Racialized and Immigrant Status and the Pursuit of Living Donor Kidney Transplant - a Canadian Cohort Study.

Introduction: Both immigrant and racialized status may be associated with the pursuit of living donor kidney transplant (LDKT). Methods: This study was a secondary analysis of a convenience cross-sectional sample of patients with kidney failure in Toronto, obtained from our "Comprehensive Psychosocial Research Data System" research database. The exposures included racialized, immigrant, and combined immigrant and racialized status (White nonimmigrant, racialized nonimmigrant, White immigrant and racialized immigrant). Outcomes include the following: (i) having spoken about LDKT with others, (ii) having a potential living donor (LD) identified, (iii) having allowed others to share the need for LDKT, (iv) having directly asked a potential donor to be tested, and (v) accept a hypothetical LDKT offer. We assessed the association between exposure and outcomes using univariable, and multivariable binary or multinominal logistic regression (reference: White or White nonimmigrant participants). Results: Of the 498 participants, 281 (56%) were immigrants; 142 (28%) were African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB); 123 (25%) were Asian; and 233 (47%) were White. Compared to White nonimmigrants, racialized immigrants (relative risk ratio [RRR]: 2.98; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.76-5.03) and racialized nonimmigrants (RRR: 2.84; 95% CI: 1.22-6.65) were more likely not to have spoken about LDKT with others (vs. having spoken or planning to do so). Both racialized immigrant (odds ratio [OR]: 4.07; 95% CI: 2.50-6.34), racialized nonimmigrants (OR: 2.68; 95% CI: 1.31-5.51) and White immigrants (OR: 2.68; 95% CI: 1.43-5.05) were more likely not to have a potential LD identified. Conclusion: Both racialized and immigrant status are associated with less readiness to pursue LDKT. Supporting patients to communicate their need for LDKT may improve equitable access to LDKT.

Nonopioid Versus Opioid Analgesics After Thyroid and Parathyroid Surgery: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether nonopioid analgesic regimens, taken after discharge for thyroid and parathyroid surgery have noninferior pain outcomes in comparison to opioid analgesic regimens. Secondarily, we sought to determine if nonopioid analgesic regimens decrease the number of opioid medications taken after thyroid and parathyroid surgery, and to assess adverse events associated with opioid versus nonopioid regimens. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane. REVIEW METHODS: A comprehensive search of the literature was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines, and identified 1299 nonduplicate articles for initial review of which 2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified as meeting all eligibility criteria. Meta-analysis was not conducted due to heterogeneity in the data and statistical analyses. RESULTS: Both RCTs included in this systematic review found no significant differences in postoperative pain scores between individuals discharged with a nonopioid only analgesic regimen compared to analgesic regimen that included oral opioid medications. One study reported significantly increased number of postoperative calls related specifically to pain in the nonopioid arm compared to the opioid arm (15.6% vs. 3.2%, P = .045). CONCLUSION: This systematic review of RCTs revealed a limited number of studies examining nonopioid versus opioid postoperative pain medications among adults who undergo thyroid and parathyroid surgery. Among the 2 RCTs on this topic, there is a shared finding that nonopioid analgesic regimens are noninferior to opioid analgesic regimens in managing postoperative pain after thyroid and parathyroid surgery, supporting the use of nonopioid pain regimens given the risk of opioid dependence associated with prescription opioid medications.

Knowledge About Renal Transplantation Among African, Caribbean, and Black Canadian Patients With Advanced Kidney Failure.

Introduction: Variable transplant-related knowledge may contribute to inequitable access to living donor kidney transplant (LDKT). We compared transplant-related knowledge between African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) versus White Canadian patients with kidney failure using the Knowledge Assessment of Renal Transplantation (KART) questionnaire. Methods: This was a cross-sectional cohort study. Data were collected from a cross-sectional convenience sample of adults with kidney failure in Toronto. Participants also answered an exploratory question about their distrust in the kidney allocation system. Clinical characteristics were abstracted from medical records. The potential contribution of distrust to differences in transplant knowledge was assessed in mediation analysis. Results: Among 577 participants (mean [SD] age 57 [14] years, 63% male), 25% were ACB, and 43% were White Canadians. 45% of ACB versus 26% of White participants scored in the lowest tertile of the KART score. The relative risk ratio to be in the lowest tertile for ACB compared to White participants was 2.22 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11, 4.43) after multivariable adjustment. About half of the difference in the knowledge score between ACB versus White patients was mediated by distrust in the kidney allocation system. Conclusion: Participants with kidney failure from ACB communities have less transplant-related knowledge compared to White participants. Distrust is potentially contributing to this difference.

Pretransplant Patient Education in Solid-organ Transplant: A Narrative Review.

Education for pretransplant, solid-organ recipient candidates aims to improve knowledge and understanding about the transplant process, outcomes, and potential complications to support informed, shared decision-making to reduce fears and anxieties about transplant, inform expectations, and facilitate adjustment to posttransplant life. In this review, we summarize novel pretransplant initiatives and approaches to educate solid-organ transplant recipient candidates. First, we review approaches that may be common to all solid-organ transplants, then we summarize interventions specific to kidney, liver, lung, and heart transplant. We describe evidence that emphasizes the need for multidisciplinary approaches to transplant education. We also summarize initiatives that consider online (eHealth) and mobile (mHealth) solutions. Finally, we highlight education initiatives that support racialized or otherwise marginalized communities to improve equitable access to solid-organ transplant. A considerable amount of work has been done in solid-organ transplant since the early 2000s with promising results. However, many studies on education for pretransplant recipient candidates involve relatively small samples and nonrandomized designs and focus on short-term surrogate outcomes. Overall, many of these studies have a high risk of bias. Frequently, interventions assessed are not well characterized or they are combined with administrative and data-driven initiatives into multifaceted interventions, which makes it difficult to assess the impact of the education component on outcomes. In the future, well-designed studies rigorously assessing well-defined surrogate and clinical outcomes will be needed to evaluate the impact of many promising initiatives.