Provision of transplant education for patients starting dialysis: Disparities persist.

Background: All patients starting dialysis should be informed of kidney transplant as a renal replacement therapy option. Prior research has shown disparities in provision of this information. In this study, we aimed to identify patient sociodemographic and dialysis facility characteristics associated with not receiving transplant information at the time of dialysis initiation. We additionally sought to determine the association of receiving transplant information with waitlist and transplant outcomes. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed CMS-2728 forms filed from 2007 to 2019. The primary outcome was report of provision of information about transplant on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Form CMS-2728. For patients not informed at the time of dialysis, we collected the reported reason for not being informed (medically unfit, declined information, unsuitable due to age, psychologically unfit, not assessed, or other). Cox proportional-hazards model estimates were used to study determinants of addition to the waitlist and transplant (secondary outcomes). Results: Fifteen percent of patients did not receive information about transplant (N = 133,414). Non-informed patients were more likely to be older, female, white, and on Medicare. Patients informed about transplant had a shorter time between end-stage renal disease onset and addition to the waitlist; they also spent a shorter time on the waitlist before receiving a transplant. Patients at chain dialysis facilities were more likely to receive information, but this did not translate into higher waitlist or transplant rates. Patients at independent facilities acquired by chains were more likely to be informed but less likely to be added to the waitlist post acquisition. Conclusions: Disparities continue to persist in providing information about transplant at initiation of dialysis. Patients who are not informed have reduced access to the transplant waitlist and transplant. Maximizing the number of patients informed could increase the number of patients referred to transplant centers, and ultimately transplanted. However, policy actions should account for differences in protocols stemming from facility ownership.

Quality measures in pre-liver transplant care by the Practice Metrics Committee of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

The liver transplantation (LT) evaluation and waitlisting process is subject to variations in care that can impede quality. The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) Practice Metrics Committee (PMC) developed quality measures and patient-reported experience measures along the continuum of pre-LT care to reduce care variation and guide patient-centered care. Following a systematic literature review, candidate pre-LT measures were grouped into 4 phases of care: referral, evaluation and waitlisting, waitlist management, and organ acceptance. A modified Delphi panel with content expertise in hepatology, transplant surgery, psychiatry, transplant infectious disease, palliative care, and social work selected the final set. Candidate patient-reported experience measures spanned domains of cognitive health, emotional health, social well-being, and understanding the LT process. Of the 71 candidate measures, 41 were selected: 9 for referral; 20 for evaluation and waitlisting; 7 for waitlist management; and 5 for organ acceptance. A total of 14 were related to structure, 17 were process measures, and 10 were outcome measures that focused on elements not typically measured in routine care. Among the patient-reported experience measures, candidates of LT rated items from understanding the LT process domain as the most important. The proposed pre-LT measures provide a framework for quality improvement and care standardization among candidates of LT. Select measures apply to various stakeholders such as referring practitioners in the community and LT centers. Clinically meaningful measures that are distinct from those used for regulatory transplant reporting may facilitate local quality improvement initiatives to improve access and quality of care.

Improving Health Equity in Living Donor Kidney Transplant: Application of an Implementation Science Framework.

BACKGROUND: Interventions to improve racial equity in access to living donor kidney transplants (LDKT) have focused primarily on patients, ignoring the contributions of clinicians, transplant centers, and health system factors. Obtaining access to LDKT is a complex, multi-step process involving patients, their families, clinicians, and health system functions. An implementation science framework can help elucidate multi-level barriers to achieving racial equity in LDKT and guide the implementation of interventions targeted at all levels. METHODS: We adopted the Pragmatic Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM), an implementation science framework for racial equity in LDKT. The purpose was to provide a guide for assessment, inform intervention design, and support planning for the implementation of interventions. RESULTS: We applied 4 main PRISM domains to racial equity in LDKT: Organizational Characteristics, Program Components, External Environment, and Patient Characteristics. We specified elements within each domain that consider perspectives of the health system, transplant center, clinical staff, and patients. CONCLUSION: The applied PRISM framework provides a foundation for the examination of multi-level influences across the entirety of LDKT care. Researchers, quality improvement staff, and clinicians can use the applied PRISM framework to guide the assessment of inequities, support collaborative intervention development, monitor intervention implementation, and inform resource allocation to improve equity in access to LDKT.

Geography, inequities, and the social determinants of health in transplantation.

Among the causes of inequity in organ transplantation, geography is oft-cited but rarely defined with precision. Traditionally, geographic inequity has been characterized by variation in distance to transplant centers, availability of deceased organ donors, or the consequences of allocation systems that are inherently geographically based. Recent research has begun to explore the use of measures at various geographic levels to better understand how characteristics of a patient's geographic surroundings contribute to a broad range of transplant inequities. Within, we first explore the relationship between geography, inequities, and the social determinants of health. Next, we review methodologic considerations essential to geographic health research, and critically appraise how these techniques have been applied. Finally, we propose how to use geography to improve access to and outcomes of transplantation.

Defining the Need for Causal Inference to Understand the Impact of Social Determinants of Health: A Primer on Behalf of the Consortium for the Holistic Assessment of Risk in Transplantation (CHART).

Objective: This study aims to introduce key concepts and methods that inform the design of studies that seek to quantify the causal effect of social determinants of health (SDOH) on access to and outcomes following organ transplant. Background: The causal pathways between SDOH and transplant outcomes are poorly understood. This is partially due to the unstandardized and incomplete capture of the complex interactions between patients, their neighborhood environments, the tertiary care system, and structural factors that impact access and outcomes. Designing studies to quantify the causal impact of these factors on transplant access and outcomes requires an understanding of the fundamental concepts of causal inference. Methods: We present an overview of fundamental concepts in causal inference, including the potential outcomes framework and direct acyclic graphs. We discuss how to conceptualize SDOH in a causal framework and provide applied examples to illustrate how bias is introduced. Results: There is a need for direct measures of SDOH, increased measurement of latent and mediating variables, and multi-level frameworks for research that examine health inequities across multiple health systems to generalize results. We illustrate that biases can arise due to socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, and incongruencies in language between the patient and clinician. Conclusions: Progress towards an equitable transplant system requires establishing causal pathways between psychosocial risk factors, access, and outcomes. This is predicated on accurate and precise quantification of social risk, best facilitated by improved organization of health system data and multicenter efforts to collect and learn from it in ways relevant to specialties and service lines.

Racial Equity in Living Donor Kidney Transplant Centers, 2008-2018.

Importance: It is unclear whether center-level factors are associated with racial equity in living donor kidney transplant (LDKT). Objective: To evaluate center-level factors and racial equity in LDKT during an 11-year time period. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort longitudinal study was completed in February 2023, of US transplant centers with at least 12 annual LDKTs from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2018, identified in the Health Resources Services Administration database and linked to the US Renal Data System and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Main Outcomes and Measures: Observed and model-based estimated Black-White mean LDKT rate ratios (RRs), where an RR of 1 indicates racial equity and values less than 1 indicate a lower rate of LDKT of Black patients compared with White patients. Estimated yearly best-case center-specific LDKT RRs between Black and White individuals, where modifiable center characteristics were set to values that would facilitate access to LDKT. Results: The final cohorts of patients included 394 625 waitlisted adults, of whom 33.1% were Black and 66.9% were White, and 57 222 adult LDKT recipients, of whom 14.1% were Black and 85.9% were White. Among 89 transplant centers, estimated yearly center-level RRs between Black and White individuals accounting for center and population characteristics ranged from 0.0557 in 2008 to 0.771 in 2018. The yearly median RRs ranged from 0.216 in 2016 to 0.285 in 2010. Model-based estimations for the hypothetical best-case scenario resulted in little change in the minimum RR (from 0.0557 to 0.0549), but a greater positive shift in the maximum RR from 0.771 to 0.895. Relative to the observed 582 LDKT in Black patients and 3837 in White patients, the 2018 hypothetical model estimated an increase of 423 (a 72.7% increase) LDKTs for Black patients and of 1838 (a 47.9% increase) LDKTs for White patients. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of patients with kidney failure, no substantial improvement occurred over time either in the observed or the covariate-adjusted estimated RRs. Under the best-case hypothetical estimations, modifying centers' participation in the paired exchange and voucher programs and increased access to public insurance may contribute to improved racial equity in LDKT. Additional work is needed to identify center-level and program-specific strategies to improve racial equity in access to LDKT.

Residential Structural Racism and Prevalence of Chronic Health Conditions.

Importance: Studies elucidating determinants of residential neighborhood-level health inequities are needed. Objective: To quantify associations of structural racism indicators with neighborhood prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD), diabetes, and hypertension. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used public data (2012-2018) and deidentified electronic health records (2017-2018) to describe the burden of structural racism and the prevalence of CKD, diabetes, and hypertension in 150 residential neighborhoods in Durham County, North Carolina, from US census block groups and quantified their associations using bayesian models accounting for spatial correlations and residents' age. Data were analyzed from January 2021 to May 2023. Exposures: Global (neighborhood percentage of White residents, economic-racial segregation, and area deprivation) and discrete (neighborhood child care centers, bus stops, tree cover, reported violent crime, impervious areas, evictions, election participation, income, poverty, education, unemployment, health insurance coverage, and police shootings) indicators of structural racism. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes of interest were neighborhood prevalence of CKD, diabetes, and hypertension. Results: A total of 150 neighborhoods with a median (IQR) of 1708 (1109-2489) residents; median (IQR) of 2% (0%-6%) Asian residents, 30% (16%-56%) Black residents, 10% (4%-20%) Hispanic or Latino residents, 0% (0%-1%) Indigenous residents, and 44% (18%-70%) White residents; and median (IQR) residential income of $54 531 ($37 729.25-$78 895.25) were included in analyses. In models evaluating global indicators, greater burden of structural racism was associated with greater prevalence of CKD, diabetes, and hypertension (eg, per 1-SD decrease in neighborhood White population percentage: CKD prevalence ratio [PR], 1.27; 95% highest density interval [HDI], 1.18-1.35; diabetes PR, 1.43; 95% HDI, 1.37-1.52; hypertension PR, 1.19; 95% HDI, 1.14-1.25). Similarly in models evaluating discrete indicators, greater burden of structural racism was associated with greater neighborhood prevalence of CKD, diabetes, and hypertension (eg, per 1-SD increase in reported violent crime: CKD PR, 1.15; 95% HDI, 1.07-1.23; diabetes PR, 1.20; 95% HDI, 1.13-1.28; hypertension PR, 1.08; 95% HDI, 1.02-1.14). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found several global and discrete structural racism indicators associated with increased prevalence of health conditions in residential neighborhoods. Although inferences from this cross-sectional and ecological study warrant caution, they may help guide the development of future community health interventions.

Association of Age and Gender With Concerns About Live Donor Kidney Transplantation Among Black Individuals.

Black individuals are less likely to receive live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) compared to others. This may be partly related to their concerns about LDKT, which can vary based on age and gender. We conducted a cross-sectional, secondary analysis of the baseline enrollment data from the Talking about Living Kidney Donation Support trial, which studied the effectiveness of social workers and financial interventions on activation towards LDKT among 300 Black individuals from a deceased donor waiting list. We assessed concerns regarding the LDKT process, including their potential need for postoperative social support, future reproductive potential, recipient and donor money matters, recipient and donor safety, and interpersonal concerns. Answers ranged from 0 ("not at all concerned") to 10 ("extremely concerned"). We described and compared participants' concerns both overall and stratified by age (≥45 years old vs <45 years old) and self-reported gender ("male" versus "female"). The participants' top concerns were donor safety (median [IQR] score 10 [5-10]), recipient safety (5 [0-10]), money matters (5 [0-9]), and guilt/indebtedness (5 [0-9]). Younger females had statistically significantly higher odds of being concerned about future reproductive potential (odds ratio [OR] 3.77, 95% CI 2.77, 4.77), and older males had statistically higher mean concern about postoperative social support (OR 1.79, 95% CI 0.19, 3.38). Interventions to improve rates of LDKT among Black individuals should include education and counseling about the safety of LDKT for both recipients and donors, reproductive counseling for female LDKT candidates of childbearing age, and addressing older males' needs for increased social support.

One size does not fit all: Differential benefits of simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation by eligibility criteria.

Standard eligibility criteria for simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLK) are in place in the United States. We hypothesize that the benefit associated with SLK over liver transplant alone differs by patient, depending on the specific SLK criteria met. We analyzed a retrospective US cohort of 5446 adult liver transplant or SLK recipients between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018, who are potentially qualified for SLK. Exposure was a receipt of SLK. We tested effect modification by the specific SLK eligibility criteria met (end-stage kidney disease, acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, or unknown). The primary outcome was death within 1 year of a liver transplant. We used a modified Cox regression analysis containing an interaction term of SLK * time from transplant. Two hundred ten (9%) SLK recipients and 351 (11%) liver-alone recipients died in 1 year. In the overall population, SLK was associated with a mortality benefit over liver transplant on the day of the transplant, without adjustment [HR: 0.59 (95% CI, 0.46-0.76)] and with adjustment [aHR: 0.50 (95% CI, 0.35-0.71)]. However, when SLK eligibility criteria were included, only in patients with end-stage kidney disease was SLK associated with a sustained survival benefit at day 0 [HR: 0.17 (0.08-0.35)] up to 288 (95% CI, 120-649) days post-transplant. Benefit within the first year post-transplant associated with SLK over liver-alone transplantation was only pronounced in patients with end-stage kidney disease but not present in patients meeting other criteria for SLK. A "strict SLK liberal Safety Net" strategy may warrant consideration at the national policy level.

Equity in liver transplantation: are we any closer?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: As policies governing liver transplantation (LT) continue to change and influence clinical practice, it is important to monitor trends in equitable access and outcomes amongst patients. The purpose of this review is to closely examine recent advances and findings in health equity research in LT over the last 2 years; specifically evaluating inequities at the different stages of LT (referral, evaluation, listing, waitlist outcomes and post-LT outcomes). RECENT FINDINGS: Advancements in geospatial analysis have enabled investigators to identify and begin to study the role of community level factors (such as neighborhood poverty, increased community capital/urbanicity score) in driving LT disparities. There has also been a shift in investigating center specific characteristics that contributes to disparities in waitlist access. Modification to the current model for end stage liver disease (MELD) score policy accounting for height differences is also crucial to eradicating the disparity in LT amongst sexes. Lastly, Black pediatric patients have been shown to have higher rates of death and worse posttransplant outcome after transitioning to adult healthcare. SUMMARY: Although, there have been some advances in methodology and policies, inequities in waitlist access, waitlist outcomes and posttransplant outcomes continue to be pervasive in the field of LT. Future directions include expansion of social determinants of health measures, inclusion of multicenter designs, MELD score modification and investigation into drivers of worse posttransplant outcomes in Black patients.

Characterization of social determinants of health of a liver transplant referral population.

Disparities exist in referral and access to the liver transplant (LT) waitlist, and social determinants of health (SDOH) are increasingly recognized as important factors driving health inequities, including in LT. The SDOH of potential transplant candidates is therefore important to characterize when designing targeted interventions to promote equity in access to LT. Yet, it is uncertain how a transplant center should approach this issue, characterize SDOH, identify disparities, and use these data to inform interventions. We performed a retrospective study of referrals for first-time, single-organ LT to our center from 2016 to 2020. Addresses were geoprocessed and mapped to the corresponding county, census tract, and census block group to assess their geospatial distribution, identify potential disparities in referrals, and characterize their communities across multiple domains of SDOH to identify potential barriers to evaluation and selection. We identified variability in referral patterns and areas with disproportionately low referrals, including counties in the highest quartile of liver disease mortality (9%) and neighborhoods in the highest quintile of socioeconomic deprivation (17%) and quartile of poverty (21%). Black individuals were also under-represented compared with expected state demographics (12% vs. 18%). Among the referral population, several potential barriers to evaluation and selection for LT were identified, including poverty, educational attainment, access to healthy food, and access to technology. This approach to the characterization of a transplant center's referral population by geographic location and associated SDOH demonstrates a model for identifying disparities in a referral population and potential barriers to evaluation that can be used to inform targeted interventions for disparities in LT access.