Association between Medicaid Expansion under the Affordable Care Act and Preemptive Listings for Kidney Transplantation

Quantifying the association of individual-level characteristics with disparities in kidney transplant waitlist addition among people with HIV

BACKGROUND

Over 45% of people with HIV (PWH) in the United States at least 50 years old and are at heightened risk of aging-related comorbidities including end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), for which kidney transplant is the optimal treatment. Among ESKD patients, PWH have lower likelihood of waitlisting, a requisite step in the transplant process, than individuals without HIV. It is unknown what proportion of the inequity by HIV status can be explained by demographics, medical characteristics, substance use history, and geography.

METHODS

The United States Renal Data System, a national database of all individuals ESKD, was used to create a cohort of people with and without HIV through Medicare claims linkage (2007-2017). The primary outcome was waitlisting. Inverse odds ratio weighting was conducted to assess what proportion of the disparity by HIV status could be explained by individual characteristics.

RESULTS

Six thousand two hundred and fifty PWH were significantly younger at ESKD diagnosis and more commonly Black with fewer comorbidities. PWH were more frequently characterized as using tobacco, alcohol and drugs. Positive HIV-status was associated with 57% lower likelihood of waitlisting [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.46-0.48, P  < 0.001]. Controlling for demographics, medical characteristics, substance use and geography explained 39.8% of this observed disparity (aHR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.59-0.79, P  < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

PWH were significantly less likely to be waitlisted, and 60.2% of that disparity remained unexplained. HIV characteristics such as CD4 + counts, viral loads, antiretroviral therapy adherence, as well as patient preferences and provider decision-making warrant further study.

The impact of Medicaid expansion and travel distance on access to transplantation

Most transplant centers require candidates be insured before they can join the waitlist for a deceased donor organ. After the Affordable Care Act, many uninsured Americans gained improved access to Medicaid. I examine the effect of this increase in access to insurance and find that Medicaid expansions significantly increase Medicaid-insured waitlist registrations by 39% and deceased donor transplants received by 44%, but the increase in registrations is larger for candidates who live closer to a transplant center. Additionally I show that most of these registrations would have been privately insured otherwise but provide suggestive evidence that this is better explained by improved access to subsidized private coverage due to other ACA reforms than from candidates with private coverage before the ACA switching to Medicaid coverage after expansion. This suggests that although the ACA improved access to the transplantation system, access is still limited for candidates who live far from centers.

Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion associated with increased liver transplant waitlist access without worsening mortality

It is unclear what impact Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansion has had on the liver transplantation (LT) waitlist. We aimed to assess associations between ACA Medicaid expansion and LT waitlist outcomes. The United Network for Organ Sharing Standard Transplant Analysis and Research (UNOS STAR) database was queried for patients listed for LT between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2018. Our primary outcome was waitlist mortality and our secondary outcomes included Medicaid use on the LT waitlist and transplant rate. States were divided into groups based on their expansion status and the study period was divided into 2 time intervals-pre-expansion and post-expansion. Difference-in-difference (DiD) models were created to assess the impacts of expansion on each of the outcomes and for racial/ethnic and sex groups. In total, 56,414 patients from expansion states and 32,447 patients from nonexpansion states were included. Three-year waitlist mortality decreased at a similar rate in both cohorts [DiD estimate: 0.1, (95% CI, -1.1, -1.4), p = 0.838], but Medicaid use increased [DiD estimate: +7.7, (95% CI, 6.7, 8.7), p < 0.001] to a greater degree in expansion states after expansion than nonexpansion states. Between the 2 time intervals, Medicaid use on the LT waitlist increased from 19.4% to 26.1% in expansion states but decreased from 13.4% to 12.1% in nonexpansion states. In patients on Medicaid, there was a slight increase in the 3-year transplant rate associated with Medicaid expansion [DiD estimate +5.0, (95% CI, 1.8, 8.3), p = 0.002], which may in part be explained by differences in patient characteristics. Medicaid expansion was associated with increased Medicaid use on the LT waitlist without worsening overall waitlist mortality or transplant rate, suggesting that lenient and widespread public health insurance may increase access to the LT waitlist without adversely affecting outcomes.

Racial Equity in Living Donor Kidney Transplant Centers, 2008-2018

Importance

It is unclear whether center-level factors are associated with racial equity in living donor kidney transplant (LDKT).

Objective

To evaluate center-level factors and racial equity in LDKT during an 11-year time period.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective cohort longitudinal study was completed in February 2023, of US transplant centers with at least 12 annual LDKTs from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2018, identified in the Health Resources Services Administration database and linked to the US Renal Data System and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Observed and model-based estimated Black-White mean LDKT rate ratios (RRs), where an RR of 1 indicates racial equity and values less than 1 indicate a lower rate of LDKT of Black patients compared with White patients. Estimated yearly best-case center-specific LDKT RRs between Black and White individuals, where modifiable center characteristics were set to values that would facilitate access to LDKT.

Results

The final cohorts of patients included 394 625 waitlisted adults, of whom 33.1% were Black and 66.9% were White, and 57 222 adult LDKT recipients, of whom 14.1% were Black and 85.9% were White. Among 89 transplant centers, estimated yearly center-level RRs between Black and White individuals accounting for center and population characteristics ranged from 0.0557 in 2008 to 0.771 in 2018. The yearly median RRs ranged from 0.216 in 2016 to 0.285 in 2010. Model-based estimations for the hypothetical best-case scenario resulted in little change in the minimum RR (from 0.0557 to 0.0549), but a greater positive shift in the maximum RR from 0.771 to 0.895. Relative to the observed 582 LDKT in Black patients and 3837 in White patients, the 2018 hypothetical model estimated an increase of 423 (a 72.7% increase) LDKTs for Black patients and of 1838 (a 47.9% increase) LDKTs for White patients.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of patients with kidney failure, no substantial improvement occurred over time either in the observed or the covariate-adjusted estimated RRs. Under the best-case hypothetical estimations, modifying centers' participation in the paired exchange and voucher programs and increased access to public insurance may contribute to improved racial equity in LDKT. Additional work is needed to identify center-level and program-specific strategies to improve racial equity in access to LDKT.

Factors associated with health inequities in access to kidney transplantation in the USA: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The kidney is the most needed organ for transplantation in the United States. However, demand and scarcity of this organ has caused significant inequities for historically marginalized groups. In this review, we report on the frequency of inequities in all steps of kidney transplantation from 2016 to 2022. Search criteria was based on the National Institute of Health's (NIH) 2022 list of populations who experience health inequities, which includes: race and ethnicity; sex or gender; Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer + (LGBTQ+); underserved rural communities; education level; income; and occupation status. We outline steps for future research aimed at assessing interventions and programs to improve health outcomes.

METHODS

This scoping review was developed following guidelines from the Joanna Briggs Institute and PRISMA extension for scoping reviews. In July 2022, we searched Medline (via PubMed) and Ovid Embase databases to identify articles addressing inequities in access to kidney transplantation in the United States. Articles had to address at least one of the NIH's 2022 health inequity groups.

RESULTS

Our sample of 44 studies indicate that Black race, female sex or gender, and low socioeconomic status are negatively associated with referral, evaluation, and waitlisting for kidney transplantation. Furthermore, only two studies from our sample investigated LGBTQ+ identity since the NIH's addition of SGM in 2016 regarding access to transplantation. Lastly, we found no detectable trend in studies for the four most investigated inequity groups between 2016 and 2022.

CONCLUSION

Investigations in inequities for access to kidney transplantation for the two most studied groups, race/ethnicity and sex or gender, have shown no change in frequencies. Regarding race and ethnicity, continued interventions focused on educating Black patients and staff of dialysis facilities may increase transplant rates. Studies aimed at assessing effectiveness of the Kidney Paired Donation program are highly warranted due to incompatibility problems in female patients. The sparse representation for the LGBTQ+ population may be due to a lack of standardized data collection for sexual orientation. We recommend this community be engaged via surveys and further investigations.

Reexamining the Impact of Insurance Type on Kidney Transplant Waitlist Status and Posttransplantation Outcomes in the United States After Implementation of the Affordable Care Act

Insurance type, a marker of socioeconomic status, has been associated with poor access to kidney transplant (KT) and worse KT outcomes before the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and the revised Kidney Allocation System (KAS). In this study, we assessed if insurance type remained a risk marker for worse waitlist and transplant outcomes after ACA and KAS.

Methods

Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data, we assessed insurance type of waitlisted candidates pre- (2008-2014) versus post- (2014-2021) KAS/ACA using chi-square tests. Next, we performed a competing risk analysis to study the effect of private versus public (Medicare, Medicaid, or government-sponsored) insurance on waitlist outcomes and a Cox survival analysis to study posttransplant outcomes while controlling for candidate, and recipient and donor variables, respectively.

Results

The proportion of overall KT candidates insured by Medicaid increased from pre-KAS/ACA to post-KAS/ACA (from 12 667 [7.3%] to 21 768 [8.8%], P < 0.0001). However, KT candidates with public insurance were more likely to have died or become too sick for KT (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] = 1.33, confidence interval [CI], 1.30-1.36) or to receive a deceased donor KT (SHR = 1.57, CI, 1.54-1.60) but less likely to receive a living donor KT (SHR = 0.87, CI, 0.85-0.89). Post-KT, KT recipients with public insurance had greater risk of mortality (relative risks = 1.22, CI, 1.15-1.31) and allograft failure (relative risks = 1.10, CI, 1.03-1.29).

Conclusions

Although the implementation of ACA marginally increased the proportion of waitlisted candidates with Medicaid, publicly insured KT candidates remained at greater risk of being removed from the waitlist, had lower probability of living donor kidney transplantation, and had greater probability of dying post-KT and allograft failure. Concerted efforts to address factors contributing to these inequities in future studies are needed, with the goal of achieving equity in KT for all.

Association of the Affordable Care Act on Access to and Outcomes After Kidney or Liver Transplant: A Transplant Registry Study

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effect of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansion on payor mix among patients on the kidney and liver transplant waiting list as well as waiting list and post-transplant outcomes.

DESIGN

Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we performed a secondary data analysis of all patients on the kidney and liver transplant waiting list from 2007 to 2018. We described changes in payor mix by timing of state Medicaid expansion. We used competing risks models to estimate cause-specific hazard ratios for the effects of insurance and era on death/delisting and transplant. We used a Poisson regression model to estimate the effect of insurance and era on incidence rate ratio of inactivations on the waiting list. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the effect of insurance and era on graft and patient survival.

RESULTS

A decade after implementation of the ACA, the prevalence of Medicaid beneficiaries listed for transplant increased by 2.5% (from 7.4% to 9.9%) for kidney and by 2.6% (15.3% to 17.9%) for liver. Expansion states had greater increases than nonexpansion states (kidney 3.8% vs 0.6%, liver 5.3% vs -1.8%). Among wait-listed patients, the magnitude of association of Medicaid insurance vs private insurance with transplant decreased over time for kidney candidates (era 1 subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR), 0.62 [95% CI, 0.60-0.64] vs era 3 SHR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.74-0.70]) but increased for liver candidates (era 1 SHR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.83-0.90] vs era 3 SHR 0.79 [95% CI, 0.77-0.82]). Medicaid-insured kidney and liver recipients had greater hazards of graft failure; this did not change over time (kidney: HR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.06-1.44] liver: HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.94-1.17]).

CONCLUSIONS

For the millions of patients with chronic kidney and liver diseases, implementation of the ACA has resulted in only modest increases in access to transplant for the publicly insured vs the privately insured.

Medicaid Expansion and Medicare-Financed Hospitalizations Among Adult Patients With Incident Kidney Failure

Importance

Although Medicare provides health insurance coverage for most patients with kidney failure in the US, Medicare beneficiaries who initiate dialysis without supplemental coverage are exposed to substantial out-of-pocket costs. The availability of expanded Medicaid coverage under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) for adults with kidney failure may improve access to care and reduce Medicare-financed hospitalizations after dialysis initiation.

Objective

To examine the implications of the ACA's Medicaid expansion for Medicare-financed hospitalizations, health insurance coverage, and predialysis nephrology care among Medicare-covered adults aged 19 to 64 years with incident kidney failure in the first year after initiating dialysis.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study used a difference-in-differences approach to assess Medicare-financed hospitalizations among adults aged 19 to 64 years who initiated dialysis between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2018, while covered by Medicare Part A (up to 5 years postexpansion). Data on patients were obtained from the Renal Management Information System's End Stage Renal Disease Medical Evidence Report, which includes data for all patients initiating outpatient maintenance dialysis regardless of health insurance coverage, treatment modality, or citizenship status, and these data were linked with claims data from the Medicare Provider Analysis and Review. Data were analyzed from January to August 2022.

Exposure

Living in a Medicaid expansion state.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes were number of Medicare-financed hospitalizations and hospital days in the first 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after dialysis initiation. Secondary outcomes included dual Medicare and Medicaid coverage at 91 days after dialysis initiation and the presence of an arteriovenous fistula or graft at dialysis initiation for patients undergoing hemodialysis.

Results

The study population included 188 671 adults, with 97 071 living in Medicaid expansion states (mean [SD] age, 53.4 [9.4] years; 58 329 men [60.1%]) and 91 600 living in nonexpansion states (mean [SD] age, 53.0 [9.6] years; 52 677 men [57.5%]). In the first 3 months after dialysis initiation, Medicaid expansion was associated with a significant decrease in Medicare-financed hospitalizations (-4.24 [95% CI, -6.70 to -1.78] admissions per 100 patient-years; P = .001) and hospital days (-0.73 [95% CI, -1.08 to -0.39] days per patient-year; P < .001), relative reductions of 8% for both outcomes. Medicaid expansion was associated with a 2.58-percentage point (95% CI, 0.88-4.28 percentage points; P = .004) increase in dual Medicare and Medicaid coverage at 91 days after dialysis initiation and a 1.65-percentage point (95% CI, 0.31-3.00 percentage points; P = .02) increase in arteriovenous fistula or graft at initiation.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study with a difference-in-differences analysis, the ACA's Medicaid expansion was associated with decreases in Medicare-financed hospitalizations and hospital days and increases in dual Medicare and Medicaid coverage. These findings suggest favorable spillover outcomes of Medicaid expansion to Medicare-financed care, which is the primary payer for patients with kidney failure.

Patients Hospitalized for Complications of Cirrhosis may Have Benefited From Medicaid Expansion Under the Affordable Care Act

Objective

The benefit of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) for patients with cirrhosis is unclear. We determined the impact of ACA expansion on outcomes in patients hospitalized for complications of cirrhosis.

Patients and Methods

We compared hospitalizations; in-hospital outcomes; and readmissions among patients with cirrhosis identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, and International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, codes in states that expanded Medicaid under ACA (expanded [E] states) and those that did not (nonexpanded [NE] states). Data from the State Inpatient Databases were obtained for 3 pairs of contiguous E and NE states with both pre-ACA expansion and post-ACA expansion data. The difference-in-difference analysis was performed to compare the pre- and post-ACA data between the E and NE states. The outcomes were admission rates, hospital complications, resource utilization, length of stay, in-hospital mortality, discharge destination, cost of initial hospitalization, and readmission characteristics.

Results

There were 228,349 admissions (E states, 149,705; NE states, 78,644). After ACA implementation, the E states had lower rates of admission increase per 100,000 population (22.9 in E states vs 25.5 in NE states, P=.005), sepsis (relative risk, 0.884; P=.0084), and hepatic coma (relative risk, 0.763; P<.001) than the NE states. The length of stay was lower by 0.21 days (P=.00028), with a $587.40 lower cost per hospitalization (P=.00091), in the E states than in the NE states. The readmission rates within 30, 60, and 90 days decreased in the E states after ACA implementation but increased in the NE states after ACA implementation.

Conclusion

Among patients hospitalized for cirrhosis, quality indicators, such as the rate of admission increase, complications, costs, and readmissions, were more favorable in the states that expanded Medicaid. Medicaid expansion under ACA may have benefited patients with cirrhosis.

Keys to Driving Implementation of the New Kidney Care Models

Contemporary nephrology practice is heavily weighted toward in-center hemodialysis, reflective of decisions on infrastructure and personnel in response to decades of policy. The Advancing American Kidney Health initiative seeks to transform care for patients and providers. Under the initiative’s framework, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation has launched two new care models that align patient choice with provider incentives. The mandatory ESRD Treatment Choices model requires participation by all nephrology practices in designated Hospital Referral Regions, randomly selecting 30% of all Hospital Referral Regions across the United States for participation, with the remaining Hospital Referral Regions serving as controls. The voluntary Kidney Care Choices model offers alternative payment programs open to nephrology practices throughout the country. To help organize implementation of the models, we developed Driver Diagrams that serve as blueprints to identify structures, processes, and norms, and generate intervention concepts. We focused on two goals that are directly applicable to nephrology practices and central to the incentive structure of the ESRD Treatment Choices and Kidney Care Choices: (1) increasing utilization of home dialysis, and (2) increasing the number of kidney transplants. Several recurring themes became apparent with implementation. Multiple stakeholders from assorted backgrounds are needed. Communication with primary care providers will facilitate timely referrals, education, and comanagement. Nephrology providers (nephrologists, nursing, dialysis organizations, others) must lead implementation. Patient engagement at nearly every step will help achieve the aims of the models. Advocacy with federal and state regulatory agencies will be crucial to expanding home dialysis and transplantation access. Although the models hold promise to improve choices and outcomes for many patients, we must be vigilant that they not do reinforce existing disparities in health care or widen known racial, socioeconomic, or geographic gaps. The Advancing American Kidney Health initiative has the potential to usher in a new era of value-based care for nephrology.

Use of Race in Kidney Research and Medicine: Concepts, Principles, and Practice

Black Americans and other racially and ethnically minoritized individuals are disproportionately burdened by higher morbidity and mortality from kidney disease when compared with their White peers. Yet, kidney researchers and clinicians have struggled to fully explain or rectify causes of these inequalities. Many studies have sought to identify hypothesized genetic and/or ancestral origins of biologic or behavioral deficits as singular explanations for racial and ethnic inequalities in kidney health. However, these approaches reinforce essentialist beliefs that racial groups are inherently biologically and behaviorally different. These approaches also often conflate the complex interactions of individual-level biologic differences with aggregated population-level disparities that are due to structural racism (i.e., sociopolitical policies and practices that created and perpetuate harmful health outcomes through inequities of opportunities and resources). We review foundational misconceptions about race, racism, genetics, and ancestry that shape research and clinical practice with a focus on kidney disease and related health outcomes. We also provide recommendations on how to embed key equity-enhancing concepts, terms, and principles into research, clinical practice, and medical publishing standards.

Structural Inequities and Barriers to Accessing Kidney Healthcare Services in the United States: A Focus on Uninsured and Undocumented Children and Young Adults

The population of children living in poverty and lacking healthcare insurance has increased in the United States of America in the last decade. Several factors have been responsible for this trend including illegal immigration, socioeconomic deprivation, young age, racial segregation, environmental degradation, and discriminatory housing policies. These systemic barriers have contributed to the exclusion of families from essential healthcare services. They are also contributory to the development of chronic illnesses (such as dialysis-dependent kidney disease) that are debilitating and frequently require considerable therapeutic resources. This unfortunate scenario creates a never-ending vicious cycle of poverty and diseases in a segment of society. For pediatric nephrologists, the challenges of caring for uninsured children with chronic kidney disease are all too familiar. Federally funded healthcare programs do not cover this patient population, leaving them the option of seeking care in emergency healthcare settings. Presentation with a critical illness often necessitates urgent placement of vascular catheters and the choice of acute hemodialysis. Adverse social environment influences the need for protracted chronic hemodialysis and a delay in kidney transplantation. Consequently, there is greater comorbidity, recurrent hospitalization, and a higher mortality rate. New policies should address the deficit in health insurance coverage while promoting social programs that will remove structural barriers to health care resources for undocumented children and young adults.

Racial disparities in living donor kidney transplantation in the United States

Living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) is the best treatment for end-stage kidney disease, but there are racial disparities in LDKT rates. To study putative mechanisms of these disparities, we identified 58 752 adult kidney transplant candidates first activated on the United States kidney transplant waitlist 2015-2016 and defined four exposure groups by race/primary payer: African American/Medicaid, African American/NonMedicaid, Non-African American/Medicaid, Non-African American/NonMedicaid. We performed competing risk regression to compare risk of LDKT between groups. Among included candidates, 30% had African American race and 9% had Medicaid primary payer. By the end of follow up, 16% underwent LDKT. The cumulative incidence of LDKT was lowest for African American candidates regardless of payer. Compared to African American/Non-Medicaid candidates, the adjusted likelihood of LDKT was higher for both Non-African American/Medicaid (HR 1.60, 95%CI 1.43-1.78) and Non-African American/Non-Medicaid candidates (HR 2.66, 95%CI 2.50-2.83). Results were similar when analyzing only candidates still waitlisted > 2 years after initial activation or candidates with type O blood. Among 9639 candidates who received LDKT, only 13% were African American. Donor-recipient relationships were similar for African American and Non-African American recipients. These findings indicate African American candidates have a lower incidence of LDKT than candidates of other races, regardless of primary payer.

A Cascade of Structural Barriers Contributing to Racial Kidney Transplant Inequities

Stark racial disparities in access to and receipt of kidney transplantation, especially living donor and pre-emptive transplantation, have persisted despite decades of investigation and intervention. The causes of these disparities are complex, are inter-related, and result from a cascade of structural barriers to transplantation which disproportionately impact minoritized individuals and communities. Structural barriers contributing to racial transplant inequities have been acknowledged but are often not fully explored with regard to transplant equity. We describe longstanding racial disparities in transplantation, and we discuss contributing structural barriers which occur along the transplant pathway including pretransplant health care, evaluation, referral processes, and the evaluation of transplant candidates. We also consider the role of multilevel socio-contextual influences on these processes. We believe focused efforts which apply an equity lens to key transplant processes and systems are required to achieve greater structural competency and, ultimately, racial transplant equity.

Non-medical barriers in access to early steps of kidney transplantation in the United States - A scoping review

BACKGROUND

In the United States (US), barriers in access to later steps in the kidney transplantation process (i.e. waitlisting) have been well documented. Barriers in access to earlier steps (i.e. referral and evaluation) are less well described due to the lack of national surveillance data. In this review, we summarize the available literature on non-medical barriers in access to kidney transplant referral and evaluation.

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a scoping review of the literature through June 3, 2021. We included all studies (quantitative and qualitative) reporting on barriers to kidney transplant referral and evaluation in the US published from 1990 onwards in English and among adult end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014015027). We narratively synthesized results across studies.

RESULTS

We retrieved information from 33 studies published from 1990 to 2021 (reporting data between 1990 and 2018). Most studies (n = 28, 85%) described barriers among patient populations, three (9%) among provider populations, and two (6%) included both patients and providers. Key barriers were identified across multiple levels and included patient- (e.g. demographic, socioeconomic, sociocultural, and knowledge), provider- (e.g. miscommunication, staff availability, provider perceptions and attitudes), and system- (e.g. geography, distance to care, healthcare logistics) level factors.

CONCLUSIONS

A multi-pronged approach (e.g. targeted and systemwide interventions, and policy change) implemented at multiple levels of the healthcare system will be necessary to reduce identified barriers in access to early kidney transplant steps. Collection of national surveillance data on these early kidney transplant steps is also needed to enhance our understanding of barriers to referral and evaluation.

Medicaid Expansion and Incidence of Kidney Failure among Nonelderly Adults

BACKGROUND

Low-income individuals without health insurance have limited access to health care. Medicaid expansions may reduce kidney failure incidence by improving access to chronic disease care.

METHODS

Using a difference-in-differences analysis, we examined the association between Medicaid expansion status under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and the kidney failure incidence rate among all nonelderly adults, aged 19-64 years, in the United States, from 2012 through 2018. We compared changes in kidney failure incidence in states that implemented Medicaid expansions with concurrent changes in nonexpansion states during pre-expansion, early postexpansion (years 2 and 3 postexpansion), and later postexpansion (years 4 and 5 postexpansion).

RESULTS

The unadjusted kidney failure incidence rate increased in the early years of the study period in both expansion and nonexpansion states before stabilizing. After adjustment for population sociodemographic characteristics, Medicaid expansion status was associated with 2.20 fewer incident cases of kidney failure per million adults per quarter in the early postexpansion period (95% CI, -3.89 to -0.51) compared with nonexpansion status, a 3.07% relative reduction (95% CI, -5.43% to -0.72%). In the later postexpansion period, Medicaid expansion status was not associated with a statistically significant change in kidney failure incidence (-0.56 cases per million per quarter; 95% CI, -2.71 to 1.58) compared with nonexpansion status and the pre-expansion time period.

CONCLUSIONS

The ACA Medicaid expansion was associated with an initial reduction in kidney failure incidence among the entire, nonelderly, adult population in the United States; but the changes did not persist in the later postexpansion period. Further study is needed to determine the long-term association between Medicaid expansion and changes in kidney failure incidence.

Failure to Advance Access to Kidney Transplantation over Two Decades in the United States

BACKGROUND

Extensive research and policies have been developed to improve access to kidney transplantation among patients with ESKD. Despite this, wide variation in transplant referral rates exists between dialysis facilities.

METHODS

To evaluate the longitudinal pattern of access to kidney transplantation over the past two decades, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with ESKD initiating ESKD or placed on a transplant waiting list from 1997 to 2016 in the United States Renal Data System. We used cumulative incidence models accounting for competing risks and multivariable Cox models to evaluate time to waiting list placement or transplantation (WLT) from ESKD onset.

RESULTS

Among the study population of 1,309,998 adult patients, cumulative 4-year WLT was 29.7%, which was unchanged over five eras. Preemptive WLT (prior to dialysis) increased by era (5.2% in 1997-2000 to 9.8% in 2013-2016), as did 4-year WLT incidence among patients aged 60-70 (13.4% in 1997-2000 to 19.8% in 2013-2016). Four-year WLT incidence diminished among patients aged 18-39 (55.8%-48.8%). Incidence of WLT was substantially lower among patients in lower-income communities, with no improvement over time. Likelihood of WLT after dialysis significantly declined over time (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 0.82) in 2013-2016 relative to 1997-2000.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite wide recognition, policy reforms, and extensive research, rates of WLT following ESKD onset did not seem to improve in more than two decades and were consistently reduced among vulnerable populations. Improving access to transplantation may require more substantial interventions.

Association Between Donor-Recipient Biological Relationship and Allograft Outcomes After Living Donor Kidney Transplant

IMPORTANCE

The proportion of living donor kidney transplants from donors unrelated to their recipients is increasing in the US.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between donor-recipient biological relationship and allograft survival after living donor kidney transplant.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study used Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data on US adult living donor kidney transplants (n = 86 154) performed from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2014, excluding cases in which recipients previously received a kidney transplant (n = 10 342) or key data were missing (n = 2832). Last follow-up was March 20, 2020.

EXPOSURES

Donor-recipient biological relationship.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was death-censored allograft failure. Univariate and multivariable time-to-event analyses were performed for death-censored allograft failure for the overall cohort, then separately for recipients with and without primary diagnoses of cystic kidney disease and for transplants from African American and non-African American donors.

RESULTS

Among the 72 980 transplant donor and recipients included in the study (median donor age, 41 years; interquartile range [IQR], 32-50 years; 43 990 [60%] female; 50 014 [69%] White), 43 174 (59%) donors and recipients were biologically related and 29 806 (41%) were unrelated. Donors related to their recipients were younger (median [IQR] age, 39 [31-48] vs 44 [35-52] years) and less likely to be female (24 848 [58%] vs 19 142 [64%]) or White (26 933 [62%] vs 23 081 [77%]). Recipients related to their donors were younger (median [IQR] age, 48 [34-58] vs 50 [40-58] years), more likely to be female (18 035 [42%] vs 10 530 [35%]), and less likely to have cystic kidney disease (2530 [6%] vs 4600 [15%]). Related pairs had fewer HLA mismatches overall (median [IQR], 3 [2-3] vs 5 [4-5]). After adjustment for HLA mismatches, donor and recipient characteristics, and transplant era, donor-recipient biological relationship was associated with higher death-censored allograft failure (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.10; P = .03). When stratified by primary disease, this association persisted only for recipients without cystic kidney disease. When stratified by donor race, this association persisted only for transplants from African American donors.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study, living donor kidney transplants from donors biologically related to their recipients had higher rates of allograft failure than transplants from donors unrelated to their recipients after HLA matching was accounted for. Further study is needed to determine which genetic or socioenvironmental factors are associated with this finding.

Racism and Kidney Health: Turning Equity Into a Reality

Kidney disease continues to manifest stark racial inequities in the United States, revealing the entrenchment of racism and bias within multiple facets of society, including in our institutions, practices, norms, and beliefs. In this perspective, we synthesize theory and evidence to describe why an understanding of race and racism is integral to kidney care, providing examples of how kidney health disparities manifest interpersonal and structural racism. We then describe racialized medicine and "colorblind" approaches as well as their pitfalls, offering in their place suggestions to embed antiracism and an "equity lens" into our practice. We propose examples of how we can enhance kidney health equity by enhancing our structural competency, using equity-focused race consciousness, and centering investigation and solutions around the needs of the most marginalized. To achieve equitable outcomes for all, our medical institutions must embed antiracism and equity into all aspects of advocacy, policy, patient/community engagement, educational efforts, and clinical care processes. Organizations engaged in kidney care should commit to promoting structural equity and eliminating potential sources of bias across referral practices, guidelines, research agendas, and clinical care. Kidney care providers should reaffirm our commitment to structurally competent patient care and educational endeavors in which empathy and continuous self-education about social drivers of health and inequity, racism, and bias are integral. We envision a future in which kidney health equity is a reality for all. Through bold collective and sustained investment, we can achieve this critical goal.

Immigration status and end-stage kidney disease: Role of policy and access to care

Immigration status is an important mitigating factor in determining the provision of dialysis and kidney-related care. Immigrants make up the largest uninsured group in the country. For immigrants with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), dialysis access varies by insurance type and by state, leading to great variability in the availability of kidney care. In some states, undocumented immigrants may only qualify for hemodialysis when critically ill (emergency hemodialysis), which is associated with higher mortality, hospital length of stay, and cost, in addition to an emotional burden on patients, their caregivers, and healthcare professionals. Barriers to effective care for immigrants with ESKD include immigration status, insurance access, and availability of pre-end stage kidney disease care, vascular access, and transplant. Effective strategies for improving dialysis care for immigrants include advocacy at the state and federal level, broadening definitions under Emergency Medicaid, and improving benefits for home therapies and transplantation options.

An opt-out model for kidney transplant referral: The time has come

Disparities that affect equity in access to kidney transplantation for patients with kidney failure have been well described. Many robust clinical trials have tested the effectiveness of interventions to reduce disparities and equilibrate access to kidney transplantation. Moreover, policy changes have been enacted to achieve the same aims. Despite these efforts, rates of kidney transplant waitlisting within the first year of end-stage kidney disease have remained unchanged over the past 2 decades, while incident rates of end-stage kidney disease have climbed. Because prior interventions have not durably increased transplant access, disruptive change is clearly needed. The Advancing American Kidney Health Executive Order sets bold goals to transform kidney care for patients and caregivers. In this spirit, we discuss an Opt-Out for Transplant Referral Model as a compelling solution to improve equity in access to kidney transplantation.

Trends in Disparities in Preemptive Kidney Transplantation in the United States

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Long wait times for deceased donor kidneys and low rates of preemptive wait-listing have limited preemptive transplantation in the United States. We aimed to assess trends in preemptive deceased donor transplantation with the introduction of the new Kidney Allocation System (KAS) in 2014 and identify whether key disparities in preemptive transplantation have changed.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

We identified adult deceased donor kidney transplant recipients in the United States from 2000 to 2018 using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Preemptive transplantation was defined as no dialysis before transplant. Associations between recipient, donor, transplant, and policy era characteristics and preemptive transplantation were calculated using logistic regression. To test for modification by KAS policy era, an interaction term between policy era and each characteristic of interest was introduced in bivariate and adjusted models.

RESULTS

The proportion of preemptive transplants increased after implementation of KAS from 9.0% to 9.8%, with 1.10 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.06 to 1.14) times higher odds of preemptive transplantation post-KAS compared with pre-KAS. Preemptive recipients were more likely to be white, older, female, more educated, hold private insurance, and have ESKD cause other than diabetes or hypertension. Policy era significantly modified the association between preemptive transplantation and race, age, insurance status, and Human Leukocyte Antigen zero-mismatch (interaction P<0.05). Medicare patients had a significantly lower odds of preemptive transplantation relative to private insurance holders (pre-KAS adjusted OR, [aOR] 0.26; [95% CI, 0.25 to 0.27], to 0.20 [95% CI, 0.18 to 0.22] post-KAS). Black and Hispanic patients experienced a similar phenomenon (aOR 0.48 [95% CI, 0.45 to 0.51] to 0.41 [95% CI, 0.37 to 0.45] and 0.43 [95% CI, 0.40 to 0.47] to 0.40 [95% CI, 0.36 to 0.46] respectively) compared with white patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the proportion of deceased donor kidney transplants performed preemptively increased slightly after KAS, disparities in preemptive kidney transplantation persisted after the 2014 KAS policy changes and were exacerbated for racial minorities and Medicare patients.

Association of Medicaid Expansion With 1-Year Mortality Among Patients With End-Stage Renal Disease

IMPORTANCE

The Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion may be associated with reduced mortality, but evidence to date is limited. Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are a high-risk group that may be particularly affected by Medicaid expansion.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association of Medicaid expansion with 1-year mortality among nonelderly patients with ESRD initiating dialysis.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Difference-in-differences analysis of nonelderly patients initiating dialysis in Medicaid expansion and nonexpansion states from January 2011 to March 2017.

EXPOSURE

Living in a Medicaid expansion state.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was 1-year mortality. Secondary outcomes were insurance, predialysis nephrology care, and type of vascular access for hemodialysis.

RESULTS

A total of 142 724 patients in expansion states (mean age, 50.2 years; 40.2% women) and 93 522 patients in nonexpansion states (mean age, 49.7; 42.4% women) were included. In Medicaid expansion states, 1-year mortality following dialysis initiation declined from 6.9% in the preexpansion period to 6.1% after expansion (change, -0.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.1 to -0.5). In nonexpansion states, mortality rates were 7.0% before expansion and 6.8% after expansion (change, -0.2 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.5 to 0.2), yielding an adjusted absolute reduction in mortality in expansion states of -0.6 percentage points (95% CI, -1.0 to -0.2). Mortality reductions were largest for black patients (-1.4 percentage points; 95% CI, -2.2, -0.7; P=.04 for interaction) and patients aged 19 to 44 years (-1.1 percentage points; 95% CI, -2.1 to -0.3; P=.01 for interaction). Expansion was associated with a 10.5-percentage-point (95% CI, 7.7-13.2) increase in Medicaid coverage at dialysis initiation, a -4.2-percentage-point (95% CI, -6.0 to -2.3) decrease in being uninsured, and a 2.3-percentage-point (95% CI, 0.6-4.1) increase in the presence of an arteriovenous fistula or graft. Changes in predialysis nephrology care were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients with ESRD initiating dialysis, living in a state that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act was associated with lower 1-year mortality. If this association is causal, further research is needed to understand what factors may have contributed to this finding.

Association of the kidney allocation system with dialysis exposure before deceased donor kidney transplantation by preemptive wait-listing status

BACKGROUND

It is unknown whether the new kidney transplant allocation system (KAS) has attenuated the advantages of preemptive wait-listing as a strategy to minimize pretransplant dialysis exposure.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of adult US deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT) recipients between December 4, 2011-December 3, 2014 (pre-KAS) and December 4, 2014-December 3, 2017 (post-KAS). We estimated pretransplant dialysis durations by preemptive listing status in the pre- and post-KAS periods using multivariable gamma regression models.

RESULTS

Among 65 385 DDKT recipients, preemptively listed recipients (21%, n = 13 696) were more likely to be white (59% vs 34%, P < 0.001) and have private insurance (64% vs 30%, P < 0.001). In the pre- and post-KAS periods, average adjusted pretransplant dialysis durations for preemptively listed recipients were <2 years in all racial groups. Compared to recipients who were listed after starting dialysis, preemptively listed recipients experienced 3.85 (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 3.71-3.99) and 4.53 (95% CI 4.32-4.74) fewer average years of pretransplant dialysis in the pre- and post-KAS periods, respectively (P < 0.001 for all comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

Preemptively wait-listed DDKT recipients continue to experience substantially fewer years of pretransplant dialysis than recipients listed after dialysis onset. Efforts are needed to improve both socioeconomic and racial disparities in preemptive wait-listing.