that were from living donors. RESULTS: In a linear mixed-effects model, a composite index of health and socioeconomic status factors was negatively associated with living donation, with a rate of living donation that was on average 7.3 percentage points lower among centers in areas with more comorbid disease and poorer socioeconomic status (95% confidence interval, -12.2 to -2.3, P = 0.004). Transplant centers in areas with higher prevalence of minorities had a rate of living donation that was 7.1 percentage points lower than centers with fewer minorities (95% confidence interval, -11.8 to -2.3, P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Center-level variation in living donation was associated with population characteristics and minority prevalence. Further examination of these factors in the context of patient and center-level barriers to living donation is warranted.

Impact of the new kidney allocation system A2/A2B → B policy on access to transplantation among minority candidates.

Blood group B candidates, many of whom represent ethnic minorities, have historically had diminished access to deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT). The new national kidney allocation system (KAS) preferentially allocates blood group A2/A2B deceased donor kidneys to B recipients to address this ethnic and blood group disparity. No study has yet examined the impact of KAS on A2 incompatible (A2i) DDKT for blood group B recipients overall or among minorities. A case-control study of adult blood group B DDKT recipients from 2013 to 2017 was performed, as reported to the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Cases were defined as recipients of A2/A2B kidneys, whereas controls were all remaining recipients of non-A2/A2B kidneys. A2i DDKT trends were compared from the pre-KAS (1/1/2013-12/3/2014) to the post-KAS period (12/4/2014-2/28/2017) using multivariable logistic regression. Post-KAS, there was a 4.9-fold increase in the likelihood of A2i DDKT, compared to the pre-KAS period (odds ratio [OR] 4.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.67-6.60). However, compared to whites, there was no difference in the likelihood of A2i DDKT among minorities post-KAS. Although KAS resulted in increasing A2/A2B→B DDKT, the likelihood of A2i DDKT among minorities, relative to whites, was not improved. Further discussion regarding A2/A2B→B policy revisions aiming to improve DDKT access for minorities is warranted.

Decreasing deceased donor transplant rates among children (≤6 years) under the new kidney allocation system.

The Kidney Allocation System (KAS) was implemented in December 2014 with unknown impact on the pediatric waitlist. To understand the effect of KAS on pediatric registrants, deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT) rate was assessed using interrupted time series analysis and time-to-event analysis. Two allocation eras were defined with an intermediary washout period: Era 1 (01/01/2013-09/01/2014), Era 2 (09/01/2014-03/01/2015), and Era 3(03/01/2015-03/01/2017). When using Cox proportional hazards, there was no significant association between allocation era and DDKT likelihood as compared to Era 1 (Era 3: aHR: 1.07, 95% CI: 0.97-1.18, P = .17). However, this was not consistent across all subgroups. Specifically, while highly sensitized pediatric registrants were consistently less likely to be transplanted than their less sensitized counterparts, this disparity was attenuated in Era 3 (Era 1 aHR: 0.04, 95%CI: 0.01-0.14, P < .001; Era 3 aHR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.21-0.53, P < .001) whereas the youngest registrants aged 0-6 experienced a 21% decrease in DDKT likelihood in Era 3 as compared to Era 1 (aHR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.64-0.98, P = .03). Thus, while overall DDKT likelihood remained stable with the introduction of KAS, registrants ≤ 6 years of age were disadvantaged, warranting further study to ensure equitable access to transplantation.

Insurance Type and Solid Organ Transplantation Outcomes: A Historical Perspective on How Medicaid Expansion Might Impact Transplantation Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The number of Medicaid beneficiaries has increased under the Affordable Care Act, improving access to solid organ transplantation in this disadvantaged patient cohort. It is unclear what impact Medicaid expansion will have on transplantation outcomes. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis to measure the frequency and variation in Medicaid transplantation and post-transplantation survival in Medicaid patients. STUDY DESIGN: Adult heart, lung, liver, and renal transplant recipients between 2002 and 2011 (n = 169,194) reported to the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients were identified. Transplant recipients were classified based on insurance status (private, Medicare or Medicaid). Outcomes measures included 5-year post-transplantation survival, summarized using Kaplan-Meier curves and compared with log-rank tests. Organ-specific Cox proportional hazards models were used to adjust for donor and recipient factors. RESULTS: Medicaid patients comprised 8.6% of all organ transplant recipients. Fewer transplantations were performed than expected among Medicaid beneficiaries for all organs except liver (liver: observed to expected ratio = 1.21; 95% CI, 0.68-1.90; heart: observed to expected ratio = 0.89; 95% CI, 0.44-1.49; lung: observed to expected ratio = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.22-1.06; renal: observed to expected ratio = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.08-0.72). Medicaid transplant recipients were listed with more severe organ failure and experienced shorter transplant wait times. Post-transplantation survival was lower in Medicaid patients compared with private insurance for all organs. Post-transplantation survival in Medicaid patients was similar to Medicare patients for heart, liver, and renal but lower in lung. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid organ transplant beneficiaries had significantly lower survival compared with privately insured beneficiaries. The more severe organ failure among Medicaid beneficiaries at the time of listing, suggested a pattern of late referral, which might account for worse outcomes. Implementation of the Affordable Care Act gives the opportunity to develop the necessary infrastructure to ensure timely transplantation referrals and improve long-term outcomes in this vulnerable population.

A survey of Alabama eye care providers in 2010-2011.

BACKGROUND: State level information regarding eye care resources can provide policy makers with valuable information about availability of eye care services. The current study surveyed ophthalmologists, optometrists and vision rehabilitation providers practicing in Alabama. METHODS: Three mutually exclusive provider groups were identified, i.e., all ophthalmologists, optometrists, and vision rehabilitation providers working in Alabama in 2010. Eligible providers were contacted in 2010 and 2011 and information was requested regarding provider demographics and training, practice type and service characteristics, and patient characteristics. Descriptive statistics (e.g., means, proportions) were used to characterize provider groups by their demographic and training characteristics, practice characteristics, services provided and patients or clients served. In addition, county level figures demonstrate the numbers and per capita ophthalmologists and optometrists. RESULTS: Ophthalmologists were located in 24 of Alabama's 67 counties, optometrists in 56, and 10 counties had neither an ophthalmologist nor an optometrist. Overall, 1,033 vision care professionals were identified as eligible to participate in the survey: 217 ophthalmologists, 638 optometrists, and 178 visual rehabilitation providers. Of those, 111 (51.2%) ophthalmologists, 246 (38.6%) optometrists, and 81 (45.5%) rehabilitation providers participated. Most participating ophthalmologists, optometrists, and vision rehabilitation providers identified themselves as non-Hispanic White. Ophthalmologists and optometrists estimated that 27% and 22%, respectively, of their patients had diabetes but that the proportion that adhered to eye care guidelines was 61% among ophthalmology patients and 53% among optometry patients. CONCLUSIONS: A large number of Alabama communities are isolated from eye care services. Increased future demand for eye care is anticipated nationally given the aging of the population and decreasing numbers of providers; however, Alabama also has a high and growing prevalence of diabetes which will result in greater numbers at risk for diabetic retinopathy, glaucoma, and cataracts.

The effect of trauma care on the temporal distribution of homicide mortality in Jefferson County, Alabama.

The distribution of time from acute traumatic injury to death has three peaks: immediate (less than or equal to one hour), early (6 to 24 hours), and late (days to weeks). It has been suggested that coordinated trauma care dampens the late peak; however, this research may be more reflective of unintentional than intentional deaths. This study examines whether a coordinated trauma system (TS) alters the temporal distribution for assault-related deaths. Data were obtained from homicides examined by the Jefferson County Coroner's/Medical Examiner's Office from 1987 to 2008. Homicides were categorized-based on year of death-as occurring in the presence of no TS, during TS implementation, in the early years of the TS, or in a mature TS. The temporal distribution of homicide mortality was compared among TS categories using a χ(2) test. A Cox Markov multistate model was used to estimate proportional changes in the temporal distribution of death adjusted for assault mechanism. With a TS, after adjusting for assault mechanism, a lower proportion of homicide victims survived through the first hour (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54 to 1.03) and from one to six hours (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.96). Additionally, the presence of a TS was associated with a proportional decrease in deaths after 24 hours (P = 0.0005). These results suggest that a trauma system is effective in preventing late homicide deaths; however, other means of preventing death (such as violence prevention programs) are needed to decrease the burden of immediate homicide-related deaths.

Effects of an acute care for elders unit on costs and 30-day readmissions.

IMPORTANCE: Providing high-quality care while containing cost is essential for the economic stability of our health care system. The United States is experiencing a rapidly growing elderly population. The Acute Care for Elders (ACE) unit interdisciplinary team model of care has been shown to improve outcomes in hospitalized older adults. The University of Alabama at Birmingham ACE unit incorporates evidence-based care processes. We hypothesized that the ACE model would also reduce costs. OBJECTIVE: To examine variable direct costs from an interdisciplinary ACE compared with a multidisciplinary usual care (UC) unit. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary care academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalists' patients aged 70 years or older spending the entirety of their hospitalization in either the ACE or UC unit in fiscal year 2010. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Using administrative data, we analyzed variable direct costs for ACE and UC patients. We also conducted a subset analysis restricted to the 25 most common diagnosis related groups (DRGs) shared by ACE and UC patients. Generalized linear regression was used to estimate cost ratios and 95% confidence intervals adjusted for age, sex, comorbidity score, and case mix index (CMI). RESULTS: A total of 818 hospitalists' patients met inclusion criteria: 428 from the ACE and 390 from the UC unit. For this study group (all DRGs), the mean (SD) variable direct cost per patient was $2109 ($1870) for ACE and $2480 ($2113) for UC (P = .009). Adjusted cost ratios revealed significant cost savings for patients with low (0.82; 95% CI, 0.72-0.94) or moderate (0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.89) CMI scores; care was cost neutral for patients with high CMI scores (1.13; 95% CI, 0.93-1.37). Significantly fewer ACE patients than UC patients were readmitted within 30 days of discharge (7.9% vs 12.8%; P = .02). Subset analysis of the 25 most common DRGs revealed a significantly reduced mean (SD) variable direct cost per patient for ACE compared with UC patients ($1693 [$1063] vs $2138 [$1431]; P < .001); cost ratios for total (0.78; 95% CI, 0.70-0.87) and daily (0.89; 95% CI, 0.85-0.94) variable direct costs remained significant after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The ACE unit team model reduces costs and 30-day readmissions. In an era when improving care processes while reducing costs is a vital objective for the Medicare program and our nation as a whole, the ACE model meets these goals.

Is seat belt use associated with fewer days of lost work after motor vehicle collisions?

BACKGROUND: Seat belt use has consistently been shown to reduce motor vehicle collision (MVC)-related morbidity and mortality. The goal of this study is to determine whether seat belt use is associated with fewer lost workdays among occupants involved in MVCs. METHODS: The 1995 to 2000 National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) data files were used. The NASS is a national probability sample of passenger vehicles involved in police-reported tow-away MVCs. Occupants' lost workdays, which are routinely collected as part of an NASS investigation, were compared according to seat belt use. RESULTS: During 1995 to 2000 in the United States, surviving occupants involved in MVCs lost a total of 42.1 million workdays (approximately 7.0 million lost workdays per year; 2.4 lost workdays per person). The overall difference in lost workdays between the belted and unbelted occupants was 1.59 days (1.99 days vs. 3.58 days, respectively; p < 0.001). After adjusting for potentially confounding factors, belted occupants had 1.52 fewer lost workdays compared with unbelted occupants (p < 0.001). This translates to an estimated 7.3 million lost workdays and an associated $566 million in lost wages and $1.25 billion in work-place costs attributable to lack of seat belt use in the United States during 1995 to 2000. CONCLUSION: Lost workdays attributable to MVCs in the United States have sizable financial implications. Furthermore, seat belt use significantly reduces lost time at work and is associated with a significant cost savings. The national impact of unbelted driving on work productivity is dramatic, and further efforts to promote appropriate seat belt use should continue as part of the national safety agenda.