Home-based family intervention increases knowledge, communication and living donation rates: a randomized controlled trial

System Interventions to Achieve Early and Equitable Kidney Transplants (STEPS): Protocol for STEPS, a randomized comparative effectiveness clinical trial

The System Interventions to Achieve Early and Equitable Kidney Transplants Study (STEPS) is an ongoing pragmatic clinical trial investigating the effectiveness of an equitable and patient-centered approach to kidney care on equitable access to early kidney transplants for individuals with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis. The STEPS intervention combines active electronic health record surveillance to equitably identify all potentially eligible kidney transplant candidates in three health systems ('STEPS Surveillance') with a 'STEPS Outreach Program' (comprised of equity-conscious patient-centered transplant social worker and transplant coordinator outreach and navigation activities). Identified eligible participants are randomly assigned to receive either (a) Augmented Usual Kidney Care (routine care plus electronic surveillance and best practice alerts), or (b) the STEPS Health System Surveillance and Outreach Intervention plus Augmented Usual Kidney Care to improve access to kidney transplants overall as well as among Black and rural residing individuals. STEPS recruited all planned 1168 participants from March 2022 to March 2024. Outcomes will quantify differences between the study arms in progress toward and completion of kidney transplant evaluations, assessed via medical records, and patient-reported outcomes. Registration of clinical trials This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under the identifier NCT05014256.

Evaluating Quality and Readability of AI-generated Information on Living Kidney Donation

Background

The availability of high-quality and easy-to-read informative material is crucial to providing accurate information to prospective kidney donors. The quality of this information has been associated with the likelihood of proceeding with a living donation. Artificial intelligence-based large language models (LLMs) have recently become common instruments for acquiring information online, including medical information. The aim of this study was to assess the quality and readability of artificial intelligence-generated information on kidney donation.

Methods

A set of 35 common donor questions was developed by the authors and used to interrogate 3 LLMs (ChatGPT, Google Gemini, and MedGPT). Answers were collected and independently evaluated using the CLEAR tool for (1) completeness, (2) lack of false information, (3) evidence-based information, (4) appropriateness, and (5) relevance. Readability was evaluated using the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease Score and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level.

Results

The interrater intraclass correlation was 0.784 (95% confidence interval, 0.716-0.814). Median CLEAR scores were ChatGPT 22 (interquartile range [IQR], 3.67), Google Gemini 24.33 (IQR, 2.33), and MedGPT 23.33 (IQR, 2.00). ChatGPT, Gemini, and MedGPT had mean Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease Scores of 37.32 (SD = 10.00), 39.42 (SD = 13.49), and 29.66 (SD = 7.94), respectively. Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level assessment, ChatGPT had an average score of 12.29, Gemini had 10.63, and MedGPT had 13.21 (P < 0.001), indicating that all LLMs had a readability at the college-level education.

Conclusions

Current LLM provides fairly accurate responses to common prospective living kidney donor questions; however, the generated information is complex and requires an advanced level of education. As LLMs become more relevant in the field of medical information, transplant providers should familiarize themselves with the shortcomings of these technologies.

Expanding Opportunities for Living Donation: Recommendations From the 2023 Santander Summit to Ensure Donor Protections, Informed Decision Making, and Equitable Access

A strategic vision toward global convergence in transplantation must encourage and remove barriers to living organ donation and transplantation. Here, we discuss deliberations of a working group of the 2023 Santander Summit charged with formulating recommendations for the safe expansion of living donor kidney transplantation and living donor liver transplantation worldwide. Living donor kidney transplantation has grown to be the preferred treatment for advanced kidney failure. Living donor liver transplantation emerged more recently as a strategy to reduce waitlist mortality, with adoption influenced by cultural factors, regional policies, clinical team experience, and the maturity of regional deceased donor transplant systems. Barriers to living donor transplantation span domains of education, infrastructure, risk assessment/risk communication, and financial burden to donors. Paired donor exchange is a growing option for overcoming incompatibilities to transplantation but is variably used across and within countries. Effectively expanding access to living donor transplantation requires multifaceted strategies, including improved education and outreach, and measures to enhance efficiency, transparency, and shared decision making in donor candidate evaluation. Efforts toward global dissemination and vigilant oversight of best practices and international standards for the assessment, informed consent, approval, and monitoring of living donors are needed. Fostering greater participation in paired exchange requires eliminating disincentives and logistical obstacles for transplant programs and patients, and establishing an ethical and legal framework grounded in World Health Organization Guiding Principles. Sharing of best practices from successful countries and programs to jurisdictions with emerging practices is vital to safely expand the practice of living donation worldwide and bring the field together globally.

Educational interventions improve disparities in patient access to kidney transplantation: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Transplantation significantly improves the quality of life for patients with chronic kidney disease. Despite various educational strategies being assessed, the optimal approach to overcome barriers to kidney transplantation remains unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing educational interventions to improve kidney transplantation access. The authors searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, and Clinicaltrials.gov up until June 2024. Outcomes included rate of transplantation, living donor inquiries, waitlisting, evaluation, and knowledge level. Frequentist random-effects models and p-scores were used to rank strategies. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO.

RESULTS

The authors included 24 RCTs with a total of 116 054 patients. Of these, 57 996 (49.97%) received educational interventions and 58 058 (50.03%) received standard-care. Educator-guided and home-based strategies were associated with a higher rate of transplantation to multilevel interventions (RR 1.63; 95% CI: 1.07-2.48; P=0.023 | RR 1.85; 95% CI: 1.11-3.08; P=0.019) and standard-care (RR 1.56; 95% CI: 1.00-2.45; P=0.049 | RR 1.78; 95% CI: 1.17-2.70; P=0.007). According to the P-scores ranking, home-based interventions were the most likely strategy to improve transplantation access.

CONCLUSION

In this NMA of 24 RCTs, home-based and educator-guided interventions were the most beneficial for improving access to kidney transplantation. Future studies should focus on their applicability for minority populations with challenges in health literacy and transplant access.

Challenges in decision-making support processes regarding living kidney donation: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Previous studies on decision-making of living kidney donors have indicated issues regarding donors' autonomy is inherent in decision-making to donate their kidney. Establishing effective decision-making support that guarantees autonomy of living kidney donor candidates is important.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to identify the difficulties in the decision-making support when clinical transplant coordinators advocating for the autonomy of donor candidates of living donor kidney transplantation and to identify the methods to deal with these difficulties.

DESIGN

A qualitative descriptive study.

PARTICIPANTS

Ten clinical transplant coordinators supporting living kidney donors.

APPROACH

Semi-structured interviews were conducted using an interview guide. The modified grounded theory approach was utilised to analyse.

RESULTS

Three categories related to difficulties were as follows: issues inherent to the interaction between coordinators, donor candidates and their families; issues regarding the environment and institutional background in which coordinators operate; and emotional labour undertaken by coordinators in the decision-making support process. Additionally, five categories related to methods were as follows: assessing the autonomy of donor candidates based on the coordinators nursing experience; interventions for the donor candidates and their family members based on the coordinators nursing experience; smooth coordination with medical staff; clarifying and asserting their views as coordinators; and readiness to protect the donor candidates.

CONCLUSION

The involvement of highly experienced coordinators with excellent and assertive communication skills as well as the ability to reflect on their own practices is essential. Moreover, we may need to fundamentally review the transplant community, where power domination is inherent.

Time trends in preemptive kidney transplantation in Europe: an ERA registry study

BACKGROUND

Preemptive kidney transplantation (PEKT) has better outcomes when compared with transplantation after dialysis. We aimed to examine trends in PEKT between 2000 and 2019 in Europe and to provide an overview of associated policies, barriers and initiatives.

METHODS

Adult patients from 12 European countries who received a preemptive kidney transplant were included. The representatives of the registries providing these data were questioned on the policies, barriers and initiatives around PEKT.

RESULTS

Between 2000 and 2019, 20 251 adults underwent PEKT [11 169 from living donors (LDs), 8937 from deceased donors (DDs)]. The proportion of first kidney transplantations that were preemptive more than doubled from 7% in 2000 to 18% in 2019, reflecting a similar relative increase for LD kidney recipients (from 21% to 43%) and DD kidney recipients (from 4% to 11%). Large international differences were found. The increase in PEKT was observed across all age, sex and primary renal disease groups. Countries had similar criteria for preemptive waitlisting. Barriers mentioned included donor shortage, late referral to the transplant center and long donoror recipient work-up. Suggested initiatives included raising awareness on the possibility of PEKT, earlier start and shorter work-up time for recipient and LD.

CONCLUSIONS

Over the last two decades the proportion of patients receiving a first kidney transplant preemptively has more than doubled, reflecting a similar relative increase for living and DD kidney recipients.

A Transplant-Inclusive Value-Based Kidney Care Payment Model

In the United States, kidney care payment models are migrating toward value-based care (VBC) models incentivizing quality of care at lower cost. Current kidney VBC models will continue through 2026. We propose a future transplant-inclusive VBC (TIVBC) model designed to supplement current models focusing on patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). The proposed TIVBC is structured as an episode-of-care model with risk-based reimbursement for "referral/evaluation/waitlisting" (REW, referencing kidney transplantation), "primary hospitalization to 180 days posttransplant," and "long-term graft survival." Challenges around organ acquisition costs, adjustments to quality metrics, and potential criticisms of the proposed model are discussed. We propose next steps in risk-adjustment and cost-prediction to develop as an end-to-end, TIVBC model.

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.

Safety and safety protocols for living donor nephrectomy in Italy

Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKTx) is recommended by all scientific societies. Living donor nephrectomy (LDN) is probably one of the safest surgical procedures, but it carries some risk for healthy donors. The aim of this study is to provide a snapshot of LDKTx activities in Italy and ask about safety measures implemented in LDN. Data on LDKTx were extracted from the national database. Safety measures were examined through a specific survey. Between 2001 and 2022 40,663 kidney transplants (31.4 per million population-pmp) were performed, including 4731 LDKTx (3.7 pmp). There was no postoperative death of the donor. After a median follow-up of 52.2 months [IQR:17.9-99.5], the 10-year donor survival rate was 93.38% (CI:97.52-98.94). There was evidence of renal disease in 65 donors (1.8%), including 42 (1.1%) with stage III end-stage renal disease. Twenty-nine out of 35 transplant centers (TC) involved in LDKTx responded to the survey (82.9%). Six TCs (21.4%) had a total experience of 20 or fewer LDN. Minimally invasive LDN was the first choice at 24 TC (82.8%). At 10 TC (37.0%) only one surgeon performed LDN. Nineteen TCs (65.5%) had a surgical safety checklist for LDN and 14 had a postoperative surveillance protocol. The renal artery was occluded in 3 TCs (10.3%) mainly by non-transfixion methods (including clips). Redundancy of key safety systems in the operating room was available in 22 of 29 centers (75.8%). In summary, LDKTx should be further implemented in Italy. Donor safety should be improved through the implementation of a national procedural protocol.

Mitigating Health Disparities in Transplantation Requires Equity, Not Equality

Despite decades of research and evidence-based mitigation strategies, disparities in access to transplantation persist for all organ types and in all stages of the transplant process. Although some strategies have shown promise for alleviating disparities, others have fallen short of the equity goal by providing the same tools and resources to all rather than tailoring the tools and resources to one's circumstances. Innovative solutions that engage all stakeholders are needed to achieve equity regardless of race, sex, age, socioeconomic status, or geography. Mitigation of disparities is paramount to ensure fair and equitable access for those with end-stage disease and to preserve the trust of the public, upon whom we rely for their willingness to donate organs. In this overview, we present a summary of recent literature demonstrating persistent disparities by stage in the transplant process, along with policies and interventions that have been implemented to combat these disparities and hypotheses for why some strategies have been more effective than others. We conclude with future directions that have been proposed by experts in the field and how these suggested strategies may help us finally arrive at equity in transplantation.

Strategies to address perceived barriers to timely kidney transplantation in the Netherlands: A qualitative study from a stakeholders' perspective

Objective

We present strategies to perceived barriers to access to kidney transplantation (KT) in the Netherlands.

Methods

This qualitative study (N = 70) includes nephrologists, social workers, surgeons, nurses, patients, former living kidney donors, policy employees, and insurance representatives. Interviews were conducted both in focus groups and individually and coded with NVivo.

Results

Participants proposed strategies within five domains. 1.Policy: Making KT guideline more visible. 2.Medical: Increase access and transparency to KT medical eligibility criteria (e.g., age, BMI) for patients and healthcare providers. 3.Psychological: Support patients who continue to use dialysis because of social interaction opportunities associated with dialysis settings to find such interaction elsewhere. Link kidney patients with fears for KT to experienced experts or trained professionals. 4.Social: Support patients with language barriers with interpreters and visual explanations. Support patients using social media, e.g. Facebook, to identify potential donors. Better expectation management to reduce reports of inadequate aftercare for living donors. 5.Economical: Solving negative economic incentives for KT by changing incentives.

Conclusion

Stakeholders see strategies for barriers in the entire care pathway.

Innovation

This large qualitative study gives an important overview which strategies stakeholders see improving access to KT. Some strategies offer opportunities to solve barriers in the short-term.

Sikh and Muslim perspectives on kidney transplantation: phase 1 of the DiGiT project - a qualitative descriptive study

OBJECTIVES

Kidney transplantation offers patients better quality of life and survival compared with dialysis. The risk of end stage renal disease is higher among ethnic minorities and they experience longer wait times on transplant lists. This inequality stems from a high need for kidney transplantation combined with a low rate of deceased donation among ethnic minority groups. This study aimed to explore the perspectives around living donor kidney transplantation of members of the Sikh and Muslim communities with an aim to develop a digital intervention to overcome any barriers.

DESIGN

A qualitative descriptive study using in person focus groups.

SETTING

University Teaching Hospital and Transplant Centre.

PARTICIPANTS

Convenience sampling of participants from the transplant population. Three focus groups were held with 20 participants, all were of South Asian ethnicity belonging to the Sikh and Muslim communities.

METHODS

Interviews were digitally audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim; transcripts were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Four themes were identified: (a) religious issues; (b) lack of knowledge within the community; (c) time; (d) cultural identification with transplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

Not only is the information given and when it is delivered important, but also the person giving the information is crucial to enhance consideration of live donor kidney transplantation. Information should be in a first language where possible and overtly align to religious considerations. A more integrated approach to transplantation counselling should be adopted which includes healthcare professionals and credible members of the target cultural group.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04327167.

Multidisciplinary Support To Access living donor Kidney Transplant (MuST AKT): A Clinical Research Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial to Increase Living Kidney Donation

Background

Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the optimal treatment for eligible patients with kidney failure, although it is underutilized. Contextually tailored patient- and family-centered interventions may be effective to increase LDKT.

Objective

We outline a protocol to test the feasibility of the Multidisciplinary Support To Access living donor Kidney Transplant (MuST AKT) intervention designed to increase LDKT.

Design

Non-blinded single-center pilot randomized controlled trial with a qualitative interview component.

Setting

Academic transplant referral center in Northern Alberta Region with a population of more than 2 million in its catchment area.

Patients

English-speaking patients of the age range 18 to 75 years who are referred for kidney transplantation are eligible to participate.

Measurements

Feasibility will be assessed by indicators of recruitment, retention, and completion rates, treatment fidelity, adherence to intervention, engagement in intervention, and acceptability.

Methods

Participants will be randomly assigned 1:1 to either standard care (control) or the experimental group who receive standard care plus the MuST AKT intervention, a person-centered program designed to assist and enable the kidney transplant candidate to achieve what is required to receive an LDKT. The intervention consists of an introductory session and 4 intervention sessions delivered in-person or virtually.

Limitations

Inferences cannot be drawn regarding the efficacy/effectiveness of the MuST AKT intervention. This study is non-blinded.

Conclusions

This pilot study is the first step in our broader initiative to increase LDKT in our health care jurisdiction. The results of this study will be used to inform the development of a future definitive randomized controlled trial.

Trial registration number

NCT04666545.

Sex and Gender Disparities in Living Kidney Donation: A Scoping Review

Background

Women are more likely than men to be living kidney donors. We summarized the evidence concerning the reasons behind sex and gender disparities in living kidney donation (LKD).

Methods

A scoping review of quantitative and qualitative evidence on reasons for sex and gender disparities in LKD was conducted from inception to March 2023.

Results

Of 1123 studies screened, 45 were eligible for inclusion. Most studies were from North America, Europe, and Central Asia (n = 33, 73%). A predominance of women as living donors (55%-65%) was observed in 15 out of 18 (83%) studies. Reasons for sex and gender disparities in LKD included socioeconomic, biological, and cognitive or emotional factors. A gendered division of roles within the families was observed in most studies, with men being the primary income earner and women being the main caregiver. Fear of loss of income was a barrier to male donation. Human leukocyte antigen sensitization through pregnancy in female recipients precluded male partner donation, whereas female donation was supported by altruism and a positive attitude toward LKD.

Conclusions

Sex imbalance in LKD is prevalent, with a predominance of women as living donors. Such disparities are driven by societal and cultural perceptions of gender roles, pregnancy-induced sensitization, and attitudes toward donation and at least some of these factors are modifiable. Donor compensation to support predonation assessments and income loss, implementation of innovative desensitization treatments, promotion of paired kidney exchange program, and targeted educational initiatives to promote equitable living donation may help to close the gender gap in LKD.

Inequities in Organ Donation and Transplantation Among Immigrant Populations in Italy: A Narrative Review of Evidence, Gaps in Research and Potential Areas for Intervention

Immigrants from outside Europe have increased over the past two decades, especially in Southern European countries including Italy. This influx coincided with an increased number of immigrants with end-stage organ diseases. In this narrative review, we reviewed evidence of the gaps between native-born and immigrant populations in the Organ Donation and Transplantation (ODT) process in Italy. Consistent with prior studies, despite the availability of a publicly funded health system with universal healthcare coverage, non-European-born individuals living in Italy are less likely to receive living donor kidney transplantation and more likely to have inferior long-term kidney graft function compared with EU-born and Eastern European-born individuals. While these patients are increasingly represented among transplant recipients (especially kidney and liver transplants), refusal rates for organ donation are higher in some ethnic groups compared with native-born and other foreign-born referents, with the potential downstream effects of prolonged waiting times and inferior transplant outcomes. In the process, we identified gaps in relevant research and biases in existing studies. Given the Italian National Transplant Center's (CNT) commitment to fighting inequities in ODT, we illustrated actions taken by CNT to tackle inequities in ODT among immigrant communities in Italy.

Paving the way for solutions improving access to kidney transplantation: a qualitative study from a multistakeholder perspective

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to obtain an in-depth perspective from stakeholders involved in access to kidney transplantation to pave the way for solutions in improving access to kidney transplantation. This study qualitatively explored factors influencing optimal access to kidney transplantation from a broad stakeholder perspective.

DESIGN

A qualitative study was performed using semistructured interviews both in focus groups and with individual participants. All interviews were recorded, transcribed and coded according to the principles of grounded theory.

SETTING

Participants were healthcare providers (geographically spread), patients and (former living) kidney donors, policy-makers and insurers.

PARTICIPANTS

Stakeholders (N=87) were interviewed regarding their perceptions, opinions and attitudes regarding access to kidney transplantation.

RESULTS

The problems identified by stakeholders within the domains-policy, medical, psychological, social and economic-were acknowledged by all respondents. According to respondents, more efforts should be made to make healthcare providers and patients aware of the clinical guideline for kidney transplantation. The same opinion applied to differences in medical inclusion criteria used in the different transplantation centres. Stakeholders saw room for improvement based on psychological and social themes, especially regarding the provision of information. Many stakeholders described the need to rethink the current economic model to improve access to kidney transplantation. This discussion led to a definition of the most urgent problems for which, according to the respondents, a solution must be sought to optimise access to kidney transplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

Stakeholders indicated a high sense of urgency to solve barriers in patient access to kidney transplantation. Moreover, it appears that some barriers are quite straightforward to overcome; according to stakeholders, it is striking that this process has not yet been overcome. Stakeholders involved in kidney transplantation have provided directions for future solutions, and now it is possible to search for solutions with them.

A Home Education Service to Increase Knowledge of Treatment Options and Improve Attitudes to Living Donor Kidney Transplantation

Introduction: Lack of knowledge about living donor kidney transplant and difficulties in approaching potential donors constitute barriers for many patients and may contribute to inequality of access. Project Aims: Renal Education and Choices at Home was a UK single-centre pilot of home education; an initiative aiming to overcome barriers by increasing knowledge among patients and support networks and by facilitating living donation discussion in the patient's home. Design: This was a pre-post comparison of knowledge, attitude, and ability to communicate about transplant. Pre-visit knowledge about treatment options and attitudes towards transplant were measured using a validated questionnaire, repeated 4-6 weeks post-visit, to assess the session's impact, along with an evaluation survey, to determine how patients perceived the session. Results: From November 2018 to February 2020, a nurse specialist delivered living donor transplant education sessions in the homes of 86 patients, attended by 141 additional invitees. Home visits led to a significant improvement in knowledge about renal therapies, including living donor transplantation. The evaluation of the home visits by patients and invitees was overwhelmingly positive. Of the 86 patients visited, 46 (53%) had at least one potential donor initiating the assessment process following the visit. Overall, 78 potential donors initiated the assessment process. Conclusion: Home education contributed to addressing recognised barriers, in a way that was well received by patients and was novel in our health system. Home education may be particularly beneficial for patients affected by known barriers to living donor transplantation such as socio-economic deprivation.

Patient information about living donor kidney transplantation across UK renal units: A critical review

BACKGROUND

Patient information about living donor kidney transplantation is used to supplement conversations between health professionals, people with advanced kidney disease and potential kidney donors. It is not known if the information is designed to support decision-making about renal replacement options and if it helps people discuss living kidney donation with family and friends.

OBJECTIVE

Critical review of resources used in outpatient kidney consultations to support patients' decision-making about living kidney donor transplantation.

DESIGN

Mixed methods including an audit questionnaire and critical analysis of patient information leaflets.

PARTICIPANTS AND MEASUREMENTS

All kidney transplant centres and renal units in United Kingdom received a questionnaire to elicit by whom, how, and when information about living kidney donation is delivered. Copies of leaflets were requested. A coding frame was utilised to produce a quality score for each leaflet.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine (54%) units participated. Patients discussed living donor kidney transplantation with nephrologists (100%), living donor nurse (94%), transplant co-ordinator (94%), and predialysis nurse (86%). Twenty-three leaflets were provided and reviewed, mean quality scores for inclusion of information known to support shared decision-making was m = 2.82 out of 10 (range = 0-6, SD = 1.53). Readability scores indicated they were 'fairly difficult to read' (M = 56.3, range = 0-100, SD = 9.4). Few included cultural and faith information. Two leaflets were designed to facilitate conversations with others about donation.

CONCLUSIONS

Leaflets are unlikely to adequately support decision-making between options and discussions about donation. Services writing and updating patient leaflets may benefit from our six principles to guide their development.

Investigating strategies to improve AccesS to Kidney transplantation (the ASK trial): a protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial with parallel process evaluation

BACKGROUND

The UK's living-donor kidney transplant (LDKT) activity falls behind that of many other countries internationally, with less than 20% of those eligible receiving a LDKT each year. Certain individuals with kidney disease in the UK appear to be particularly disadvantaged in accessing a LDKT; the most socioeconomically deprived people with kidney disease are 60% less likely to receive a LDKT than the least deprived. Improving equity in living-donor kidney transplantation has been highlighted as an international research priority.

METHODS

This feasibility trial was designed to determine the feasibility of delivery and acceptability of a multicomponent intervention designed to improve access to living-donor kidney transplantation. The intervention comprises three main components: (i) a meeting between a home educator and the transplant candidate for a dedicated discussion about living-donor kidney transplantation, living kidney donation and potential donors; (ii) a standardized letter from a healthcare professional to a candidate's potential donors and (iii) a home-based education and family engagement session including two home educators, the transplant candidate and their family. The primary objectives are to establish the feasibility (i) of delivering the developed intervention in existing care pathways and (ii) of undertaking a randomised controlled trial of the intervention. A mixed-methods parallel process evaluation will investigate the acceptability, implementation and mechanisms of impact of the intervention. The trial is based at two UK hospitals: a transplanting hospital and a non-transplanting referral hospital. Individuals are eligible if they are ≥ 18 years old, are active on the kidney transplant waiting list or have been referred for transplant listing and do not have a potential living-donor undergoing surgical assessment. Randomisation will be undertaken with concealed allocation. Participants will be randomly allocated 1:1 to (i) the intervention or (ii) usual care, stratified by site to ensure a balance in terms of local differences. Minimisation will be used to ensure balance in sex, age group and socioeconomic strata, with probability weighting of 0.8 in order to reduce predictability. The primary outcomes are recruitment (% of those eligible and invited who consent to randomisation) and retention (% of participants completing follow-up).

DISCUSSION

Findings will inform the design of a future fully powered, randomised controlled trial to formally evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention at improving equitable access to living-donor kidney transplantation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN10989132 Applied 30/10/20.

Interventions for improving health literacy in people with chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Low health literacy affects 25% of people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and is associated with increased morbidity and death. Improving health literacy is a recognised priority, but effective interventions are not clear.

OBJECTIVES

This review looked the benefits and harms of interventions for improving health literacy in people with CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 12 July 2022 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also searched MEDLINE (OVID) and EMBASE (OVID) for non-randomised studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies that assessed interventions aimed at improving health literacy in people with CKD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed studies for eligibility and performed risk of bias analysis. We classified studies as either interventions aimed at improving aspects of health literacy or interventions targeting a population of people with poor health literacy. The interventions were further sub-classified in terms of the type of intervention (educational, self-management training, or educational with self-management training). Results were expressed as mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 120 studies (21,149 participants) which aimed to improve health literacy. There were 107 RCTs and 13 non-randomised studies. No studies targeted low literacy populations. For the RCTs, selection bias was low or unclear in 94% of studies, performance bias was high in 86% of studies, detection bias was high in 86% of studies reporting subjective outcomes and low in 93% of studies reporting objective outcomes. Attrition and other biases were low or unclear in 86% and 78% of studies, respectively. Compared to usual care, low certainty evidence showed educational interventions may increase kidney-related knowledge (14 RCTs, 2632 participants: SMD 0.99, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.32; I² = 94%). Data for self-care, self-efficacy, quality of life (QoL), death, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and hospitalisations could not be pooled or was not reported. Compared to usual care, low-certainty evidence showed self-management interventions may improve self-efficacy (5 RCTs, 417 participants: SMD 0.58, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.03; I² = 74%) and QoL physical component score (3 RCTs, 131 participants: MD 4.02, 95% CI 1.09 to 6.94; I² = 0%). There was moderate-certainty evidence that self-management interventions probably did not slow the decline in eGFR after one year (3 RCTs, 855 participants: MD 1.53 mL/min/1.73 m², 95% CI -1.41 to 4.46; I² = 33%). Data for knowledge, self-care behaviour, death and hospitalisations could not be pooled or was not reported. Compared to usual care, low-certainty evidence showed educational with self-management interventions may increase knowledge (15 RCTs, 2185 participants: SMD 0.65, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.93; I² = 90%), improve self-care behaviour scores (4 RCTs, 913 participants: SMD 0.91, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.82; I² =97%), self-efficacy (8 RCTs, 687 participants: SMD 0.50, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.89; I² = 82%), improve QoL physical component score (3 RCTs, 2771 participants: MD 2.56, 95% CI 1.73 to 3.38; I² = 0%) and may make little or no difference to slowing the decline of eGFR (4 RCTs, 618 participants: MD 4.28 mL/min/1.73 m², 95% CI -0.03 to 8.85; I² = 43%). Moderate-certainty evidence shows educational with self-management interventions probably decreases the risk of death (any cause) (4 RCTs, 2801 participants: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.02; I² = 0%). Data for hospitalisation could not be pooled.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Interventions to improve aspects of health literacy are a very broad category, including educational interventions, self-management interventions and educational with self-management interventions. Overall, this type of health literacy intervention is probably beneficial in this cohort however, due to methodological limitations and high heterogeneity in interventions and outcomes, the evidence is of low certainty.

Potential living kidney donors' positive experiences of an information letter from healthcare: a descriptive qualitative study

Background

Patients who need a live donor kidney transplant (LDKT) must often ask potential donors (PLDs) themselves. This is a difficult task and healthcare could unburden them by making this first contact, ensuring also that PLDs receive correct information. We investigated how PLDs experience receiving a letter from healthcare about LDKT, live kidney donation, and inviting them to meet with professionals to get more information.

Methods

The letter (LD-letter) was sent to a cohort of 46 individuals, from which a purposeful sample of 15 were interviewed using a semi-structured guide covering their experience of the letter, views on being approached by healthcare, and opinions on style and content. Interviews were analyzed using conventional inductive analysis.

Results

We identified three categories of experiences: Category (1) Reflections on receiving the letter, contains three subcategories relating to how the letter did not induce pressure to donate, did not affect the PLD’s relationship with the patient with kidney disease, and made the letter-receiver feel important in the transplant process; Category (2) The letter creates clarification and trust, also contains three subcategories, relating to how it clarified the voluntariness of donation and neutrality of healthcare providers with respect to the PLD’s decision, elucidated the patient with kidney disease’s current stage of disease (where transplantation was approaching), and unburdened patients from the responsibility of contacting PLDs on their own; Category (3) Opinions and suggestions about the letter and further communication, with four subcategories, relating to preference of a letter as the first step for communication about LDKT, suggestions on style and content, views on following up the letter, and how open meetings about LDKT were an important information source. Furthermore, 80% of the interviewees found the letter’s information comprehensive, 67% found it easy to read and respectful, and 86% rated it as good or very good.

Conclusion

Potential donors prefer and recommend a letter as the first step for communication regarding LD. The LD-letter unburdens patients from the task of asking PLDs and stresses the voluntariness of donation, does not leave PLDs feeling coerced or lead to negative effects in their relationship with the patient.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12882-022-02959-5.

Shared decision-making in advanced kidney disease: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

To provide a comprehensive overview of interventions that support shared decision-making (SDM) for treatment modality decisions in advanced kidney disease (AKD). To provide summarised information on their content, use and reported results. To provide an overview of interventions currently under development or investigation.

DESIGN

The JBI methodology for scoping reviews was followed. This review conforms to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Emcare, PsycINFO, PROSPERO and Academic Search Premier for peer-reviewed literature. Other online databases (eg, clinicaltrials.gov, OpenGrey) for grey literature.

ELIGIBILITY FOR INCLUSION

Records in English with a study population of patients >18 years of age with an estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m2. Records had to be on the subject of SDM, or explicitly mention that the intervention reported on could be used to support SDM for treatment modality decisions in AKD.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently screened and selected records for data extraction. Interventions were categorised as prognostic tools (PTs), educational programmes (EPs), patient decision aids (PtDAs) or multicomponent initiatives (MIs). Interventions were subsequently categorised based on the decisions they were developed to support.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-five interventions were identified in a total of 158 included records: 52 PTs, 51 EPs, 29 PtDAs and 13 MIs. Sixteen (n=16, 11%) were novel interventions currently under investigation. Forty-six (n=46, 35.7%) were reported to have been implemented in clinical practice. Sixty-seven (n=67, 51.9%) were evaluated for their effects on outcomes in the intended users.

CONCLUSION

There is no conclusive evidence on which intervention is the most efficacious in supporting SDM for treatment modality decisions in AKD. There is a lot of variation in selected outcomes, and the body of evidence is largely based on observational research. In addition, the effects of these interventions on SDM are under-reported.

A dynamic Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of the Kidney Team at Home intervention in The Netherlands

OBJECTIVES

The Kidney Team at Home program is an educational intervention aimed at patients with chronic kidney disease to assist them in their choice for kidney replacement therapy. Previous studies have shown that the intervention results in an increase in knowledge and communication on kidney replacement therapy, and eventually in an increase in the number of living donor kidney transplantations. The study assesses the cost-effectiveness of the intervention compared to standard care.

METHODS

A dynamic probabilistic Markov model was used to estimate the monetary and health benefits of the intervention in The Netherlands over 10 years. Data on costs and health-related quality of life were derived from the literature. Transition probabilities, prevalence, and incidence rates were calculated using a large national database. An optimistic and a pessimistic implementation scenario were compared to a base case scenario with standard care.

RESULTS

In both the optimistic and pessimistic scenario, the intervention is cost-effective and dominant compared to standard care: savings were €108,681,985 and €51,770,060 and the benefits were 1382 and 695 QALYs, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The superior cost-effectiveness of the intervention is caused by the superior health effects and the reduction of costs associated with transplantation, and the relatively small incremental costs of the intervention. The favorable findings of this implementation project resulted in national uptake of the intervention in The Netherlands as of 2021. This is the first time a psychosocial intervention has been implemented as part of standard care in a kidney replacement therapy program worldwide.

Kidney transplantation and withdrawal rates among wait-listed first-generation immigrants in Italy

Background

Multiple barriers diminish access to kidney transplantation (KT) in immigrant compared to non-immigrant populations. It is unknown whether immigration status reduces the likelihood of KT after wait-listing despite universal healthcare coverage with uniform access to transplantation.

Methods

We retrospectively collected data of all adult waiting list (WL) registrants in Italy (2010–20) followed for 5 years until death, KT in a foreign center, deceased-donor kidney transplant (DDKT), living-donor kidney transplant (LDKT) or permanent withdrawal from the WL. We calculated adjusted relative probability of DDKT, LDKT and permanent WL withdrawal in different immigrant categories using competing-risks multiple regression models.

Results

Patients were European Union (EU)-born (n = 21 624), Eastern European-born (n = 606) and non-European-born (n = 1944). After controlling for age, sex, blood type, dialysis vintage, case-mix and sensitization status, non-European-born patients had lower LDKT rates compared to other immigrant categories: LDKT adjusted relative probability of non-European-born vs. Eastern European-born 0.51 (95% CI: 0.33–0.79; P = 0.002); of non-European-born vs. EU-Born: 0.65 (95% CI: 0.47–0.82; P = 0.001). Immigration status did not affect the rate of DDKT or permanent WL withdrawal.

Conclusions

Among EU WL registrants, non-European immigration background is associated with reduced likelihood of LDKT but similar likelihood of DDKT and permanent WL withdrawal. Wherever not available, new national policies should enable coverage of travel and medical fees for living-donor surgery and follow-up for non-resident donors to improve uptake of LDKT in immigrant patients, and provide KT education that is culturally competent, individually tailored and easily understandable for patients and their potential living donors.

Interaction between socioeconomic deprivation and ethnicity for likelihood of receiving living-donor kidney transplantation

Background

The interplay between ethnicity and socioeconomic deprivation for living-donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) opportunities is unclear.

Methods

Data for 2040 consecutive kidney-alone transplant recipients receiving an allograft between 1st January 2007 and 30th June 2020 at a single center were retrospectively analyzed. The associations between the proportions of transplants that were LDKT (versus deceased donation) and both ethnicity and socioeconomic deprivation were assessed, with the latter quantified by the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) quintile.

Results

The cohort comprised recipients of White (64.7%), South Asian (21.7%), Black (7.0%) and other (6.6%) ethnic groups. Recipients tended to be from socioeconomically deprived areas, with the most deprived quintile being the most frequently observed (quintile 1: 38.6% of patients); non-White recipients were significantly more likely to live in socioeconomically deprived areas (p < 0.001). Overall, 36.5% of transplants were LDKT, with this proportion declining progressively with socioeconomic deprivation, from 50.4 to 27.6% in the least versus most deprived IMD quintile (p < 0.001). A significant difference across recipient ethnicities was also observed, with the proportion of LDKTs ranging from 43.2% in White recipients to 17.8% in Black recipients (p < 0.001). Both socioeconomic deprivation (p < 0.001) and ethnicity (p = 0.005) remained significant predictors of LDKT on multivariable analysis, with a significant interaction between these factors also being observed (p < 0.001). Further assessment of this interaction effect found that, whilst there was a marked difference in the proportions of transplants that were LDKT between White versus non-White recipients in the most socioeconomically deprived groups (39.5% versus 19.3%), no such difference was seen in the least deprived recipients (48.5% versus 51.9%).

Conclusions

Whilst both socioeconomic deprivation and non-White ethnicity are independent predictors for lower proportions of LDKTs, the significant interaction between the two factors should be appreciated.

Barriers to the donation of living kidneys for kidney transplantation

Since the waiting time for deceased donor kidney transplantation continues to increase, living donor kidney transplantation is an important treatment for end stage kidney disease patients. Barriers to living kidney donation have been rarely investigated despite a growing interest in the utilization of living donor transplantation and the satisfaction of donor safety. Here, we retrospectively analyzed 1658 potential donors and 1273 potential recipients who visited the Seoul National University Hospital for living kidney transplantation between 2010 and 2017 to study the causes of donation discontinuation. Among 1658 potential donors, 902 (54.4%) failed to donate kidneys. The average number of potential donors that received work-up was 1.30 ± 0.66 per recipient. Among living donor kidney transplant patients, 75.1% received kidneys after work-up of the first donor and 24.9% needed work-up of two or more donors. Donor-related factors (49.2%) were the most common causes of donation discontinuation, followed by immunologic or size mismatches between donors and recipients (25.4%) and recipient-related factors (16.2%). Interestingly, withdrawal of donation consent along with refusal by recipients or family were the commonest causes, suggesting the importance of non-biomedical aspects. The elucidation of the barriers to living kidney donation could ensure more efficient and safer living kidney donation.

Couple and family interventions for high mortality health conditions: A strategic review (2010-2019)

The earliest publications in the field of marriage and family therapy introduced interventions conducted with families experiencing complex health conditions. This strategic review captures an evaluation of efficacy for 87 couple and family interventions published between 2010 and 2019 with a focus on the leading causes of mortality in the United States. These health conditions include chromosomal anomalies and accidents with infants aged 0-4 years; accidents and cancer among children aged 5-14; accidents among adolescents aged 15-24; and heart disease, cancer, accidents, chronic lower respiratory diseases, stroke, Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, influenza/pneumonia, and nephritis/nephrosis among adults 25 and older. Results support the need for greater inclusion of couples and families in assessments and interventions. The greatest chasm in efficacy research was with minoritized couples and families. Implications include ways to initiate couple and family interventions in the context of health conditions with attention given to accessibility, recruitment, retention, and evaluation.

The choice between deceased and living donor kidney transplantation in children and adolescents: a multicentric cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

The aim of our study was to evaluate the factors influencing the choice between a deceased donor (DD) and living donor kidney transplantation (LD KT) for children and adolescents with chronic kidney disease (CKD) from the perspective of parents and physicians.

METHODS

Patients with CKD stages 4 and 5 at the University Hospitals of Ghent, Leuven and Antwerp were included. Between February 2019 and March 2020, the corresponding questionnaires were distributed among parents and physicians in order to evaluate the potential differences between the medical recommendation and parental choice.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients (median age 11 yr, range 2-19 yr), 10 girls and 18 boys were included. Three patients had undergone kidney transplantation in the past. Parents of 13 children opted for DD and 13 LD, and in two cases, there was no preference. Physicians recommended DD in 14 cases and LD in 14 cases. Parental choice corresponded with physician's recommendation in 22 cases. Parental reasons for choosing DD were medical (n = 7), socio-economic (n = 1), combination of both (n = 1) or no reason (n = 4). Pediatric nephrologists advised against LD for medical (n = 6) or socio-economic (n = 6) reasons or a combination of both (n = 2).

CONCLUSION

In our cohort, the treating physicians regarded the family's socio-economic factors more important for not actively promoting LD than the parents. A better understanding and communication regarding perceived socio-economic hurdles between caretakers and families might contribute to a higher incidence of living kidney donation in Belgium.

The beneficial effect of providing kidney transplantation information on transplantation status differs between for-profit and nonprofit dialysis centers

Informing end-stage kidney disease patients about kidney transplantation options increases the likelihood of kidney transplant waiting list (WL) enrollment and live donor kidney transplant (LDKT) receipt. Patients in for-profit dialysis centers have lower rates of WL enrollment and LDKT receipt. This study examined if the ownership status of dialysis centers modified the association between informing patients about transplantation options and patients' transplantation status. Multilevel analysis using mixed-effect multinomial logistic regression was performed using the United States Renal Data System (USRDS) data (January 2005 to December 2017). The study showed that informing patients improved the odds of WL enrollment and LDKT receipt. However, the effect of informing patients on transplantation status was less pronounced at for-profit as compared with nonprofit centers (Nonprofit: WL enrollment OR: 2.23 [95% CI: 2.07-2.40], and LDKT receipt OR: 3.35 [95% CI: 2.65-4.25]. For-profit: WL enrollment OR: 1.73 [95% CI: 1.66-1.79], and LDKT receipt OR: 2.35 [95% CI: 2.08-2.66]), although the odds of informing patients was higher for for-profit centers, and type of patients informed were similar across both types of centers. Information provided by for-profit centers was potentially less effective than those provided by nonprofit centers. Standardized guidelines for transplantation information provision are needed in order to ensure similar informational quality across centers.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Pretransplant Educational Intervention in Kidney Patients

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Poor patient knowledge about transplantation is a significant problem following kidney transplant. A video-based educational intervention was developed to supplement standard education provided by transplant teams.

Implementation of the Kidney Team at Home Intervention: Evaluating Generalizability, Implementation Process, and Effects

Research has shown that a home-based educational intervention for patients with chronic kidney disease results in better knowledge and communication, and more living donor kidney transplantations (LDKT). Implementation research in the field of renal care is almost non-existent. The aims of this study were (1) to demonstrate generalizability, (2) evaluate the implementation process, and (3) to assess the relationship of intervention effects on LDKT-activity. Eight hospitals participated in the project. Patients eligible for all kidney replacement therapies (KRT) were invited to participate. Effect outcomes were KRT-knowledge and KRT-communication, and treatment choice. Feasibility, fidelity and intervention costs were assessed as part of the process evaluation. 332 patients completed the intervention. There was a significant increase in KRT-knowledge and KRT-communication among participants. 129 out of 332 patients (39%) had LDKT-activity, which was in line with the results of the clinical trials. Protocol adherence, knowledge and age were correlated with LDKT-activity. This unique implementation study shows that the results in practice are comparable to the previous trials, and show that the intervention can be implemented, while maintaining quality. Results from the project resulted in the uptake of the intervention in standard care. We urge other countries to investigate the uptake of the intervention.

Development and Preliminary Evaluation of a Patient-facing Educational Video About Live Kidney Donor Surgical Complications

Background.

Living kidney donation (LKD) improves transplant access; however, its use is compromised, in part, by individuals’ unaddressed concerns about perioperative complications.

Methods.

We developed an animated, patient-centered educational video about LKD surgical complications, with input from experts in transplantation, communication, and anthropology, 35 patients/care partners (5 LKD candidates, 5 prior LKDs, 10 kidney transplant recipients, 10 kidney transplant candidates, 5 care partners), and 1 community advocate. We then conducted an online pre-post study with 24 potential kidney donors and recipients to measure the video’s acceptability and feasibility to improve donation complication knowledge and concerns.

Results.

Knowledge of LKD surgical complications increased 23% (mean 5.7 to 7.0, P < 0.01) from pre- to post- animation viewing. Large knowledge effect size increases were observed for different levels of age, race, health literacy, and technology access. The frequency of positive responses about donation safety increased from 88% preanimation to 96% postanimation. Concerns about surgical complications remained at 17% before and after exposure. After viewing the animation, over 90% indicated positive ratings on ease of watching, understanding, and engaging.

Conclusions.

An animated educational video about LKD surgical complications was developed in collaboration with multiple stakeholders. The video was well received and promised to positively impact individuals’ knowledge and concerns.

A Roadmap for Innovation to Advance Transplant Access and Outcomes: A Position Statement From the National Kidney Foundation

Over the past 65 years, kidney transplantation has evolved into the optimal treatment for patients with kidney failure, dramatically reducing suffering through improved survival and quality of life. However, access to transplant is still limited by organ supply, opportunities for transplant are inequitably distributed, and lifelong transplant survival remains elusive. To address these persistent needs, the National Kidney Foundation convened an expert panel to define an agenda for future research. The key priorities identified by the panel center on the needs to develop and evaluate strategies to expand living donation, improve waitlist management and transplant readiness, maximize use of available deceased donor organs, and extend allograft longevity. Strategies targeting the critical goal of decreasing organ discard that warrant research investment include educating patients and clinicians about potential benefits of accepting nonstandard organs, use of novel organ assessment technologies and real-time decision support, and approaches to preserve and resuscitate allografts before implantation. The development of personalized strategies to reduce the burden of lifelong immunosuppression and support "one transplant for life" was also identified as a vital priority. The panel noted the specific goal of improving transplant access and graft survival for children with kidney failure. This ambitious agenda will focus research investment to promote greater equity and efficiency in access to transplantation, and help sustain long-term benefits of the gift of life for more patients in need.

Key elements in selection of pre-dialysis patients for home dialysis

BACKGROUND

Most pre-dialysis patients are medically eligible for home dialysis, and home dialysis has several advantages over incentre dialysis. However, accurately selecting patients for home dialysis appears to be difficult, since uptake of home dialysis remains low. The aim of this study was to investigate which medical or psychosocial elements contribute most to the selection of patients eligible for home dialysis.

METHODS

All patients from a Dutch teaching hospital, who received treatment modality education and subsequently started dialysis treatment, were included. The pre-dialysis programme consisted of questionnaires for the patient, nephrologist and social worker, followed by an assessment of eligibility for home dialysis by a multidisciplinary team. Clinimetric assessment and logistic regression were used to identify domains and questions associated with home dialysis treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 135 patients were included, of whom 40 were treated with home dialysis and 95 with incentre haemodialysis. The key elements associated with long-term home dialysis treatment were part of the domains 'suitability of the housing', 'self-care', 'social support' and 'patient capacity', with adjusted odds ratios ranging from 0.13 for negative to 18.3 for positive associations.

CONCLUSION

The assessment of contraindications by a nephrologist followed by the assessment of possibilities by a social worker or dialysis nurse who investigates four key elements, ideally during a home visit, and subsequent detailed education offered by specialized nurses is an optimal way to select patients for home dialysis.

Development of an intervention to improve access to living-donor kidney transplantation (the ASK study)

A living-donor kidney transplant (LDKT) is one of the best treatments for kidney failure. The UK’s LDKT activity falls behind that of many other countries, and there is evidence of socioeconomic inequity in access. We aimed to develop a UK-specific multicomponent intervention to support eligible individuals to access a LDKT. The intervention was designed to support those who are socioeconomically-deprived and currently disadvantaged, by targeting mediators of inequity identified in earlier work. We identified three existing interventions in the literature which target these mediators: a) the Norway model (healthcare practitioners contact patients’ family with information about kidney donation), b) a home education model, and c) a Transplant candidate advocate model. We undertook intervention development using the Person-Based Approach (PBA). We performed in-depth qualitative interviews with people with advanced kidney disease (n = 13), their family members (n = 4), and renal and transplant healthcare practitioners (n = 15), analysed using thematic analysis. We investigated participant views on each proposed intervention component. We drafted intervention resources and revised these in light of comments from qualitative ‘think-aloud’ interviews. Four general themes were identified: i) Perceived cultural and societal norms; ii) Influence of family on decision-making; iii) Resource limitation, and iv) Evidence of effectiveness. For each intervention discussed, we identified three themes: for the Norway model: i) Overcoming communication barriers and assumptions; ii) Request from an official third party, and iii) Risk of coercion; for the home education model: i) Intragroup dynamics; ii) Avoidance of hospital, and iii) Burdens on participants; and for the transplant candidate advocates model: i) Vested interest of advocates; ii) Time commitment, and iii) Risk of misinformation. We used these results to develop a multicomponent intervention which comprises components from existing interventions that have been adapted to increase acceptability and engagement in a UK population. This will be evaluated in a future randomised controlled trial.

Interventions for increasing solid organ donor registration

BACKGROUND

A solution for increasing the number of available organs for transplantation is to encourage more individuals to register a commitment for deceased organ donation. However, the percentage of the population registered for organ donation remains low in many countries.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of various interventions used to increase deceased organ donor registration.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 11 August 2020 through contact with an Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs and quasi-RCTs of interventions to promote deceased organ donor registration. We included studies if they measured self-reported or verified donor registration, intention to donate, intention to register a decision or number of individuals signing donor cards as outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed retrieved studies and extracted data from included studies. We assessed studies for risk of bias. We obtained summary estimates of effect using a random-effects model and expressed results as risk ratios (RR) (95% confidence intervals; CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD; 95% CI) or standardised mean difference (SMD; 95% CI) for continuous outcomes. In multi-arm trials, data were pooled to create single pair-wise comparisons. Analyses were stratified by specific intervention setting where available.

MAIN RESULTS

Our search strategy identified 46 studies (47 primary articles, including one abstract) comprising 24 parallel RCTs, 19 cluster RCTs and 3 quasi-RCTs. Sample sizes ranged from 138 to 1,085,292 (median = 514). A total of 16 studies measured registration behaviour, 27 measured intention to register/donate and three studies measured both registration behaviour and intention to register. Interventions were delivered in a variety of different settings: schools (14 studies), driver's motor vehicle (DMV) centres (5), mail-outs (4), primary care centres (3), workplaces (1), community settings (7) and general public (12). Interventions were highly varied in terms of their content and included strategies such as educational sessions and videos, leveraging peer leaders, staff training, message framing, and priming. Most studies were rated as having high or unclear risk of bias for random sequence generation and allocation concealment and low risk for the remainder of the domains. Data from 34/46 studies (74%) were available for meta-analysis. Low certainty evidence showed organ donation registration interventions had a small overall effect on improving registration behaviour (16 studies, 1,294,065 participants: RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.43, I2 = 84%), intention to register/donate (dichotomous) (10 studies, 10,838 participants: RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.42, I2 = 91%) and intention to register/donate (continuous) (9 studies, 3572 participants: SMD 0.23, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.36, I2 = 67%). Classroom-based interventions delivered in a lecture format by individuals from the transplant community may be effective at increasing intention to register/donate (3 studies, 675 participants: RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.55, I² = 0%). Community interventions targeting specific ethnic groups were generally effective at increasing registration rates (k = 5, n = 4186; RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.35 to 3.40, I² = 85%), although heterogeneity was high. In particular, interventions delivered in the community by trained peer-leaders appear to be effective (3 studies, 3819 participant: RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.08 to 4.06, I² = 87%), although again, the data lacked robustness. There was some evidence that framing messages (e.g. anticipated regret) and priming individuals (e.g. reciprocity) in a certain way may increase intention to register/donate, however, few studies measured this effect on actual registration. Overall, the studies varied significantly in terms of design, setting, content and delivery. Selection bias was evident and a quarter of the studies could not be included in the meta-analysis due to incomplete outcome data reporting. No adverse events were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In our review, we identified a variety of approaches used to increase organ donor registration including school-based educational sessions and videos, leveraging peer leaders in the community, DMV staff training, targeted messaging and priming. The variability in outcome measures used and incompleteness in reporting meant that most data could not be combined for analysis. When data were combined, overall effect sizes were small in favour of intervention groups over controls, however, there was significant variability in the data. There was some evidence that leveraging peer-leaders in the community to deliver organ donation education may improve registration rates and classroom-based education from credible individuals (i.e. members of the transplant community) may improve intention to register/donate, however, there is no clear evidence favouring any particular approach. There was mixed evidence for simple, low-intensity interventions utilising message framing and priming. However, it is likely that interest in these strategies will persist due to their reach and scalability. Further research is therefore required to adequately address the question of the most effective interventions for increasing deceased organ donor registration.

Patient-reported factors influencing the choice of their kidney replacement treatment modality

Background

Access to various kidney replacement therapy (KRT) modalities for patients with end-stage kidney disease differs substantially within Europe.

Methods

European adults on KRT filled out an online or paper-based survey about factors influencing and experiences with modality choice (e.g. information provision, decision-making and reasons for choice) between November 2017 and January 2019. We compared countries with low, middle and high gross domestic product (GDP).

Results

In total, 7820 patients [mean age 59 years, 56% male, 63% on centre haemodialysis (CHD)] from 38 countries participated. Twenty-five percent had received no information on the different modalities, and only 23% received information >12 months before KRT initiation. Patients were not informed about home haemodialysis (HHD) (42%) and comprehensive conservative management (33%). Besides nephrologists, nurses more frequently provided information in high-GDP countries, whereas physicians other than nephrologists did so in low-GDP countries. Patients from low-GDP countries reported later information provision, less information about other modalities than CHD and lower satisfaction with information. The majority of modality decisions were made involving both patient and nephrologist. Patients reported subjective (e.g. quality of life and fears) and objective reasons (e.g. costs and availability of treatments) for modality choice. Patients had good experiences with all modalities, but experiences were better for HHD and kidney transplantation and in middle- and high-GDP countries.

Conclusion

Our results suggest European differences in patient-reported factors influencing KRT modality choice, possibly caused by disparities in availability of KRT modalities, different healthcare systems and varying patient preferences. Availability of home dialysis and kidney transplantation should be optimized.

Informing American Muslims about living donation through tailored health education: A randomized controlled crossover trial evaluating increase in biomedical and religious knowledge

Biomedical and religious knowledge affects organ donation attitudes among Muslims. We tested the effectiveness of mosque-based, religiously tailored, ethically balanced education on organ donation among Muslim Americans. Our randomized, controlled, crossover trial took place at 4 mosques randomized to an early arm where organ donation education preceded a control educational workshop or a late arm with the order reversed. Primary outcomes were changes in biomedical (Rotterdam Renal Replacement Knowledge Test living donation subscale, R3KT) and religious (Islamic Knowledge of Living Organ Donation, IK-LOD) living kidney donation knowledge. Statistical analysis employed a 2 (Treatment Arm) X 3 (Time of Assessment) mixed-method analysis of variance. Of 158 participants, 59 were in the early arm and 99 in the late arm. A between group t test comparison at Period 1 (Time 1 - Time 2), demonstrated that the early arm had a significantly higher mean IK-LOD (7.11 v 5.19, P < .05) and R3KT scores (7.65 v 4.90, P < .05) when compared to the late arm. Late arm participants also had significant increases in mean IK-LOD (5.19 v 7.16, P < .05) and R3KT scores (4.90 v. 6.81, P < .05) postintervention (Time 2-Time 3). Our novel program thus yielded significant kidney donation-related knowledge gains among Muslim Americans (NCT04443114 Clinicaltrials.gov).

Your Path to Transplant: A randomized controlled trial of a tailored expert system intervention to increase knowledge, attitudes, and pursuit of kidney transplant

Individually tailoring education over time may help more patients, especially racial/ethnic minorities, get waitlisted and pursue deceased and living donor kidney transplant (DDKT and LDKT, respectively). We enrolled 802 patients pursuing transplant evaluation at the University of California, Los Angeles Transplant Program into a randomized education trial. We compared the effectiveness of Your Path to Transplant (YPT), an individually tailored coaching and education program delivered at 4 time points, with standard of care (SOC) education on improving readiness to pursue DDKT and LDKT, transplant knowledge, taking 15 small transplant-related actions, and pursuing transplant (waitlisting or LDKT rates) over 8 months. Survey outcomes were collected prior to evaluation and at 4 and 8 months. Time to waitlisting or LDKT was assessed with at least 18 months of follow-up. At 8 months, compared to SOC, the YPT group demonstrated increased LDKT readiness (47% vs 33%, P = .003) and transplant knowledge (effect size [ES] = 0.41, P < .001). Transplant pursuit was higher in the YPT group (hazard ratio: 1.44, 95% confidence interval: 1.15-1.79, P = .002). A focused, coordinated education effort can improve transplant-seeking behaviors and waitlisting rates. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT02181114.

Analysis of Linguistically and Culturally Tailored Initiatives in Websites of Kidney Transplant Programs in the United States Between 2013-2018

INTRODUCTION

Minority patients constitute the majority of the kidney transplant waiting list, yet they suffer greater difficulties in listing and longer wait times to transplantation. There is a lack of information regarding targeted efforts by transplant centers to improve transplant care for minority populations.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Our aim was to analyze all kidney transplant websites in the United States to identify changes over a 5-year period in the number of multilingual websites, reported culturally targeted initiatives, and center and provider diversity.

DESIGN

Surveys were developed to analyze center websites of all transplant programs in the United States. Those with incomplete information about their nephrology or surgical teams were excluded, resulting in 174 (73%) sites in 2013 and 185 (76%) in 2018. Results: Few websites were available in a language other than English, 6.3% in 2013 and 9.7% in 2018 (P = 0.24). Only 3 websites (1.3%) in 2013 and 7 (3.7%) in 2018 reported any evidence of a culturally targeted initiative (P = 0.23). In 2018, 35% of centers employed a Hispanic transplant physician, 77% had a transplant physician who spoke a language other than English, and 39% had a transplant physician who spoke Spanish.

DISCUSSION

Although minority patients are expected to grow in the United States, decreased access to transplantation continues to vex the transplant community. Very little progress has been made in the development of multilingual websites and culturally targeted initiatives.

Investigating Ethnic Disparity in Living-Donor Kidney Transplantation in the UK: Patient-Identified Reasons for Non-Donation among Family Members

There is ethnic inequity in access to living-donor kidney transplants in the UK. This study asked kidney patients from Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups why members of their family were not able to be living kidney donors. Responses were compared with responses from White individuals. This questionnaire-based mixed-methods study included adults transplanted between 1/4/13-31/3/17 at 14 UK hospitals. Participants were asked to indicate why relatives could not donate, selecting all options applicable from: Age; Health; Weight; Location; Financial/Cost; Job; Blood group; No-one to care for them after donation. A box entitled 'Other-please give details' was provided for free-text entries. Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyse the association between the likelihood of selecting each reason for non-donation and the participant's self-reported ethnicity. Qualitative responses were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. In total, 1240 questionnaires were returned (40% response). There was strong evidence that Black, Asian and minority ethnic group individuals were more likely than White people to indicate that family members lived too far away to donate (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 3.25, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 2.30-4.58), were prevented from donating by financial concerns (aOR = 2.95, 95% CI 2.02-4.29), were unable to take time off work (aOR = 1.88, 95% CI 1.18-3.02), were "not the right blood group" (aOR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.35-2.01), or had no-one to care for them post-donation (aOR = 3.73, 95% CI 2.60-5.35). Four qualitative themes were identified from responses from Black, Asian and minority ethnic group participants: 'Burden of disease within the family'; 'Differing religious interpretations'; 'Geographical concerns'; and 'A culture of silence'. Patients perceive barriers to living kidney donation in the UK Black, Asian and minority ethnic population. If confirmed, these could be targeted by interventions to redress the observed ethnic inequity.

The impact of religiously tailored and ethically balanced education on intention for living organ donation among Muslim Americans

We tested the efficacy of religiously tailored and ethically balanced education upon living kidney organ donation intent among Muslim Americans. Pre-post changes in participant stage of change, preparedness, and likelihood judged efficacy. Among 137 participants, mean stage of change toward donation appeared to improve (0.59; SD ± 1.07, P < .0001), as did the group's preparedness to make a donation decision (0.55; SD ± 0.86, P < .0001), and likelihood to donate a kidney (0.39; SD ± 0.85, P < .0001). Mean change in likelihood to encourage a loved one, a co-worker, or a mosque community member with ESRD to seek a living donor also increased (0.22; SD ± 0.84, P = .0035, 0.23; SD ± 0.82, P = .0021, 0.33; SD ± 0.79, P < .0001 respectively). Multivariate ordered logistic regression models revealed that gains in biomedical knowledge regarding organ donation increased odds for positive change in preparedness (OR = 1.20; 95% CI 1.01-1.41, P = .03), while increasing age associated with lower odds of positive change in stage of change (OR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-0.998, P = .03), and prior registration as an organ donor lowered odds for an increase in likelihood to donate a kidney (OR = 0.22; 95% CI 0.08-0.60, P = .003). Our intervention appears to enhance living kidney donation-related intent among Muslim Americans [Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT04443114].

A Digital Library for Increasing Awareness About Living Donor Kidney Transplants: Formative Study

Background

It is not common for people to come across a living kidney donor, let alone consider whether they would ever donate a kidney themselves while they are alive. Narrative storytelling, the sharing of first-person narratives based on lived experience, may be an important way to improve education about living donor kidney transplants (LDKTs). Developing ways to easily standardize and disseminate diverse living donor stories using digital technology could inspire more people to consider becoming living donors and reduce the kidney shortage nationally.

Objective

This paper aimed to describe the development of the Living Donation Storytelling Project, a web-based digital library of living donation narratives from multiple audiences using video capture technology. Specifically, we aimed to describe the theoretical foundation and development of the library, a protocol to capture diverse storytellers, the characteristics and experiences of participating storytellers, and the frequency with which any ethical concerns about the content being shared emerged.

Methods

This study invited kidney transplant recipients who had received LDKTs, living donors, family members, and patients seeking LDKTs to record personal stories using video capture technology by answering a series of guided prompts on their computer or smartphone and answering questions about their filming experience. The digital software automatically spliced responses to open-ended prompts, creating a seamless story available for uploading to a web-based library and posting to social media. Each story was reviewed by a transplant professional for the disclosure of protected health information (PHI), pressuring others to donate, and medical inaccuracies. Disclosures were edited.

Results

This study recruited diverse storytellers through social media, support groups, churches, and transplant programs. Of the 137 storytellers who completed the postsurvey, 105/137 (76.6%) were white and 99/137 (72.2%) were female. They spent 62.5 min, on average, recording their story, with a final median story length of 10 min (00:46 seconds to 32:16 min). A total of 94.8% (130/137) of storytellers were motivated by a desire to educate the public; 78.1% (107/137) were motivated to help more people become living donors; and 75.9% (104/137) were motivated to dispel myths. The ease of using the technology and telling their story varied, with the fear of being on film, emotional difficulty talking about their experiences, and some technological barriers being reported. PHI, most commonly surnames and transplant center names, was present in 62.9% (85/135) of stories and was edited out.

Conclusions

With appropriate sensitivity to ensure diverse recruitment, ethical review of content, and support for storytellers, web-based storytelling platforms may be a cost-effective and convenient way to further engage patients and increase the curiosity of the public in learning more about the possibility of becoming living donors.

Efficacy of Educational Interventions in Improving Measures of Living-donor Kidney Transplantation Activity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To address patient-level barriers to living-donor kidney transplantation (LDKT), centers have implemented educational interventions. Recently, some have highlighted several gaps in knowledge and lack of evidence of efficacy of these interventions. No review has synthesized the available data.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies conducted to increase measures of LDKT. Outcomes of interest were LDKT rates, donor evaluation, donor contact/inquiry, total transplantation rates, and change in knowledge scores and pursuit behaviors. A literature search was conducted across 7 databases from inception until 2017. Educational interventions were a decision/teaching aid alone or with personalized sessions. Comparator was another intervention or nonspecific education. Random effects meta-analysis was performed to pool risk ratios (RRs) across studies.

RESULTS

Of the 1813 references, 15 met the inclusion criteria; 9 were randomized control trials. When compared with nonspecific education, interventions increased LDKT rates (RR = 2.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49-4.35), donor evaluation (RR = 3.82; 95% CI, 1.91-7.64), and donor inquiry/contact (RR = 2.41; 95% CI, 1.53-3.80), but not total transplants (RR = 1.24; 95% CI, 0.96-1.61). Significant increased mean knowledge scores postintervention was noted, and most showed favorable trends in pursuit behaviors. Quality across the studies was mixed and sometimes difficult to assess. The biggest limitations were small sample size, selection bias, and short follow-ups.

CONCLUSIONS

Educational interventions improve measures of LDKT activity; however, current literature is heterogeneous and at risk of selection bias. Prospective studies with diverse patient populations, longer follow-ups, and robust outcomes are needed to inform clinical practice.

Mediators of Socioeconomic Inequity in Living-donor Kidney Transplantation: Results From a UK Multicenter Case-Control Study

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

There is evidence of socioeconomic inequity in access to living-donor kidney transplantation, but limited evidence as to why. We investigated possible mediators of the inequity.

Associations of perceived information adequacy and knowledge with pursuit of live donor kidney transplants and living donor inquiries among African American transplant candidates

We studied associations between perceived adequacy of live donor kidney transplant (LDKT) information or knowledge with pursuit of LDKT or receipt of live donor inquiries among 300 African American kidney transplant candidates. Participants reported via questionnaire how informed or knowledgeable they felt regarding LDKT. Participants also reported their pursuit of LDKT, categorized as "low" (no discussion with family or friends about LDKT and no identified donor), "intermediate" (discussed LDKT with family but no identified donor) or "high" (discussed LDKT with family and identified a potential donor). We reviewed participants' electronic health records to identify potential donors' transplant center inquiries on participants' behalves. A minority of participants reported they felt "very" or "extremely" well informed about LDKT (39%) or had "a great deal" of LDKT knowledge (38%). Participants perceiving themselves as "very" or "extremely" (vs "not" or "slightly") well informed about LDKT had statistically significantly greater odds of intermediate or high (vs low) pursuit of LDKT (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 2.71 [1.02-7.17]). Perceived LDKT knowledge was not associated with pursuit of LDKT. Neither perceived information adequacy nor knowledge was associated with living donor inquiries. Efforts to better understand the role of education in the pursuit of LDKT among African American transplant candidates are needed.

Experiences, perspectives and values of Indigenous peoples regarding kidney transplantation: systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies

Background

Kidney transplantation is considered best practice treatment for end stage kidney disease (ESKD), however Indigenous patients are substantially less likely to receive either a deceased or live donor kidney transplant than non-Indigenous patients. We describe Indigenous peoples’ experiences and perspectives including traditional values around kidney transplantation to inform international transplant programs.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of qualitative studies involving Indigenous adults who have experience with or perceptions of kidney transplantation. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, and CINAHL, in conjunction with analysis of Google Scholar and reference lists of related studies till July 2019. We utilised thematic synthesis to analyse data. Completeness of reporting in studies was evaluated using the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies (COREQ) framework.

Results

Eight studies involving 225 Indigenous participants were included. Five themes were identified: strong desire for transplantation (seeking normality and freedom from dialysis, wanting to reduce burden of disease within community); lack of partnership in shared decision-making (receiving inadequate information, ineffective communication); barriers to live kidney donation (difficulty asking, apprehension about impact on donor, avoiding additional financial burden and fear of complications); cultural considerations (influence of traditional values and beliefs, reconciling traditional values with pragmatic need); and experiencing lack of cultural competence in clinical care (struggling with prejudice and ignorance, mistrust of clinicians and health system).

Conclusion

Indigenous participants had a strong desire for a kidney transplant and recognised the need for more readily available kidney transplants for others in their communities with ESKD. However, they faced prejudice and a lack of cultural competence by health workers as well as wider barriers to transplantation in systems that did not support effective and culturally appropriate delivery of information and care. Traditional cultural values also influenced decisions regarding kidney transplantation but such values were moderated when considering transplantation. Transplantation programs need to identify and mitigate barriers, such as the financial burden, promote cultural safety and incorporate traditional values into the promotion of transplantation in order to address inequitable transplantation rates.

Registration

Not applicable.