Lack of Evidence for Racial Disparity in 30-Day All-Cause Readmission Rate for Older US Veterans Hospitalized with Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure is the leading cause for 30-day all-cause readmission. Although racial disparities in health care are well documented, their impact on 30-day all-cause readmission rate is inconclusive. OBJECTIVE: We examined the impact of racial disparity on 30-day readmission for hospitalized patients with heart failure. METHODS: This is a retrospective secondary data analysis for a large veteran cohort in 130 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. Propensity scores were used to reduce differences in age, gender, survival days, and comorbidities in index hospitalization among 46 524 whites and 14 124 African Americans (AA). RESULTS: At index hospitalization, AA patients were younger (73.04 vs 67.10 years, t = -54.58, P < .000) and less likely to have myocardial infarcts (8.02% vs 9.80%, t = -6.36, P = .000), peripheral vascular disease (15.25% vs 22.51%, t = -18.68, P = .000), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (39.59% vs 50.05%, t = -21.89, P < .000), and complicated diabetes (23.42% vs 26.24%, t = -6.73, P = .000). AA patients had lower mortality 30 days post-index hospitalization (3.51% vs 5.69%, t = -10.23, P = .000). In contrast, AA patients were more likely to have renal disease (44.03% vs 38.71%, t = 11.32, P < .000) and HIV/AIDS (1.56% vs 0.20%, t = 19.71, P < .000). The 30-day all-cause readmission rate before adjustments was 17.82% for AA patients versus 18.72% for white patients. There was no difference in the 2 rates after adjustments (18% vs 18%; odds of readmission = 1.002, z = 0.08, P = .937). CONCLUSIONS: In a large Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) cohort, white and AA veterans hospitalized for heart failure had similar 30-day all-cause readmission rates after adjustments were made for age, gender, survival days, and comorbidities. However, the 30-day all-cause mortality rate was higher for white patients than for AA patients. Future prospective studies are needed to validate results and test generalizability outside the VA system of care.

Current Canadian initiatives to reimburse live organ donors for their non-medical expenses.

Living organ donors frequently incur non-medical expenses for travel, accommodation, prescription drugs, loss of income, and child care in conjunction with organ donation. Despite international precedent and widespread public support, Canada currently lacks a unified strategy to reimburse donors for these expenses. In 2005, we communicated with 78 individuals within the field of Canadian transplantation to identify which initiatives for reimbursement of living donors existed in each province. Saskatchewan was the only province in which public employees were granted paid leave for organ donation. Six provincial governments partially reimbursed travel and accommodation. At the federal level, other expenses could be partially reimbursed through an income tax credit, while the Employment Insurance program and the Canada Pension Plan provided funding for donors who become unemployed or develop long-term disability as a result of donation. Charities helped a limited number of patients in financial need through grants and no-interest loans, but funding was generally limited by contributions received. While reimbursing living donors for their non-medical expenses is considered just, existing programs only partially reimburse expenses and are not available in all provinces. Developing future reimbursement policies will remove a disincentive faced by some potential donors, and may increase rates of transplantation in Canada.

The direct and indirect economic costs incurred by living kidney donors-a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Despite the many benefits of living donor kidney transplantation, economic consequences can result for donors. We reviewed studies which quantified the direct and indirect costs incurred by living kidney donors, in order to understand the strengths and limitations of existing literature. METHODS: We identified relevant studies in MEDLINE, EMBASE and ECONOLIT bibliographic databases, in the Science Citation Index and study reference lists. Any study which reported at least one cost relevant to donors was included. The accuracy of abstracted data was verified by two reviewers and reported in year 2004 US dollars. RESULTS: Thirty-five studies from 12 countries described costs incurred by individuals who donated between the years 1964 and 2003. No study comprehensively quantified all relevant expenses-the sum of select costs considered in one US study averaged Dollars 837 per donor and ranged from Dollars 0 to 28,906. Travel and/or accommodation costs were incurred by 9-99% of donors, and were higher in countries with a larger land mass. Post-discharge analgesics were required by 4-24% of donors, but prescription costs were not reported. Between 14 and 30% of donors incurred costs for lost income, with an average loss of Dollars 3386 in one study from the UK and Dollars 682 in another study from the Netherlands. Costs for dependent care were incurred by 9-44% of donors, while costs for domestic help were incurred by 8% of donors. CONCLUSIONS: Donors incur many types of costs attributable to kidney donation and the total costs are certainly higher than previously reported. To guide informed consent and fair reimbursement policies, further data on all relevant costs, preferably from a detailed prospective multi-centre cohort study, are required.

Progress and pitfalls in underrepresented minority recruitment: perspectives from the medical schools.

PURPOSE: To assess current initiatives at U.S. medical schools to recruit underrepresented minorities (URM) and to identify perceived barriers to enrollment of URM students. METHODS: We developed a survey that was mailed to the dean of Student Affairs of all U.S. allopathic and osteopathic medical schools in 2002. Respondents were asked to list their schools' URM recruitment programs and rate the effectiveness of these programs. They were also asked to indicate barriers to URM recruitment from a list of 37 potential barriers and rate their overall success with URM recruitment. RESULTS: The study had a 59% response rate. All schools reported a wide variety of initiatives for URM recruitment with > or =50% of all schools using each of the 11 strategies. The three most commonly listed barriers to URM recruitment were MCAT scores of applicants (90%), lack of minority faculty (71%) and lack of minority role models (71%). Most schools rated their recruitment efforts highly; on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being very successful), the average score was an 8. CONCLUSION: While schools continue to invest tremendous efforts in recruiting minority applicants, admissions criteria, lack of URM faculty and the need for external evaluation remain important barriers to achieving a diverse physician workforce.