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.

National Attitudes Toward Living Kidney Donation in the United States: Results of a Public Opinion Survey.

Rationale & Objective: Understanding national attitudes about living kidney donation will enable us to identify and address existing disincentives to living kidney donation. We performed a national survey to describe living kidney donation perceptions, perceived factors that affect the willingness to donate, and analyzed differences by demographic subgroups. Study Design: The survey items captured living kidney donation awareness, living kidney donation knowledge, willingness to donate, and barriers and facilitators to living kidney donation. Setting & Population: We surveyed 802 US adults (aged 25-65 years) in June 2021, randomly selected from an online platform with diverse representation. Analytical Approach: We developed summed, scaled indices to assess the association between the living kidney donation knowledge (9 items) and the willingness to donate (8 items) to self-reported demographic characteristics and other variables of interest using analysis of variance. All other associations for categorical questions were calculated using Pearson's χ2 and Fisher exact tests. We inductively evaluated free-text responses to identify additional barriers and facilitators to living kidney donation. Results: Most (86.6%) of the respondents reported that they might or would definitely consider donating a kidney while they were still living. Barriers to living kidney donation included concerns about the risk of the surgery, paying for medical expenses, and potential health effects. Facilitators to living kidney donation included having information on the donation surgery's safety, knowing that the donor would not have to pay for medical expenses related to the donation, and hearing living kidney donation success stories. Awareness of the ability to participate in kidney-paired donation was associated with a higher willingness to donate. Limitations: Potential for selection bias resulting from the use of survey panels and varied incentive amounts, and measurement error related to respondents' attention level. Conclusions: Most people would consider becoming a living kidney donor. Increased rates of living kidney donation may be possible with investment in culturally competent educational interventions that address risks associated with donating, policies that reduce financial disincentives, and communication campaigns that raise awareness of kidney-paired donation and living kidney donation.

Understanding what the general public thinks about living kidney donation will help to develop better education and increase the number of living kidney donors. We surveyed the public to find out: (1) how aware they are about the opportunity to donate a kidney while alive; (2) how much they know about living kidney donation; (3) whether they would be willing to donate; and (4) what would affect their willingness to donate. We found that teaching people about the risks of donating, decreasing costs related to donation, and raising awareness about it could increase the number of people willing to donate.

Unrecognized opportunities: The landscape of pediatric kidney-paired donation in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric (age < 18 years) kidney transplant (KT) candidates face increasingly complex choices. The 2014 kidney allocation system nearly doubled wait times for pediatric recipients. Given longer wait times and new ways to optimize compatibility, more pediatric candidates may consider kidney-paired donation (KPD). Motivated by this shift and the potential impact of innovations in KPD practice, we studied pediatric KPD procedures in the US from 2008 to 2021. METHODS: We describe the characteristics and outcomes of pediatric KPD recipients with comparison to pediatric non-KPD living donor kidney transplants (LDKT), pediatric LDKT recipients, and pediatric deceased donor (DDKT) recipients. RESULTS: Our study cohort includes 4987 pediatric DDKTs, 3447 pediatric non-KPD LDKTs, and 258 pediatric KPD transplants. Fewer centers conducted at least one pediatric KPD procedure compared to those that conducted at least one pediatric LDKT or DDKT procedure (67, 136, and 155 centers, respectively). Five centers performed 31% of the pediatric KPD transplants. After adjustment, there were no differences in graft failure or mortality comparing KPD recipients to non-KPD LDKT, LDKT, or DDKT recipients. DISCUSSION: We did not observe differences in transplant outcomes comparing pediatric KPD recipients to controls. Considering these results, KPD may be underutilized for pediatric recipients. Pediatric KT centers should consider including KPD in KT candidate education. Further research will be necessary to develop tools that could aid clinicians and families considering the time horizon for future KT procedures, candidate disease and histocompatibility characteristics, and other factors including logistics and donor protections.

Utilizing Telenursing to Supplement Acute Care Nursing in an Era of Workforce Shortages: A Feasibility Pilot.

Hospitals are experiencing a nursing shortage crisis that is expected to worsen over the next decade. Acute care settings, which manage the care of very complex patients, need innovations that lessen nurses' workload burden while ensuring safe patient care and outcomes. Thus, a pilot study was conducted to evaluate the feasibility of implementing a large-scale acute care telenurse program, where a hospital-employed telenurse would complete admission and discharge processes for hospitalized patients virtually. In 3 months, almost 9000 (67%) of patient admissions and discharges were conducted by an acute care telenurse, saving the bedside nurse an average of 45 minutes for each admission and discharge. Preliminary benefits to the program included more uninterrupted time with patients, more complete hospital admission and discharge documentation, and positive patient and nurse feedback about the program.

Temporal trends in kidney paired donation in the United States: 2006-2021 UNOS/OPTN database analysis.

Kidney paired donation (KPD) is a major innovation that is changing the landscape of kidney transplantation in the United States. We used the 2006-2021 United Network for Organ Sharing data to examine trends over time. KPD is increasing, with 1 in 5 living donor kidney transplants (LDKTs) in 2021 facilitated by KPD. The proportion of LDKT performed via KPD was comparable for non-Whites and Whites. An increasing proportion of KPD transplants are going to non-Whites. End-chain recipients are not identified in the database. To what extent these trends reflect how end-chain kidneys are allocated, as opposed to increase in living donation among minorities, remains unclear. Half the LDKT in 2021 in sensitized (panel reactive antibody ≥ 80%) and highly sensitized (panel reactive antibody ≥ 98%) groups occurred via KPD. Yet, the proportion of KPD transplants performed in sensitized recipients has declined since 2013, likely due to changes in the deceased donor allocation policies and newer KPD strategies such as compatible KPD. In 2021, 40% of the programs reported not performing any KPD transplants. Our study highlights the need for understanding barriers to pursuing and expanding KPD at the center level and the need for more detailed and accurate data collection at the national level.

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.

Effect of a Novel Multicomponent Intervention to Improve Patient Access to Kidney Transplant and Living Kidney Donation: The EnAKT LKD Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) have the best chance for a longer and healthier life if they receive a kidney transplant. However, many barriers prevent patients from receiving a transplant. Objectives: To evaluate the effect of a multicomponent intervention designed to target several barriers that prevent eligible patients from completing key steps toward receiving a kidney transplant. Design, Setting, and Participants: This pragmatic, 2-arm, parallel-group, open-label, registry-based, superiority, cluster randomized clinical trial included all 26 CKD programs in Ontario, Canada, from November 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021. These programs provide care for patients with advanced CKD (patients approaching the need for dialysis or receiving maintenance dialysis). Interventions: Using stratified, covariate-constrained randomization, allocation of the CKD programs at a 1:1 ratio was used to compare the multicomponent intervention vs usual care for 4.2 years. The intervention had 4 main components, (1) administrative support to establish local quality improvement teams; (2) transplant educational resources; (3) an initiative for transplant recipients and living donors to share stories and experiences; and (4) program-level performance reports and oversight by administrative leaders. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the rate of steps completed toward receiving a kidney transplant. Each patient could complete up to 4 steps: step 1, referred to a transplant center for evaluation; step 2, had a potential living donor contact a transplant center for evaluation; step 3, added to the deceased donor waitlist; and step 4, received a transplant from a living or deceased donor. Results: The 26 CKD programs (13 intervention, 13 usual care) during the trial period included 20 375 potentially transplant-eligible patients with advanced CKD (intervention group [n = 9780 patients], usual-care group [n = 10 595 patients]). Despite evidence of intervention uptake, the step completion rate did not significantly differ between the intervention vs usual-care groups: 5334 vs 5638 steps; 24.8 vs 24.1 steps per 100 patient-years; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.00 (95% CI, 0.87-1.15). Conclusions and Relevance: This novel multicomponent intervention did not significantly increase the rate of completed steps toward receiving a kidney transplant. Improving access to transplantation remains a global priority that requires substantial effort. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03329521.

Factors enabling transplant program participation in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) Living Donor Collective: A national survey.

BACKGROUND: The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) Living Donor Collective (LDC), the first effort to create a lifetime registry for living donor candidates in the United States, requires transplant programs to register donor candidates while the SRTR conducts follow-up. METHODS: To better understand facilitators and barriers to program participation, we conducted a brief electronic survey of U.S. transplant program staff from October 26, 2021 to December 17, 2021. RESULTS: We received 132 responses, with at least one response from 87 living donor programs (46 kidney programs, 33 kidney and liver programs, and eight liver programs alone). We found 86% of program representatives strongly agreed or agreed that funding adequate to cover the cost of data collection would facilitate LDC participation, 92% agreed or strongly agreed with importance of electronic data submission options, and 74% reported that elimination of requirements to submit duplicative pre-operative information to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) would be helpful. Other potentially enabling factors include reduction in duration of OPTN postdonation follow-up requirements, ease-of-use, protection from data use for regulation, adequate data security, and equity in data access. CONCLUSION: This survey identifies potential targets to strengthen participation in the effort to create a national living donor registry in the United States. Collaboration and investment to overcome barriers to LDC participation among transplant programs are vital to generate long-term data on living donation for donor candidates, donors, and patients in need of transplant.

"Positive Kidney Health": Implementation and design of a pharmacist-led intervention for patients at risk for development or progression of chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients with early chronic kidney disease (CKD) or underlying risk factors are often unaware of their kidney test results, common causes of CKD, and ways to lower risk of disease onset/progression. OBJECTIVE: To test feasibility of a pharmacist-led intervention targeting patient education and risk factors in patients with early CKD and those at risk for CKD. PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: Ambulatory care pharmacists in community-based primary care clinics delivered kidney health education, ordered labs, and recommended medication adjustments. PRACTICE INNOVATION: We identified patients with a moderate rate of decline (≥2 mL/min/1.73 m2 per year) in estimated glomerular filtration (eGFR) at-risk for CKD or early stage CKD. An interactive workbook was designed to teach patients about kidney test results and self-management of risk factors including hypertension, type 2 diabetes, cigarette smoking, and chronic oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use. EVALUATION METHODS: Outcomes included visit uptake, completion of annual albuminuria screening, and initiation of guideline-directed medications for CKD. Patients were surveyed pre- and post-intervention for kidney health knowledge and perceptions regarding pharmacist-provided information. RESULTS: Our sample of 20 participants had a mean eGFR of 59 mL/min/1.73 m2 and the mean eGFR decline was -4.6 mL/min/1.73 m2 per year. There were 47 visits during the pilot period from February 2021 to October 2021. Thirteen patients were missing albuminuria screening within 12 months; 2 of 9 patients with resulting labs had new microalbuminuria and were started on renoprotective medications. Patients had improved understanding of their kidney function test results and most did not consider the information scary or confusing. CONCLUSION: Barriers to enrollment included fewer participants with multiple risk factors for CKD. The pharmacists were able to engage patients in learning the importance of monitoring and self-management of kidney health. A collaborative practice agreement may enhance a similar intervention that includes initiation of renoprotective medications.

Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD): Statistical Analysis Plan of a Registry-Based, Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) is a quality improvement intervention designed to enhance access to kidney transplantation and living kidney donation. We conducted a cluster-randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effect of the intervention versus usual care on completing key steps toward receiving a kidney transplant. Objective: To prespecify the statistical analysis plan for the EnAKT LKD trial. Design: The EnAKT LKD trial is a pragmatic, 2-arm, parallel-group, registry-based, open-label, cluster-randomized, superiority, clinical trial. Randomization was performed at the level of the chronic kidney disease (CKD) programs (the "clusters"). Setting: Twenty-six CKD programs in Ontario, Canada. Participants: More than 10 000 patients with advanced CKD (ie, patients approaching the need for dialysis or receiving maintenance dialysis) with no recorded contraindication to receiving a kidney transplant. Methods: The trial data (including patient characteristics and outcomes) will be obtained from linked administrative health care databases (the "registry"). Stratified covariate-constrained randomization was used to allocate the 26 CKD programs (1:1) to provide the intervention or usual care from November 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021 (4.17 years). CKD programs in the intervention arm received the following: (1) support for local quality improvement teams and administrative needs; (2) tailored education and resources for staff, patients, and living kidney donor candidates; (3) support from kidney transplant recipients and living kidney donors; and (4) program-level performance reports and oversight by program leaders. Outcomes: The primary outcome is completing key steps toward receiving a kidney transplant, where up to 4 unique steps per patient will be considered: (1) patient referred to a transplant center for evaluation, (2) a potential living kidney donor begins their evaluation at a transplant center to donate a kidney to the patient, (3) patient added to the deceased donor transplant waitlist, and (4) patient receives a kidney transplant from a living or deceased donor. Analysis plan: Using an intent-to-treat approach, the primary outcome will be analyzed using a patient-level constrained multistate model adjusting for the clustering in CKD programs. Trial Status: The EnAKT LKD trial period is November 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021. We expect to analyze and report the results once the data for the trial period is available in linked administrative health care databases. Trial Registration: The EnAKT LKD trial is registered with the U.S. National Institute of Health at clincaltrials.gov (NCT03329521 available at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03329521). Statistical Analytic Plan: Version 1.0 August 26, 2022.

Contexte: EnAKT LKD est une intervention d'amélioration de la qualité visant à améliorer l'accès à la transplantation rénale et au don vivant de rein. Nous avons mené un essai clinique randomisé par grappes afin d'évaluer l'effet de l'intervention, par rapport aux soins habituels, sur le taux d'étapes clés réalisées dans le processus de réception d'une greffe de rein. Objectif: Exposer les grandes lignes du plan d'analyse statistique de l'essai EAKT LKD. Conception: EAKT LKD est un essai clinique pragmatique ouvert, à deux bras, en groupes parallèles, basé sur un registre, et randomisé en grappes. La randomisation a été réalisée au niveau des programmes d'insuffisance rénale chronique (IRC) (les « grappes ¼). Cadre: 26 programmes d'IRC en Ontario (Canada). Sujets: Plus de 10 000 patients atteints d'IRC de stade avancé (des patients approchant le besoin de dialyse ou recevant une hémodialyse d'entretien) sans contre-indication documentée à la greffe rénale. Méthodologie: Les données de l'essai (y compris les caractéristiques et les résultats des patients) seront obtenues à partir de bases de données administratives en santé (le « registre ¼). La randomisation stratifiée avec contraintes de covariables a servi à répartir les 26 programmes d'IRC (1:1) selon qu'ils allaient fournir l'intervention ou les soins habituels entre le 1er novembre 2017 et le 31 décembre 2021 (4,17 ans). Les programmes d'IRC du bras d'intervention ont eu droit au soutien suivant: (1) des équipes locales d'amélioration de la qualité et du soutien administratif; (2) de l'information et des ressources sur mesure pour le personnel, les patients et les donneurs vivants; (3) du soutien de la part de receveurs et de donneurs vivants; et (4) des rapports sur le rendement au niveau du programme et une surveillance assurée par les chefs de programme. Résultats: Le principal critère d'évaluation est le taux d'étapes clés accomplies vers la réception d'une greffe de rein, où jusqu'à quatre étapes uniques par patient seront comptabilisées: (1) le patient est aiguillé vers un centre de transplantation pour évaluation; (2) un possible donneur vivant de rein contacte un centre de transplantation pour un receveur en particulier et amorce son évaluation; (3) le patient est ajouté à la liste d'attente pour une transplantation d'un donneur décédé, et (4) le patient reçoit une greffe de rein d'un donneur vivant ou décédé. Plan d'analyse: Selon une approche fondée sur l'intention de traiter, le critère d'évaluation principal sera analysé au niveau du patient en utilisant un modèle multiétats contraint, corrigé dans les programmes d'IRC en fonction du regroupement. Statut de l'essai: L'essai EnAKT LKD s'est tenu du 1er novembre 2017 au 31 décembre 2021. Nous analyserons les résultats et en rendrons compte dès que les données seront disponibles dans les bases de données administratives couplées du système de santé.

Living Kidney Donation Stories and Advice Shared Through a Digital Storytelling Library: A Qualitative Thematic Analysis.

Rationale & Objective: Despite the development of numerous educational interventions, there has been limited change in actual living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) rates over time. New strategies, such as the inclusion of patient stories in patient education, show promise to inspire more people to donate kidneys. This study identified the challenges faced, coping strategies used, and advice shared by transplant donors and recipients. Study Design: Qualitative thematic analysis. Setting & Participants: One hundred eighteen storytellers across the United States and Canada, including 82 living donors and 36 kidney recipients of living donor transplants who shared their stories on the Living Donation Storytelling Project (explorelivingdonation.org), an online digital storytelling platform and library. Analytical Approach: A poststorytelling survey assessed participant demographics. Two coders conducted tool-assisted (Dedoose v.8.3.35) thematic analysis on narrative storytelling videos and transcripts. Results: Storytellers were predominantly White (79/118, 66.95%), female (76/118, 64.41%), and non-Hispanic (109/118, 92.37%) with college/vocational education (50/118, 42.37%). Common themes were found related to living donation challenges for donors and recipients (eg, the fear of not being able to complete the LDKT process, of unsupportive family or rejected donation requests, and of unknown or adverse surgical outcomes and graft rejection) and recommended coping strategies (eg, seeking LDKT information, using prayer, and relying on a support network). Recipients provided advice that included being proactive and staying hopeful, whereas donors recommended seeking support, researching LDKT to comprehensively learn, and building a community of support. Limitations: Limited representation of diverse demographics. Conclusions: Although supplementary to traditional education about LDKT, digital storytelling provides a source of peer support that can enhance the experience of donors and recipients and encourage autonomy and self-management after transplant.

Stressors and Information-Seeking by Dialysis and Transplant Patients During COVID-19, Reported on a Telephone Hotline: A Mixed-Methods Study.

Rationale & Objective: In early 2020, we activated a telephone hotline, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Kidney or Transplant Listening and Resource Center, to learn more about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the stress and information-seeking behaviors of dialysis and transplant patients. Study Design: A mixed-methods study including semi-structured, qualitative interviews probing about emotional, health, and financial challenges experienced and quantitative surveys assessing depression and anxiety levels and information-seeking behaviors. Setting & Participants: 99 participants (28 dialysis patients; 71 transplant patients), varying by race and ethnicity (Hispanic, 25.3%; White, 23.2%; Asian, 24.2%; Black, 24.2%), shared their COVID-19 pandemic experiences and information-seeking behaviors by telephone. Interviews and surveys were conducted from June 17, 2020, to November 24, 2020. Analytical Approach: Qualitative themes were identified using thematic analysis. Frequencies were calculated to assess levels of depression and anxiety using the Patient Health Questionnaire for Depression and Anxiety and types of information-seeking behaviors. Results: 7 themes and 16 subthemes emerged. Themes of commonly reported stressors include postponing medical visits; decreased accessibility of getting medication; difficulty in receiving up-to-date, patient-focused health information and dialysis supplies; and delays in medical appointments. Other stressors include losses of health insurance and income, and increased vigilance in behaviors to avoid contracting COVID-19. 15 participants had moderate to severe anxiety and depression symptoms and reported more frequent and severe panic attacks after the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants sought emotional support from family, friends, and faith communities. They also commonly obtained information from news media and reported needing more transplant-specific updates about COVID-19, and frequent communication from their kidney and transplant specialists. Limitations: This convenience sample of individuals willing to share their experiences through a telephone hotline may not generalize to all dialysis and transplant patients; stressors related to the COVID-19 pandemic for these patients continue to change. Conclusions: As the impact of the pandemic continues, needs-based interventions tailored for the kidney and transplant community, including access to mental health resources, education, and support for care transitions, should continue.

Protocol for a Process Evaluation of the Quality Improvement Intervention to Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: Many patients who would benefit from a kidney transplant never receive one. The Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) pragmatic, cluster-randomized clinical trial is testing whether a multi-component quality improvement intervention, provided in chronic kidney disease (CKD) programs (vs. usual care), can help patients with CKD with no recorded contraindications to kidney transplant complete more steps toward receiving a transplant (primary outcome of the trial). The EnAKT LKD intervention has 4 components: (1) quality Improvement teams and administrative support, (2) improved transplant education for patients and healthcare providers, (3) access to support and (4) program-level performance monitoring. Objective: To conduct a process evaluation of the EnAKT LKD quality improvement intervention to determine if the components were delivered, received, and enacted as designed (fidelity), and if the intervention addressed intended barriers (mechanisms of change). Design: A mixed-methods process evaluation informed by new practice implementation and theories of behavior change. Setting: Chronic kidney disease programs in Ontario, Canada, began receiving the EnAKT LKD intervention on November 1, 2017 and will continue to receive it until December 31, 2021. The process evaluation (interviews and surveys) will occur alongside the trial, between December 2020 to May 2021. Participants: Healthcare providers (eg, dialysis nurses, nephrologists, members of the multi-care kidney clinic team) at Ontario's 27 CKD programs. Methods: We will survey and interview healthcare providers at each CKD program, and complete an intervention implementation checklist. Quantitative data from the surveys and the intervention implementation checklist will assess fidelity to the intervention, while quantitative and qualitative data from surveys and interviews will provide insight into the mechanisms of change. Limitations: The long trial period may result in poor participant recall. Conclusion: This process evaluation will enhance interpretation of the trial findings, guide improvements in the intervention components, and inform future implementation. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov; identifier: NCT03329521.

Contexte: Plusieurs patients qui pourraient tirer profit d'une greffe de rein n'en reçoivent jamais une. L'essai clinique pragmatique et randomisé par grappes EnAKT LKD (Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation) vise l'amélioration de l'accès à la transplantation rénale et au don de rein vivant. L'essai examine une intervention d'amélioration de la qualité (par rapport aux soins habituels) à composantes multiples réalisée dans le cadre des programs d'insuffisance rénale chronique (IRC) afin de déterminer si elle peut aider les patients atteints d'une néphropathie chronique sans contre-indications documentées à une greffe rénale à franchir davantage d'étapes vers la réception d'une greffe (principal critère d'évaluation de l'essai). L'intervention EAKT LKD comporte quatre composantes : 1) les équipes d'amélioration de la qualité et le soutien administratif; 2) l'amélioration de l'éducation sur la transplantation destinée aux patients et aux fournisseurs de soins; 3) l'accès au soutien; et 4) le suivi du rendement à l'échelle du program. Objectif: L'évaluation du processus de l'intervention d'amélioration de la qualité EnAKT LKD vise deux objectifs : déterminer si les composants ont été livrés, reçus et mis en œuvre comme prévu (fidélité) et vérifier si l'intervention a permis d'éliminer les obstacles prévus (mécanismes de changement). Type d'étude: Une évaluation de processus à méthodes mixtes fondée sur les théories concernant la mise en œuvre de nouvelles pratiques et les changements de comportement. Cadre: Les programs d'IRC ontariens (Canada) ont commencé à recevoir l'intervention EnAKT LKD le 1er novembre 2017 et ont continué de la recevoir jusqu'au 31 décembre 2021. L'évaluation du processus (sondages et entretiens) s'est effectuée parallèlement à l'essai, de décembre 2020 à mai 2021. Participants: Les fournisseurs de soins (infirmières en dialyze, néphrologues, membres du personnel des cliniques multidisciplinaires en santé rénale) des 27 programs d'IRC ontariens. Méthodologie: Nous allons sonder et interroger les fournisseurs de soins de chaque program d'IRC et nous complèterons une liste vérifiant la mise en œuvre de l'intervention. Les données quantitatives tirées des sondages et listes de vérification permettront d'évaluer la fidélité à l'intervention, alors que les données quantitatives et qualitatives extraites des sondages et des entretiens fourniront un aperçu des mécanismes de changement. Limites: La longue période de l'essai pourrait rendre difficile le rappel des participants. Conclusion: Cette évaluation du processus permettra d'améliorer l'interprétation des résultats de l'essai et de guider l'amélioration des composantes de l'intervention, en plus d'éclairer de futures mises en œuvre. Enregistrement de l'essai: ClinicalTrials.gov; identifiant : NCT03329521.

The Knowledge Assessment of Renal Transplantation (KART) 2.0: Development and Validation of CKD and Transplant Knowledge Scales.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Many individuals with kidney disease, particularly those belonging to racial and ethnic minority groups and whose primary language is not English, lack knowledge related to kidney disease symptoms, physiologic functions of the kidney, and benefits and risks of kidney transplantation. Valid instruments to assess patients' knowledge of CKD and kidney transplantation are needed. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Using a sample of 977 patients with stages 3-5 CKD in the Kaiser Permanente health system, we developed the Knowledge Assessment of Renal Transplantation (KART) 2.0 instrument. We conducted cognitive interviews followed by item response theory (IRT) to reduce 48 candidate items. Construct validity was tested by examining differences in scores between patients who spent <1 and ≥1 hour receiving CKD and transplant education. RESULTS: Cognitive interviews modified four items and omitted 11. IRT analyses resulted in two scales: the KART 2.0-Transplant Knowledge Scale (16 items; Cronbach's α=0.8) and the KART 2.0-CKD Knowledge Scale (nine items; Cronbach's α=0.79). Differential item functioning showed that the scales were unbiased to capture knowledge across self-identified race, primary language, CKD stage, and sex. Both scales distinguished patients who had spent <1 and ≥1 hour speaking with health professionals (effect size [ES]=0.33 [transplant], 0.54 [CKD]; P<0.001 for both), reading about kidney disease (ES=0.45 [transplant], 0.62 [CKD]; P<0.001), reading about kidney transplantation (ES=0.67 [transplant], 0.69 [CKD]; P<0.001), and reading about living donor kidney transplant (ES=0.76 [transplant], 0.62 [CKD]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The KART 2.0 is a valid tool to assess patients' knowledge of CKD and kidney transplantation.

Risk aversion in the use of complex kidneys in paired exchange programs: Opportunities for even more transplants?

This retrospective review of the largest United States kidney exchange reports characteristics, utilization, and recipient outcomes of kidneys with simple compared to complex anatomy and extrapolates reluctance to accept these kidneys. Of 3105 transplants performed, only 12.8% were right kidneys and 23.1% had multiple renal arteries. 59.3% of centers used fewer right kidneys than expected and 12.1% transplanted zero right kidneys or kidneys with more than 1 artery. Five centers transplanted a third of these kidneys (35.8% of right kidneys and 36.7% of kidneys with multiple renal arteries). 22.5% and 25.5% of centers currently will not entertain a match offer for a left or right kidney with more than one artery, respectively. There were no significant differences in all-cause graft failure or death-censored graft loss for kidneys with multiple arteries, and a very small increased risk of graft failure for right kidneys versus left of limited clinical relevance for most recipients. Kidneys with complex anatomy can be used with excellent outcomes at many centers. Variation in use (lack of demand) for these kidneys reduces the number of transplants, so systems to facilitate use could increase demand. We cannot know how many donors are turned away because perceived demand is limited.

Motivations and outcomes of compatible living donor-recipient pairs in paired exchange.

Increasing numbers of compatible pairs are choosing to enter paired exchange programs, but motivations, outcomes, and system-level effects of participation are not well described. Using a linkage of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and National Kidney Registry, we compared outcomes of traditional (originally incompatible) recipients to originally compatible recipients using the Kaplan-Meier method. We identified 154 compatible pairs. Most pairs sought to improve HLA matching. Compared to the original donor, actual donors were younger (39 vs. 50 years, p < .001), less often female (52% vs. 68%, p < .01), higher BMI (27 vs. 25 kg/m², p = .03), less frequently blood type O (36% vs. 80%, p < .001), and had higher eGFR (99 vs. 94 ml/min/1.73 m², p = .02), with a better LKDPI (median 7 vs. 22, p < .001). We observed no differences in graft failure or mortality. Compatible pairs made 280 additional transplants possible, many in highly sensitized recipients with long wait times. Compatible pair recipients derived several benefits from paired exchange, including better donor quality. Living donor pairs should receive counseling regarding all options available, including kidney paired donation. As more compatible pairs choose to enter exchange programs, consideration should be given to optimizing compatible pair and hard-to-transplant recipient outcomes.