Jennifer Gander

Variation in Dialysis Facility Referral for Kidney Transplantation Among Patients With End-Stage Renal Disease in Georgia

IMPORTANCE Dialysis facilities in the United States are required to educate patients with end-stage renal disease about all treatment options, including kidney transplantation. Patients receiving dialysis typically require a referral for kidney transplant evaluation at a transplant center from a dialysis facility to start the transplantation process, but the proportion of patients referred for transplantation is unknown. OBJECTIVE To describe variation in dialysis facility-level referral for kidney transplant evaluation and factors associated with referral among patients initiating dialysis in Georgia, the US state with the lowest kidney transplantation rates. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Examination of United States Renal Data System data from a cohort of 15,279 incident, adult (18-69 years) patients with end-stage renal disease from 308 Georgia dialysis facilities from January 2005 to September 2011, followed up through September 2012, linked to kidney transplant referral data collected from adult transplant centers in Georgia in the same period. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Referral for kidney transplant evaluation within 1 year of starting dialysis at any of the 3 Georgia transplant centers was the primary outcome; placement on the deceased donor waiting list was also examined. RESULTS The median within-facility percentage of patients referred within 1 year of starting dialysis was 24.4% (interquartile range, 16.7%-33.3%) and varied from 0% to 75.0%. Facilities in the lowest tertile of referral (<19.2%) were more likely to treat patients living in high-poverty neighborhoods (absolute difference, 21.8% [95% CI, 14.1%-29.4%]), had a higher patient to social worker ratio (difference, 22.5 [95% CI, 9.7-35.2]), and were more likely nonprofit (difference, 17.6% [95% CI, 7.7%-27.4%]) compared with facilities in the highest tertile of referral (>31.3%). In multivariable, multilevel analyses, factors associated with lower referral for transplantation, such as older age, white race, and nonprofit facility status, were not always consistent with the factors associated with lower waitlisting. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In Georgia overall, a limited proportion of patients treated with dialysis were referred for kidney transplant evaluation between 2005 and 2011, but there was substantial variability in referral among facilities. Variables associated with referral were not always associated with waitlisting, suggesting that different factors may account for disparities in referral.

A Randomized Trial to Reduce Disparities in Referral for Transplant Evaluation

Georgia has the lowest kidney transplant rates in the United States and substantial racial disparities in transplantation. We determined the effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention to increase referral of patients on dialysis for transplant evaluation in the Reducing Disparities in Access to kidNey Transplantation Community Study (RaDIANT), a randomized, dialysis facility-based, controlled trial involving >9000 patients receiving dialysis from 134 dialysis facilities in Georgia. In December of 2013, we selected dialysis facilities with either low transplant referral or racial disparity in referral. The intervention consisted of transplant education and engagement activities targeting dialysis facility leadership, staff, and patients conducted from January to December of 2014. We examined the proportion of patients with prevalent ESRD in each facility referred for transplant within 1 year as the primary outcome, and disparity in the referral of black and white patients as a secondary outcome. Compared with control facilities, intervention facilities referred a higher proportion of patients for transplant at 12 months (adjusted mean difference [aMD], 7.3%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 5.5% to 9.2%; odds ratio, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.36 to 2.26). The difference between intervention and control facilities in the proportion of patients referred for transplant was higher among black patients (aMD, 6.4%; 95% CI, 4.3% to 8.6%) than white patients (aMD, 3.7%; 95% CI, 1.6% to 5.9%; P<0.05). In conclusion, this intervention increased referral and improved equity in kidney transplant referral for patients on dialysis in Georgia; long-term follow-up is needed to determine whether these effects led to more transplants.

iChoose Kidney: A Clinical Decision Aid for Kidney Transplantation Versus Dialysis Treatment.

Background Despite a significant survival advantage of kidney transplantation compared with dialysis, nearly one third of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients are not educated about kidney transplantation as a treatment option at the time of ESRD diagnosis. Access to individualized, evidence-based prognostic information is needed to facilitate and encourage shared decision making about the clinical implications of whether to pursue transplantation or long-term dialysis. Methods We used a national cohort of incident ESRD patients in the US Renal Data System surveillance registry from 2005 to 2011 to develop and validate prediction models for risk of 1- and 3-year mortality among dialysis versus kidney transplantation. Using these data, we developed a mobile clinical decision aid that provides estimates of risks of death and survival on dialysis compared with kidney transplantation patients. Results Factors included in the mortality risk prediction models for dialysis and transplantation included age, race/ethnicity, dialysis vintage, and comorbidities, including diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and low albumin. Among the validation cohorts, the discriminatory ability of the model for 3-year mortality was moderate (c statistic, 0.7047; 95% confidence interval, 0.7029-0.7065 for dialysis and 0.7015; 95% confidence interval, 0.6875-0.7155 for transplant). We used these risk prediction models to develop an electronic, user-friendly, mobile (iPad, iPhone, and website) clinical decision aid called iChoose Kidney. Conclusions The use of a mobile clinical decision aid comparing individualized mortality risk estimates for dialysis versus transplantation could enhance communication between ESRD patients and their clinicians when making decisions about treatment options.

Improved trends in patient survival and decreased major complications after emergency ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND Improved trends in patient survival and decreased major complications after emergency ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. Emergency AAA repair carries a high risk of morbidity and mortality. This study seeks to examine morbidity and mortality trends from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database, and identify potential risk factors. METHODS All emergency AAA repairs were identified using the NSQIP database from 2005 to 2011. Univariate analysis (using the Student t, χ(2), and Fishers exact tests) and multivariate logistic regression was performed to examine trends in mortality and morbidity. RESULTS Out of 2761 patients who underwent emergency AAA repair, 321 (11.6%) died within 24 hours of surgery. Of the remaining 2440 patients, 1133 (46.4%) experienced major complications and 459 (18.8%) died during the postoperative period. From 2005 to 2011, there was a significant decrease in patient mortality, particularly in patients who survived the perioperative period (P = .002). Total complications increased overall (P < .0001); however, major complications decreased from 58.7% in 2005 to 42.6% in 2011 (P < .0001) among patients who survived beyond 24 hours. The use of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) increased over the study period (P < .0001). On multivariate analysis of patients who survived past the initial 24-hour period, advancing age (odds ratio [OR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-1.1), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.7-4.1), dependent functional status (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.2-3.2), and presence of a major complication (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 2.0-5.0) were significantly associated with death, whereas presence of a senior resident (OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.3-0.6) or fellow (OR 0.3; 95% CI, 0.2-0.6) was inversely associated with death. EVAR was not associated with death, but was associated with 30-day complications (OR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.3-0.6). CONCLUSIONS Patient survival has increased from 2005 to 2011 after emergency AAA repair, with a significant improvement particularly in patients who survive past the first 24 hours. EVAR was not associated with mortality, but was protective of 30-day complications. Although the total number of complications increased, the number of major complications decreased over the study period, suggesting that newer techniques and patient care protocols may be improving outcomes.

Everybody needs a cheerleader to get a kidney transplant: a qualitative study of the patient barriers and facilitators to kidney transplantation in the Southeastern United States.

BackgroundKidney transplantation (KTx) disparity is a significant problem in the United States, particularly in the Southeastern region. In response to this phenomenon, the Southeastern Kidney Transplant Coalition was created in 2011 to increase the KTx rate, and to reduce disparities in access to transplantation in the Southeast, by identifying and reducing barriers in the transplant process.MethodsTo determine perceived barriers and facilitators to KTx that dialysis patients in this region experience, we conducted three focus groups with 40 total patients in Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina.ResultsWe identified two novel themes specific to Southeastern dialysis patients that describe the major barriers and facilitators to kidney transplantation: dialysis center approaches to patient education about KTx, and dialysis center advocacy and encouragement for KTx. In addition, themes related to barriers and facilitators of KTx were evident that were previously mentioned in the literature such as age, fear, knowing other patients with good or bad experiences with KTx, distrust of the KTx process equity, financial concerns and medical barriers.ConclusionsDialysis providers are encouraged to enhance their delivery of information and active assistance to underserved patients related to KTx.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Mobile Clinical Decision Aid to Improve Access to Kidney Transplantation: iChoose Kidney

Introduction Kidney transplantation is the preferred treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease, as it substantially increases a patient’s survival and is cost-saving compared to a lifetime of dialysis. However, transplantation is not universally chosen by patients with renal failure, and limited knowledge about the survival benefit of transplantation versus dialysis may play a role. We created a mobile application clinical decision aid called iChoose Kidney to improve access to individualized prognosis information comparing dialysis and transplantation outcomes. Methods We describe the iChoose Kidney study, a randomized controlled trial designed to test the clinical efficacy of a mobile health decision aid among end-stage renal disease patients referred for kidney transplantation at 3 large, diverse transplant centers across the United States. Approximately 450 patients will be randomized to receive either (i) standard of care or “usual” transplantation education, or (ii) standard of care plus iChoose Kidney. Results The primary outcome is change in knowledge about the survival benefit of kidney transplantation versus dialysis from baseline to immediate follow-up; secondary outcomes include change in treatment preferences, improved decisional conflict, and increased access to kidney transplantation. Analyses are also planned to examine effectiveness across subgroups of race, socioeconomic status, health literacy, and health numeracy. Discussion Engaging patients in health care choices can increase patient empowerment and improve knowledge and understanding of treatment choices. If the effectiveness of iChoose Kidney has a greater impact on patients with low health literacy, lower socioeconomic status, and minority race, this decision aid could help reduce disparities in access to kidney transplantation.

Kidney transplant referral practices in southeastern dialysis units.

The Southeastern Kidney Transplant Coalition was created in 2010 to improve kidney transplant (KTx) rates in Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. To identify dialysis staff‐reported barriers to transplant, the Coalition developed a survey of dialysis providers in the region.

The ASCENT (Allocation System Changes for Equity in Kidney Transplantation) Study: A Randomized Effectiveness-Implementation Study to Improve Kidney Transplant Waitlisting and Reduce Racial Disparity

Introduction The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) implemented a new Kidney Allocation System (KAS) in December 2014 that is expected to substantially reduce racial disparities in kidney transplantation among waitlisted patients. However, not all dialysis facility clinical providers and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients are aware of how the policy change could improve access to transplantation. Methods We describe the ASCENT (Allocation System Changes for Equity in Kidney Transplantation) study, a randomized, controlled effectiveness-implementation study designed to test the effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention to improve access to the early steps of kidney transplantation among dialysis facilities across the United States. The multicomponent intervention consists of an educational webinar for dialysis medical directors, an educational video for patients and an educational video for dialysis staff, and a dialysis facility−specific transplantation performance feedback report. Materials will be developed by a multidisciplinary dissemination advisory board and will undergo formative testing in dialysis facilities across the United States. Results This study is estimated to enroll ∼600 US dialysis facilities with low waitlisting in all 18 ESRD networks. The co-primary outcomes include change in waitlisting and waitlist disparity at 1 year; secondary outcomes include changes in facility medical director knowledge about KAS, staff training regarding KAS, patient education regarding transplantation, and the intent of the medical director to refer patients for transplantation evaluation. Discussion The results from the ASCENT study will demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention designed to increase access to the deceased donor kidney waitlist and to reduce racial disparities in waitlisting.

Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio to Assess Performance of Transplant Referral among Dialysis Facilities

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES For patients with ESRD, referral from a dialysis facility to a transplant center for evaluation is an important step toward kidney transplantation. However, a standardized measure for assessing clinical performance of dialysis facilities transplant access is lacking. We describe methodology for a new dialysis facility measure: the Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS Transplant referral data from 8308 patients with incident ESRD within 249 dialysis facilities in the United States state of Georgia were linked with US Renal Data System data from January of 2008 to December of 2011, with follow-up through December of 2012. Facility-level expected referrals were computed from a two-stage Cox proportional hazards model after patient case mix risk adjustment including demographics and comorbidities. The Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio (95% confidence interval) was calculated as a ratio of observed to expected referrals. Measure validity and reliability were assessed. RESULTS Over 2008-2011, facility Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios in Georgia ranged from 0 to 4.87 (mean =1.16, SD=0.76). Most (77%) facilities had observed referrals as expected, whereas 11% and 12% had Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios significantly greater than and less than expected, respectively. Age, race, sex, and comorbid conditions were significantly associated with the likelihood of referral, and they were included in risk adjustment for Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio calculations. The Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios were positively associated with evaluation, waitlisting, and transplantation (r=0.46, 0.35, and 0.20, respectively; P<0.01). On average, approximately 33% of the variability in Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios was attributed to between-facility variation, and 67% of the variability in Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios was attributed to within-facility variation. CONCLUSIONS The majority of observed variation in dialysis facility referral performance was due to characteristics within a dialysis facility rather than patient factors included in risk adjustment models. Our study shows a method for computing a facility-level standardized measure for transplant referral on the basis of a pilot sample of Georgia dialysis facilities that could be used to monitor transplant referral performance of dialysis facilities.

Factors Related to Coronary Heart Disease Risk Among Men: Validation of the Framingham Risk Score

Introduction Coronary heart disease (CHD) remains a leading cause of death in the United States. The Framingham Risk Score (FRS) was developed to help clinicians in determining their patients’ CHD risk. We hypothesize that the FRS will be significantly predictive of CHD events among men in the Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study (ACLS) population. Methods Our study consisted of 34,557 men who attended the Cooper Clinic in Dallas, Texas, for a baseline clinical examination from 1972 through 2002. CHD events included self-reported myocardial infarction or revascularization or death due to CHD. During the 12-year follow-up 587 CHD events occurred. Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios generated from ACLS analysis were compared with the application of FRS to the Framingham Heart Study (FHS). Results The ACLS cohort produced similar hazard ratios to the FHS. The adjusted Cox proportional hazard model revealed that men with total cholesterol of 280 mg/dL or greater were 2.21 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.59–3.09) times more likely to have a CHD event than men with total cholesterol from 160 through 199mg/dL; men with diabetes were 1.63 (95% CI, 1.35–1.98) times more likely to experience a CHD event than men without diabetes. Conclusion The FRS significantly predicts CHD events in the ACLS cohort. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of a large, single-center cohort study to validate the FRS by using extensive laboratory and clinical measurements.