A Scoping Review for Strategies to Increase Living Kidney Donation

Determining Predictors of Actual Living Kidney Donation Based on Potential Donor Characteristics

BACKGROUND

Living donor kidney transplantation is the optimal treatment for end-stage kidney disease; however, few living donor candidates (LDCs) who begin evaluation actually donate. While some LDCs are deemed medically ineligible, others discontinue for potentially modifiable reasons.

METHODS

At five transplant centers, we conducted a prospective cohort study measuring LDCs' clinical and psychosocial characteristics, educational preparation, readiness to donate, and social determinants of health. We followed LDCs for 12 months after evaluation to determine whether they donated a kidney, opted to discontinue, had modifiable reasons for discontinuing, were medically ineligible, or had other recipient-related reasons for discontinuing.

RESULTS

Among 2184 LDCs, 18.6% donated, 38.2% opted to or had modifiable reasons for discontinuing, and 43.2% were deemed ineligible due to medical or recipient-related reasons. Multivariable analyses comparing successful LDCs with those who did not complete donation for modifiable reasons (N = 1241) found that LDCs who discussed donation with the recipient before evaluation (OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.54-3.46), had completed high school (OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.21-3.35), or were a "close relation" to their recipient (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.33-2.69) were more likely to donate. Conversely, LDCs who reported religion as important (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.38-0.80), were Non-White (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.49-1.00), or had overall higher anxiety scores (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.99) were less likely to donate.

CONCLUSION

With fewer than a fifth of LDCs donating, developing programs to provide greater emotional support and facilitate open discussions between LDCs and recipients earlier may increase living donation rates.

Empowering inclusivity: improving readability of living kidney donation information with ChatGPT

Background

Addressing disparities in living kidney donation requires making information accessible across literacy levels, especially important given that the average American adult reads at an 8th-grade level. This study evaluated the effectiveness of ChatGPT, an advanced AI language model, in simplifying living kidney donation information to an 8th-grade reading level or below.

Methods

We used ChatGPT versions 3.5 and 4.0 to modify 27 questions and answers from Donate Life America, a key resource on living kidney donation. We measured the readability of both original and modified texts using the Flesch-Kincaid formula. A paired t-test was conducted to assess changes in readability levels, and a statistical comparison between the two ChatGPT versions was performed.

Results

Originally, the FAQs had an average reading level of 9.6 ± 1.9. Post-modification, ChatGPT 3.5 achieved an average readability level of 7.72 ± 1.85, while ChatGPT 4.0 reached 4.30 ± 1.71, both with a p-value <0.001 indicating significant reduction. ChatGPT 3.5 made 59.26% of answers readable below 8th-grade level, whereas ChatGPT 4.0 did so for 96.30% of the texts. The grade level range for modified answers was 3.4-11.3 for ChatGPT 3.5 and 1-8.1 for ChatGPT 4.0.

Conclusion

Both ChatGPT 3.5 and 4.0 effectively lowered the readability grade levels of complex medical information, with ChatGPT 4.0 being more effective. This suggests ChatGPT's potential role in promoting diversity and equity in living kidney donation, indicating scope for further refinement in making medical information more accessible.

Neighborhood Segregation and Access to Live Donor Kidney Transplantation

Importance

Identifying the mechanisms of structural racism, such as racial and ethnic segregation, is a crucial first step in addressing the persistent disparities in access to live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT).

Objective

To assess whether segregation at the candidate's residential neighborhood and transplant center neighborhood is associated with access to LDKT.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cohort study spanning January 1995 to December 2021, participants included non-Hispanic Black or White adult candidates for first-time LDKT reported in the US national transplant registry. The median (IQR) follow-up time for each participant was 1.9 (0.6-3.0) years.

Main Outcome and Measures

Segregation, measured using the Theil H method to calculate segregation tertiles in zip code tabulation areas based on the American Community Survey 5-year estimates, reflects the heterogeneity in neighborhood racial and ethnic composition. To quantify the likelihood of LDKT by neighborhood segregation, cause-specific hazard models were adjusted for individual-level and neighborhood-level factors and included an interaction between segregation tertiles and race.

Results

Among 162 587 candidates for kidney transplant, the mean (SD) age was 51.6 (13.2) years, 65 141 (40.1%) were female, 80 023 (49.2%) were Black, and 82 564 (50.8%) were White. Among Black candidates, living in a high-segregation neighborhood was associated with 10% (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.90 [95% CI, 0.84-0.97]) lower access to LDKT relative to residence in low-segregation neighborhoods; no such association was observed among White candidates (P for interaction = .01). Both Black candidates (AHR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.89-1.00]) and White candidates (AHR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.88-0.97]) listed at transplant centers in high-segregation neighborhoods had lower access to LDKT relative to their counterparts listed at centers in low-segregation neighborhoods (P for interaction = .64). Within high-segregation transplant center neighborhoods, candidates listed at predominantly minority neighborhoods had 17% lower access to LDKT relative to candidates listed at predominantly White neighborhoods (AHR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.75-0.92]). Black candidates residing in or listed at transplant centers in predominantly minority neighborhoods had significantly lower likelihood of LDKT relative to White candidates residing in or listed at transplant centers located in predominantly White neighborhoods (65% and 64%, respectively).

Conclusions

Segregated residential and transplant center neighborhoods likely serve as a mechanism of structural racism, contributing to persistent racial disparities in access to LDKT. To promote equitable access, studies should assess targeted interventions (eg, community outreach clinics) to improve support for potential candidates and donors and ultimately mitigate the effects of segregation.

Are Differences in Living Kidney Donation Rates a Sex or a Gender Disparity?

Sex-disaggregated data reveal significant disparities in living kidney donation, with more female than male living kidney donors in most countries and proportions over 60% in some countries. We summarize the present state of knowledge with respect to the potential drivers of this disparity and argue that it is primarily driven by gender-related factors. First, we present the differences between sex and gender and then proceed to summarize the potential medical reasons that have been proposed to explain why males are less likely to be living kidney donors than females, such as the higher prevalence of kidney failure in males. We then present counterarguments as to why biological sex differences are not enough to explain lower living kidney donation among males, such as a higher prevalence of chronic kidney disease among females, which could affect donation rates. We argue that gender differences likely provide a better explanation as to why there are more women than men living kidney donors and explore the role of economic and social factors, as well as gender roles and expectations, in affecting living kidney donation among both men and women. We conclude with the need for a gender analysis to explain this complex psychosocial phenomenon in living kidney donation.

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

Importance

Patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) have the best chance for a longer and healthier life if they receive a kidney transplant. However, many barriers prevent patients from receiving a transplant.

Objectives

To evaluate the effect of a multicomponent intervention designed to target several barriers that prevent eligible patients from completing key steps toward receiving a kidney transplant.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This pragmatic, 2-arm, parallel-group, open-label, registry-based, superiority, cluster randomized clinical trial included all 26 CKD programs in Ontario, Canada, from November 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021. These programs provide care for patients with advanced CKD (patients approaching the need for dialysis or receiving maintenance dialysis).

Interventions

Using stratified, covariate-constrained randomization, allocation of the CKD programs at a 1:1 ratio was used to compare the multicomponent intervention vs usual care for 4.2 years. The intervention had 4 main components, (1) administrative support to establish local quality improvement teams; (2) transplant educational resources; (3) an initiative for transplant recipients and living donors to share stories and experiences; and (4) program-level performance reports and oversight by administrative leaders.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the rate of steps completed toward receiving a kidney transplant. Each patient could complete up to 4 steps: step 1, referred to a transplant center for evaluation; step 2, had a potential living donor contact a transplant center for evaluation; step 3, added to the deceased donor waitlist; and step 4, received a transplant from a living or deceased donor.

Results

The 26 CKD programs (13 intervention, 13 usual care) during the trial period included 20 375 potentially transplant-eligible patients with advanced CKD (intervention group [n = 9780 patients], usual-care group [n = 10 595 patients]). Despite evidence of intervention uptake, the step completion rate did not significantly differ between the intervention vs usual-care groups: 5334 vs 5638 steps; 24.8 vs 24.1 steps per 100 patient-years; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.00 (95% CI, 0.87-1.15).

Conclusions and Relevance

This novel multicomponent intervention did not significantly increase the rate of completed steps toward receiving a kidney transplant. Improving access to transplantation remains a global priority that requires substantial effort.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03329521.

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.

Living donor liver transplant candidate and donor selection and engagement: Meeting report from the living donor liver transplant consensus conference

INTRODUCTION

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a promising option for mitigating the deceased donor organ shortage and reducing waitlist mortality. Despite excellent outcomes and data supporting expanding candidate indications for LDLT, broader uptake throughout the United States has yet to occur.

METHODS

In response to this, the American Society of Transplantation hosted a virtual consensus conference (October 18-19, 2021), bringing together relevant experts with the aim of identifying barriers to broader implementation and making recommendations regarding strategies to address these barriers. In this report, we summarize the findings relevant to the selection and engagement of both the LDLT candidate and living donor. Utilizing a modified Delphi approach, barrier and strategy statements were developed, refined, and voted on for overall barrier importance and potential impact and feasibility of the strategy to address said barrier.

RESULTS

Barriers identified fell into three general categories: 1) awareness, acceptance, and engagement across patients (potential candidates and donors), providers, and institutions, 2) data gaps and lack of standardization in candidate and donor selection, and 3) data gaps regarding post-living liver donation outcomes and resource needs.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies to address barriers included efforts toward education and engagement across populations, rigorous and collaborative research, and institutional commitment and resources.

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.

Living Donor Kidney Transplantation in Quebec: A Qualitative Case Study of Health System Barriers and Facilitators

Background

Patients with kidney failure represent a major public health burden, and living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the best treatment option for these patients. Current work to optimize LDKT delivery to patients has focused on microlevel interventions and has not addressed interdependencies with meso and macro levels of practice.

Objective

We aimed to learn from a health system with historically low LDKT performance to identify facilitators and barriers to LDKT. Our specific aims were to understand how LDKT delivery is organized through interacting macro, meso, and micro levels of practice and identify what attributes and processes of this health system facilitate the delivery of LDKT to patients with kidney failure and what creates barriers.

Design

We conducted a qualitative case study, applying a complex adaptive systems approach to LDKT delivery, that recognizes health systems as being made up of dynamic, nested, and interconnected levels, with the patient at its core.

Setting

The setting for this case study was the province of Quebec, Canada.

Participants

Thirty-two key stakeholders from all levels of the health system. This included health care professionals, leaders in LDKT governance, living kidney donors, and kidney recipients.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews with 32 key stakeholders and a document review were undertaken between February 2021 and December 2021. Inductive thematic analysis was used to generate themes.

Results

Overall, we identified strong links between system attributes and processes and LDKT delivery, and more barriers than facilitators were discerned. Barriers that undermined access to LDKT included fragmented LDKT governance and expertise, disconnected care practices, limited resources, and regional inequities. Some were mitigated to an extent by the intervention of a program launched in 2018 to increase LDKT. Facilitators driven by the program included advocacy for LDKT from individual member(s) of the care team, dedicated resources, increased collaboration, and training opportunities that targeted LDKT delivery at multiple levels of practice.

Limitations

Delineating the borders of a "case" is a challenge in case study research, and it is possible that some perspectives may have been missed. Participants may have produced socially desirable answers.

Conclusions

Our study systematically investigated real-world practices as they operate throughout a health system. This novel approach has cross-disciplinary methodological relevance, and our findings have policy implications that can help inform multilevel interventions to improve LDKT.

A machine-learning approach to estimating public intentions to become a living kidney donor in England: Evidence from repeated cross-sectional survey data

Background

Living kidney organ donors offer a cost-effective alternative to deceased organ donation. They enable patients with life-threatening conditions to receive grafts that would otherwise not be available, thereby creating space for other patients waiting for organs and contributing to reducing overall waiting times for organs. There is an emerging consensus that an increase in living donation could contribute even more than deceased donation to reducing inequalities in organ donation between different population sub-groups in England. Increasing living donation is thus a priority for National Health Service Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) in the United Kingdom.

Methods

Using the random forest model, a machine learning (ML) approach, this study analyzed eight waves of repeated cross-sectional survey data collected from 2017 to 2021 (n = 14,278) as part of the organ donation attitudinal tracker survey commissioned by NHSBT in England to identify and help predict key factors that inform public intentions to become living donors.

Results

Overall, around 58.8% of the population would consider donating their kidney to a family member (50.5%), a friend (28%) or an unknown person (13.2%). The ML algorithm identified important factors that influence intentions to become a living kidney donor. They include, in reducing order of importance, support for organ donation, awareness of organ donation publicity campaigns, gender, age, occupation, religion, number of children in the household, and ethnic origin. Support for organ donation, awareness of public campaigns, and being younger were all positively associated with predicted propensity for living donation. The variable importance scores show that ethnic origin and religion were less important than the other variables in predicting living donor intention.

Conclusion

Factors influencing intentions to become a living donor are complex and highly individual in nature. Machine learning methods that allow for complex interactions between characteristics can be helpful in explaining these decisions. This work has identified important factors and subgroups that have higher propensity for living donation. Interventions should target both potential live donors and recipients. Research is needed to explore the extent to which these preferences are malleable to better understand what works and in which contexts to increase live organ donation.

Health system barriers and facilitators to living donor kidney transplantation: a qualitative case study in British Columbia

BACKGROUND

In patients with kidney failure, living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the best treatment option; yet, LDKT rates have stagnated in Canada and vary widely across provinces. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to LDKT in a high-performing health system.

METHODS

This study was conducted using a qualitative exploratory case study of British Columbia. Data collection, conducted between October 2020 and January 2021, entailed document review and semistructured interviews with key stakeholders, including provincial leadership, care teams and patients. We recruited participants via purposive sampling and snowballing technique. We generated themes using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

After analysis of interviews conducted with 22 participants (5 representatives from provincial organizations, 7 health care providers at transplant centres, 8 health care providers from regional units and 2 patients) and document review, we identified the following 5 themes as facilitators to LDKT: a centralized infrastructure, a mandate for timely intervention, an equitable funding model, a commitment to collaboration and cultivating distributed expertise. The relationship between 2 provincial organizations (BC Transplant and BC Renal Agency) was identified as key to enabling the mandate and processes for LDKT. Five barriers were identified that arose from silos between provincial organizations and manifested as inconsistencies in coordinating LDKT along the spectrum of care. These were divided accountability structures, disconnected care processes, missed training opportunities, inequitable access by region and financial burden for donors and recipients.

INTERPRETATION

We found strong links between provincial infrastructure and the processes that facilitate or impede timely intervention and referral of patients for LDKT. Our findings have implications for policy-makers and provide opportunities for cross-jurisdictional comparative analyses.

Outcomes and Health Care Utilization After Early Hospital Dismissal in Kidney Transplantation: An Analysis of 1001 Consecutive Cases

OBJECTIVE

To understand whether reduced lengths of stay after kidney transplantation were associated with excess health care utilization in the first 90 days or long-term graft and patient survival outcomes.

BACKGROUND

Reducing length of stay after kidney transplant has an unknown effect on post-transplant health care utilization. We studied this association in a cohort of 1001 consecutive kidney transplants.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 2011-2015 data from a prospectively-maintained kidney transplant database from a single center.

RESULTS

A total of 1001 patients underwent kidney transplant, and were dismissed from the hospital in 3 groups: Early [≤2 days] (19.8%), Normal [3-7 days] (79.4%) and Late [>7 days] (3.8%). 34.8% of patients had living donor transplants (Early 51%, Normal 31.4%, Late 18.4%, P < 0.001). Early patients had lower delayed graft function rates (Early 19.2%, Normal 32%, Late73.7%, P = 0.001). By the hospital dismissal group, there were no differences in readmissions or emergency room visits at 30 or 90 days. Glomerular filtration rate at 12 months and rates of biopsy-proven acute rejection were also similar between groups. The timing of hospital dismissal was not associated with the risk-adjusted likelihood of readmission. Early and Normal patients had similar graft and patient survival. Late dismissal patients, who had higher rates of cardiovascular complications, had significantly higher late mortality versus Normal dismissal patients in unadjusted and risk-adjusted models.

CONCLUSION

Dismissing patients from the hospital 2 days after kidney transplant is safe, feasible, and improves value. It is not associated with excess health care utilization or worse short or long-term transplant outcomes.

Factors Associated with the Willingness to Become a Living Kidney Donor: A National Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction: Living donor kidney transplantation is the preferred method of treating kidney failure. The donor agrees to undergo an elective procedure for the benefit of the recipient. Aim: To assess the attitude toward living kidney donation and to investigate the factors that contribute to kidney donation willingness. Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out between December 2020 and February 2021. The study covered a representative group of 953 Poles aged 18−77, living in all Polish voivodships. The relationship between sociodemographic factors, personal values (Personal Values List), the total score of life satisfaction (Satisfaction with Life Scale) and the willingness to donate a kidney to another human was assessed using a logistic regression model. Results: The most frequently chosen personal values were: good health; physical and mental fitness; love and friendship; knowledge and wisdom. The most frequently chosen symbols of happiness were: good health, successful family life, being needed by others. The median satisfaction with life for the entire group was 20 [16; 24]. Voluntary donation of a kidney to another human being i.e., family, friends, strangers were more often declared by women (OR = 1.21; Cl95%: 1.03−1.42), for whom the most important symbol of happiness was a life full of adventures, travels (OR = 1.39; Cl95%: 1.06−1.82) and the most important personal value was goodness and tenderness (OR = 1.21; Cl95%: 1.05−1.40). Total scores of The Satisfaction with Life Scale correlated positively with the willingness to voluntarily donate a kidney (OR = 1.03; Cl95%: 1.003−1.06), while age correlated negatively (OR = 0.99; Cl95%: 0.98−0.99). Conclusions: Respondents who declare their willingness to be a living kidney donor are mainly female, for which the most important symbol of happiness is a life full of adventures and travel, and the most important values are personal goodness and tenderness. The desire to donate a kidney to another person decreases with age and grows with life satisfaction. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT04789122).

Usability assessment of an interactive health technology for kidney living donors: protocol for a prospective cross-sectional survey

INTRODUCTION

Several web portals for kidney patients are available, but assessments of their performance are scarce. A crucial aspect of living donation is to provide standardised information about the risks of the procedure. This is of particular interest among candidates for kidney living donation. In 2019, the Digital Care Path for Living Kidney Donor Candidates was launched in Finland as part of the Health Village portal, containing information about the donation process and facilitating communication between clinicians, transplant coordinators and patients. The performance of this eHealth service has not yet been studied. The present study will investigate living donor candidates' experience with the Health Village and Digital Care Path for Living Kidney Donor Candidates. Participants' general attitudes towards the use of eHealth services will also be explored as a secondary objective.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A prospective cross-sectional survey study will take place. Participants will be kidney donor candidates who have used the digital care path since its implementation in January 2019 up to 1 March 2021 (N=122). The surveys will include demographic data, electronic device ownership and digital health literacy. Platform's ease of use will be assessed with the System Usability Scale. Open-ended questions will be used to gather suggestions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The research protocol has been approved by the Helsinki University Hospital ethical committee (HUS/501/2021) to ensure that the work is done in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki and Declaration of Istanbul. Recruitment will start during the first semester of 2021. Initial results are expected during the second semester of 2021.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04791670; Pre-results.

Journey to Transplant: Developing a social support network counselling intervention to improve kidney transplantation

Context

Kidney transplant is superior to dialysis for the treatment of end‐stage kidney disease, but accessing transplant requires high patient engagement to overcome barriers. We sought to develop an educational counselling intervention for patients along with their social support networks to help patients access the waiting list.

Methods

Utilizing an Intervention Mapping approach, we established a conceptual framework to develop a behavioural intervention that can be reproduced across kidney transplant centres. The approach includes needs assessment, identifying behavioural determinants and process objectives and integrating targeted behavioural change theory.

Results

The Intervention Mapping process resulted in the development of a group counselling session, titled Journey to Transplant (JtT). This intervention was designed for kidney transplant candidates along with members of their social support networks and guided by a transplant healthcare professional. The session begins with standardized educational information to improve knowledge and normalize emotional barriers to transplant. This education is followed by a tailored counselling intervention, including the presentation of the individual patient's calculated likely outcomes on the kidney transplant waiting list. Finally, JtT incorporates patient and support network goal setting to address the specific barriers for that patient in accessing kidney transplantation.

Conclusion

A systematic Intervention Mapping approach to develop the JtT intervention helps ensure the intervention is efficacious, acceptable and feasible for transplant centres to implement. JtT engages the patient's social support network, targeting known barriers to transplant and utilizing established behaviour change theory to motivate concrete actions to improve the likelihood of kidney transplantation.

Patient or Public Contribution

This study includes a patient and family advisory committee comprised of kidney transplant candidates and their family members to guide the final language and content of the intervention guide, and the conduct of the implementation and pilot testing of the intervention. However, patients and family members were not involved in the intervention mapping development process itself described in this manuscript, which was informed by focus group data from patient and family study participants.

Impact of technology-based interventions on linking potential kidney donors and transplant candidates: a scoping review

Despite the demonstrated survival advantage in end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients of a preemptive living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT), there has been a decline in LDKT among African American and Hispanic populations. We performed a scoping review and summarized the evidence about the use of technology-based interventions (TBI) to not only increase knowledge and awareness of LDKT but also link living donors with transplant candidates. We evaluated 31 studies and characterized them into "transplant-candidate facing" TBI, "transplant donor facing" TBI, and "interactive websites" targeting both donors and candidates. For the patient-facing interventions, 60% of studies suggested an increased likelihood of linking possible donors and candidates. The donor-facing interventions showed an increase in donor awareness and 75% of these interventions suggested increasing donor-candidate linkage. This study also demonstrates that TBI (regardless of medium) that are accessible and customized to the specific target population can potentially increase linkage of donors to recipients and serve as effective guides to connect potential donors to transplant candidates.

Disparities in living donation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Living organ donation provides improved access to transplantation, thereby shortening transplant wait times and allowing for more deceased organ transplants. However, disparity in access to living donation has resulted in decreased rates of living donor transplants for some populations of patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Though there have been marked improvements in deceased donor equity, there are still challenges as it relates to gender, racial/ethnic, and socio-economic disparity. Improvements in living donation rates in Hispanic and Asian populations are tempered by challenges in African American rates of organ donation. Socio-economic disparity may drive gender disparities in organ donation resulting in disproportionate female living donors. Tailored approaches relating to language-specific interventions as well as directed educational efforts have helped mitigate disparity. Additionally, the use of apolipoprotein1 testing and modifications of glomerular filtration rate calculators may improve rates of African American donation. This review will evaluate recent data in living donor disparity as well as highlight successes in mitigating disparity.

SUMMARY

Though there are still challenges in living donor disparity, many efforts at tailoring education and access as well as modifying living donor evaluation and identifying systemic policy changes may result in improvements in living donation rates.

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.

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.

A Quality Improvement Intervention to Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: Clinical Research Protocol of a Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial

Background:

Many patients with kidney failure will live longer and healthier lives if they receive a kidney transplant rather than dialysis. However, multiple barriers prevent patients from accessing this treatment option.

Objective:

To determine if a quality improvement intervention provided in chronic kidney disease (CKD) programs (vs. usual care) enables more patients with no recorded contraindications to kidney transplant to complete more steps toward receiving a kidney transplant.

Design:

This protocol describes a pragmatic 2-arm, parallel-group, open-label, registry-based, cluster-randomized clinical trial—the Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) trial.

Setting:

All 26 CKD programs in Ontario, Canada, with a trial start date of November 1, 2017. The original end date of March 31, 2021 (3.4 years) has been extended to December 31, 2021 (4.1 years) due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Participants:

During the trial, the 26 CKD programs are expected to care for more than 10 000 adult patients with CKD (including patients approaching the need for dialysis and patients receiving dialysis) with no recorded contraindications to a kidney transplant.

Intervention:

Programs were randomly allocated to provide a quality improvement intervention or usual care. The intervention has 4 main components: (1) local quality improvement teams and administrative support; (2) tailored education and resources for staff, patients, and living kidney donor candidates; (3) support from kidney transplant recipients and living kidney donors; and (4) program-level performance reports and oversight by program leaders.

Primary Outcome:

The primary outcome is the number of key steps completed toward receiving a kidney transplant analyzed at the cluster level (CKD program). The following 4 unique steps per patient will be counted: (1) patient referred to a transplant center for evaluation, (2) at least one living kidney donor candidate contacts a transplant center for an intended recipient and completes a health history questionnaire to begin their evaluation, (3) patient added to the deceased donor transplant wait list, and (4) patient receives a kidney transplant from a living or deceased donor.

Planned Primary Analysis:

Study data will be obtained from Ontario’s linked administrative healthcare databases. An intent-to-treat analysis will be conducted comparing the primary outcome between randomized groups using a 2-stage approach. First stage: residuals are obtained from fitting a regression model to individual-level variables ignoring intervention and clustering effects. Second stage: residuals from the first stage are aggregated at the cluster level as the outcome.

Limitations:

It may not be possible to isolate independent effects of each intervention component, the usual care group could adopt intervention components leading to contamination bias, and the relatively small number of clusters could mean the 2 arms are not balanced on all baseline prognostic factors.

Conclusions:

The EnAKT LKD trial will provide high-quality evidence on whether a multi-component quality improvement intervention helps patients complete more steps toward receiving a kidney transplant.

Trial registration:

Clinicaltrials.gov; identifier: NCT03329521.

Destination Transplant: Protocol for a Parallel-group Randomized Trial of an Educational Intervention to Increase Kidney Transplant Among Black People on the Transplant Waiting List

For most patients with kidney failure, living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) is their best treatment option. Compared with White people, Black people are more likely to have kidney failure but less likely to receive LDKTs. In this study, the investigators will test an educational intervention, Destination Transplant, designed to reduce this disparity, among Black people already listed for kidney transplant.

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.

African Americans' discussions about living-donor kidney transplants with family or friends: Who, what, and why not?

BACKGROUND

Although discussions with family or friends can improve access to living-donor kidney transplantation (LDKT), they remain an understudied step in the LDKT process.

METHODS

Among 300 African American transplant candidates, we examined how sociodemographic, clinical, LDKT-related, and psychosocial characteristics related to the occurrence of LDKT discussions with family or friends. We also analyzed the relation between discussion occurrence and donor activation on transplant candidates' behalves (at least one donor inquiry or completed donor evaluation in the medical record). We assessed associations of discussion characteristics (context, content, and perceptions) with donor activation among discussants, and we identified discussion barriers among non-discussants.

RESULTS

Most candidates (90%) had discussed LDKT. Only family functioning was statistically significantly associated with discussion occurrence. Specifically, family dysfunction was associated with 62% lower odds of discussion than family function. Family functioning, discussion occurrence, and different discussion characteristics were statistically significantly related to donor activation. The most prevalent discussion barrier was never having thought about discussing LDKT.

CONCLUSIONS

Family functioning affected the likelihood of discussing LDKT, and family functioning, discussion occurrence, and discussion characteristics were associated with donor activation. Advancing understanding of how family functioning and LDKT discussions affect progression to LDKT may benefit interventions to increase LDKT.

High-Definition Single-Cell Printing: Cell-by-Cell Fabrication of Biological Structures

Bioprinting is a powerful technology with the potential to transform medical device manufacturing, organ replacement, and the treatment of diseases and physiologic malformations. However, current bioprinters are unable to reliably print the fundamental unit of all living things, single cells. A high-definition single-cell printing, a novel microfluidic technology, is presented here that can accurately print single cells from a mixture of multiple candidates. The bioprinter employs a highly miniaturized microfluidic sorter to deterministically select single cells of interest for printing, achieving an accuracy of ≈10 µm and speed of ≈100 Hz. This approach is demonstrated by fabricating intricate cell patterns with pre-defined features through selective single-cell printing. The approach is used to synthesize well-defined spheroids with controlled composition and morphology. The speed, accuracy, and flexibility of the approach will advance bioprinting to enable new studies in organoid science, tissue engineering, and spatially targeted cell therapies.

Improving HLA matching in living donor kidney transplantation using kidney paired exchange program

BACKGROUND

The inclusion of compatible pairs within kidney paired exchange programs has been described as a way to enhance these programs. Improved immunological matching for the recipient in compatible pair has been described to be a possible benefit.

METHODS

The main purpose of our study was to determine if the introduction of compatible pairs in the Portuguese kidney paired exchange program would result in a better match for these patients, but also to assess if this strategy would increase the number of incompatible pairs with a possible match. We included 17 compatible pairs in kidney paired exchange pool of 35 pairs and performed an in-silico simulation determining HLA eplet mismatch load between the co-registered and matched pairs using HLA MatchMaker, version 3.0.

RESULTS

Our study showed that the inclusion of fully HLA-A, -B, -DR mismatched compatible pairs within the national Portuguese KEP increased matched rate within ICP (0.71%) and improved HLA eplet matching within compatible pairs. 16 of 17 (94.12%) of the CP obtained one or more transplants possibilities and 13 (81.25%) would have been transplanted with significantly lower HLA class I and class II total and antibody-verified eplet mismatch load (83.9 ± 16.9 vs. 59.8 ± 12.2, P = .002 and 30.1 ± 5.5 vs. 21.2 ± 3.0, P = .003, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This strategy is a viable alternative for compatible pairs seeking a better matched kidney and Portuguese KEP program should allow them this possibility.

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.

Living donor kidney transplantation: Let's talk about it

Transplantation is the preferred treatment option for end-stage renal disease as it offers superior results and patient reported outcomes in comparison to dialysis. Patients treated with a transplant live longer, healthier and more independent lives. Transplantation is also more cost-effective, reducing the overall burden of renal disease. Despite the rising incidence of renal failure, the uptake of living donor kidney transplantation has been static across the UK for several years. Among transplantation, living donation offers a number of advantages compared with deceased donor transplantation. The procedure is more likely to be performed pre-dialysis and the elective nature allows for better perioperative planning. Awareness for living donation processes among healthcare professionals, patients and the public appears to be poor. Sharing information regarding the process will help educate colleagues, dispel myths and, crucially, allow patients the opportunity to talk about this treatment option with their hospital doctor.

Is There Decreasing Public Interest in Renal Transplantation? A Google TrendsTM Analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Renal transplantation is the preferred form of renal replacement therapy for the majority of patients with end stage renal disease (ESRD). The Internet is a key tool for people seeking healthcare-related information. This current work explored the interest in kidney transplantation based on Internet search queries using Google Trends^TM.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND MEASUREMENTS

We performed a Google Trends^TM search with the search term "kidney transplantation" between 2004 (year of inception) and 2018. We retrieved and analyzed data on the worldwide trend as well as data from the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), the Organización Nacional de Trasplantes (ONT), the Eurotransplant area, and the National Health Service (NHS) Transplant Register. Google Trends^TM indices were investigated and compared to the numbers of performed kidney transplants, which were extracted from the respective official websites of UNOS, ONT, Eurotransplant, and the NHS.

RESULTS

During an investigational period of 15 years, there was a significant decrease of the worldwide Google Trends^TM index from 76.3 to 25.4, corresponding to an absolute reduction of -50.9% and a relative reduction by -66.7%. The trend was even more pronounced for the UNOS area (-75.2%), while in the same time period the number of transplanted kidneys in the UNOS area increased by 21.9%. Events of public interest had an impact on the search queries in the year of occurrence, as shown by an increase in the Google Trends^TM index by 39.2% in the year 2005 in Austria when a person of public interest received his second live donor kidney transplant.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates a decreased public interest in kidney transplantation. There is a clear need to raise public awareness, since transplantation represents the best form of renal replacement therapy for patients with ESRD. Information should be provided on social media, with a special focus on readability and equitable access, as well as on web pages.

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.

Attitude of Older People Toward Living Donation

BACKGROUND

Living donation is a potential source of organs that could help to reduce the organ transplant deficit. Given that we have a worldwide aging population, it is important to assess the opinion of older people toward this type of donation.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the attitude of people aged > 65 years toward living kidney donation (LKD) and living liver donation (LLD) and to investigate the variables affecting their attitudes.

METHODS

A multicentric study was carried out using a representative sample of people > 65 years stratified by sex and geographic location in southeastern Spain (n = 420). The measurement instrument was a validated questionnaire about LKD and LLD. Statistics were analyzed using SPSS version 21.0 (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY, United States) software. Descriptive analysis was carried out using Student t test, χ² test, and a multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

The questionnaire completion rate was 84% (n = 351) with 88% (n = 310) in favor of LKD, and 89% (n = 311) in favor of LLD. Favorable attitude decreased to 3% when the donation under consideration was unrelated. Attitudes toward LKD and LLD were associated with having received information from the television (P = .016 and P = .045) and from friends (P = .017 and P = .03); accepting an autopsy after death (P = .001 and P = .002); and not being worried about scars (P = .015 and P = .044). In the multivariate analysis, the following variables continued to be significant: having received information from the television (odds ratio [OR], 2) and from friends (OR, 10.3); and the acceptance of an autopsy (OR, 2).

CONCLUSIONS

Older people are in favor of both LKD and LLD, assuming it is a related donation. In addition, the information the elderly population receives regarding organ donation and transplantation affects their attitudes.

Policies to promote timely referral for kidney transplantation

There are numerous patient, provider, and health system barriers to accessing kidney transplantation. Patient barriers such as sociocultural and clinical characteristics and provider factors such as provider knowledge and awareness of transplantation play important roles in facilitating transplant. Health system factors like misaligned incentives and quality metrics for dialysis facilities and transplant centers also influence transplant access. While numerous studies have documented the impact of these barriers on wait-listing and transplant, few studies have examined referral from a dialysis facility to a transplant center and start of the transplant evaluation process. While the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) require that dialysis facilities educate patients about transplant, there are no guidelines for the content and objectives for this education. In addition, policies to require timely referral for transplantation have been considered by CMS but are difficult to implement without national data on referral. Federal policies should be amended to mandate transplant center submission of referral data-while decreasing the unfunded mandate to collect other unusable data currently collected as part of regulatory monitoring of transplant centers-to promote timely access to transplant, increased transplant rates, and to better understand the multilevel barriers and facilitators to transplant referral.

Best practices to optimize utilization of the National Living Donor Assistance Center for the financial assistance of living organ donors

Living organ donors face direct costs when donating an organ, including transportation, lodging, meals, and lost wages. For those most in need, the National Living Donor Assistance Center (NLDAC) provides reimbursement to defray travel and subsistence costs associated with living donor evaluation, surgery, and follow-up. While this program currently supports 9% of all US living donors, there is tremendous variability in its utilization across US transplant centers, which may limit patient access to living donor transplantation. Based on feedback from the transplant community, NLDAC convened a Best Practices Workshop on August 2, 2018, in Arlington, VA, to identify strategies to optimize transplant program utilization of this valuable resource. Attendees included team members from transplant centers that are high NLDAC users; the NLDAC program team; and Advisory Group members. After a robust review of NLDAC data and engagement in group discussions, the workgroup identified concrete best practices for administrative and transplant center leadership involvement; for individuals filing NLDAC applications at transplant centers; and to improve patient education about potential financial barriers to living organ donation. Multiple opportunities were identified for intervention to increase transplant programs' NLDAC utilization and reduce financial burdens inhibiting expansion of living donor transplantation in the United States.

Physician Attitudes Toward Living Kidney Donation

Background:

Compared to dialysis, living kidney donation has a greater chance of restoring health and is associated with better outcomes than deceased kidney donation. Although physicians advocate for this treatment, it is uncertain how they would act as potential living kidney donors or recipients.

Methods:

We surveyed 104 physicians, pediatric, and internal medicine nephrologists, to ascertain their attitudes toward living donation.

Results:

Among surveyed nephrologists, there was nearly universal support for living kidney donation as a viable medical option, and nearly all of them would support a healthy and medically cleared patient who wishes to participate. Although support was still strong, nephrologists were significantly less likely to support their friends and relatives participating in living kidney donation, and their support declined further for friends and relatives donating to nonrelatives.

Conclusion:

Our findings suggest the need to more deeply examine physician-perceived risks involved in serving as a living kidney donor. Based on differences in surveyed nephrologist attitudes regarding donation to and from loved ones versus nonrelatives, we suggest that physicians should give careful consideration to how they describe the risks of living donation to potential donors.

Health Professional-Identified Barriers to Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: A Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) has several advantages over deceased donor kidney transplantation. Yet rates of living donation are declining in Canada and there exists significant interprovincial variability. Efforts to improve living donation tend to focus on the patient and barriers identified at their level, such as not knowing how to ask for a kidney or lack of education. These efforts favor those who have the means and the support to find living donors. Thus, a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)-organized workshop recommended that education efforts to understand and remove barriers should focus on health professionals (HPs). Despite this, little attention has been paid to what they identify as barriers to discussing LDKT with their patients.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to explore HP-identified barriers to discuss living donation with patients in 3 provinces of Canada with low (Quebec), moderate (Ontario), and high (British Columbia) rates of LDKT.

DESIGN

This study consists of an interpretive descriptive approach as it enables to move beyond description and inform clinical practice.

SETTING

Purposive criterion and quota sampling were used to recruit HPs from Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia who are involved in the care of patients with kidney disease and/or with transplant coordination.

PATIENTS

Not applicable.

MEASUREMENTS

Semistructured interviews were conducted. The interview guide was developed based on a preliminary analytical framework and a review of the literature.

METHODS

Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data stemming from the interviews. The coding process comprised of a deductive and inductive approach, and the use of a qualitative analysis software (NVivo 11). Following this, themes were identified and developed. Interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was obtained. In total, we conducted 16 telephone interviews as thematic saturation was attained.

RESULTS

Six predominant themes emerged: (1) lack of communication between transplant and dialysis teams, (2) absence of referral guidelines, (3) role perception and lack of multidisciplinary involvement, (4) HP's lack of information and training, (5) negative attitudes of some HP toward LDKT, (6) patient-level barriers as defined by the HP. HPs did mention patients' attitudes and some characteristics as the main barriers to discussions about living donation; this was noted in all provinces. HPs from Ontario and British Columbia indicated multiple strategies being implemented to address some of these barriers. Those from Ontario mentioned strategies that center on the core principles of provincial-level standardization, while those from British Columbia center on engaging the entire multidisciplinary team and improved role perception. We noted a dearth of such efforts in Quebec; however, efforts around education and promotion, while tentative, have emerged.

LIMITATIONS

Social desirability and selection bias. Our analysis might not be applicable to other provinces.

CONCLUSIONS

HPs involved with the referral and coordination of transplantation play a major role in access to LDKT. We have identified challenges they face when discussing living donation with their patients that warrant further assessment and research to inform policy change.

Increasing living donation by implementing the Kidney Coach Program

Candidates for living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) find it difficult to discuss living donation with people in their social network, and there is a lack of useful interventions to train them. The Kidney Coach Program (KCP) was developed to equip individuals (advocates for candidates and candidate themselves) with the tools needed to find potential donors. The purpose of this pilot study is to evaluate the effects of the KCP on increasing the number of people considering living donation.

METHODS

Candidates for the KCP were recruited. Data were collected on the number of live donor inquiries in the coach group compared to listed patients (historical controls).

RESULTS

Over a 12-month period, 20 transplant candidates enrolled in the KCP were compared to 50 controls. Eighty percent of the participants in the KCP had at least one donor inquiry compared to 38% of controls (P = 0.001). Significantly, more Caucasian candidates participated in the KCP compared to other racial groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The KCP can be an effective method to increase awareness of a patient's need for LDKT. Existing clinical staff successfully implemented the program. Transplant programs should provide training to candidates and their supports on effective ways to find a living donor.

Helping More Patients Receive a Living Donor Kidney Transplant

The best treatment option for many patients with kidney failure is a kidney transplant from a living donor. Countries that successfully increase their rate of living kidney donation will decrease their reliance on dialysis, the most expensive and high-risk form of kidney replacement therapy. Outlined here are some barriers that prevent some patients from pursuing living kidney donation and current knowledge on some potential solutions to these barriers. Also described are strategies to promote living kidney donation in a defensible system of practice. Safely increasing the rate of living kidney donation will require better programs and policies to improve the experiences of living donors and their recipients, to safeguard the practice for years to come.

Social Media in the Identification of Living Kidney Donors: Platforms, Tools, and Strategies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Living donor transplantation offers patients with end-stage renal disease faster access to transplant and better survival and quality of life than waiting for a deceased donor or remaining on dialysis. While many people state they would be willing to help someone in need through kidney donation, there are education and communication barriers to donor candidate identification. These barriers might be mitigated by technological innovations, including the use of social media.

RECENT FINDINGS

This article describes the state of contemporary evidence regarding use of social media tools and interventions to increase access to living donor transplantation, as reported in peer-reviewed medical literature, as well as programs that have not yet been formally evaluated.

SUMMARY

As social media platforms continue to grow and expand, a commitment to understanding and facilitating the use of social media by the transplant community may support patients who are interested in using social media as a tool to find a living kidney donor.