Background/Aims: US registry data have consistently shown that blacks are less likely than whites to be wait-listed before beginning dialysis. Methods: The Comprehensive Dialysis Study (CDS) was a special study conducted by the US Renal Data System (USRDS) in which a national cohort of patients who began maintenance dialysis therapy in 2005–2007 were asked whether kidney transplantation (KT) had been discussed with them before they started dialysis. Using responses from black and white CDS participants and information from the USRDS, we investigated preemptive wait-listing as a function of patient-reported predialysis KT discussion. Results: Among those reporting early KT discussion, 31.0% of patients preemptively wait-listed were black, compared to 27.5% of those not preemptively wait-listed. Two thirds of preemptively wait-listed patients had received nephrology care more than 12 months before starting dialysis and reported that KT was discussed with them 12 months or more before dialysis. Early KT discussion and higher serum albumin and hemoglobin levels remained significant predictors of preemptive wait-listing in an adjusted logistic regression analysis. Among those preemptively wait-listed, 33% of blacks and 60% of whites had received a transplant by September 30, 2009 (study end date). Conclusion: Early KT discussion appeared to reduce barriers to black patients’ waiting list placement before the start of dialysis, which in turn may facilitate earlier access to a deceased donor organ transplant.

Keywords:
Education, Kidney transplantation, Preemptive wait-listing, Race, United States Renal Data System
1.
Wolfe RA, Ashby VB, Milford EL, Ojo AO, Ettenger RE, Agodoa LYC, Held PJ, Port FK: Comparison of mortality in all patients on dialysis, patients on dialysis awaiting transplantation, and recipients of a first cadaveric transplant. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1725–1730.
2.
Evans RW, Manninen DL, Garrison LP Jr, Hart LG, Blagg CR, Gutman RA, Hull AR, Lowrie EG: The quality of life of patients with end-stage renal disease. N Engl J Med 1985;312:553–559.
3.
US Renal Data System: 2011 Annual Data Report: Atlas of Chronic Kidney Disease and End-Stage Renal Disease in the United States. Bethesda, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, 2011.
4.
Kasiske BL, London W, Ellison MD: Race and socioeconomic factors influencing early placement on the kidney transplant waiting list. J Am Soc Nephrol 1998;9:2142–2147.
5.
Keith D, Ashby VB, Port FK, Leichtman AB: Insurance type and minority status associated with large disparities in prelisting dialysis among candidates for kidney transplantation. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2008;3:463–470.
6.
Kutner NG, Johansen KL, Kaysen GA, Pederson S, Chen SC, Agodoa LY, Eggers PW, Chertow GM: The comprehensive dialysis study (CDS): a USRDS special study. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2009;4:645–650.
7.
Weng FL, Mange KC: A comparison of persons who present for preemptive and nonpreemptive kidney transplantation. Am J Kidney Dis 2003;42:1050–1057.
8.
Winkelmayer WC, Mehta J, Chandraker A, Owen WF Jr, Avorn J: Predialysis nephrologist care and access to kidney transplantation in the United States. Am J Transplant 2007;7:872–879.
9.
Mehrotra R, Marsh D, Vonesh E, Peters V, Nissenson A: Patient education and access of ESRD patients to renal replacement therapies beyond in-center hemodialysis. Kidney Int 2005;68:378–390.
10.
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services: Coverage of kidney disease patient education services. MLN Matters Number MM6557. https://www.cms.gov/MLNMattersArticles/downloads/MM6557.pdf (accessed April 14, 2011).
11.
Young HN, Chan MR, Yevzlin AS, Becker BN: The rationale, implementation, and effect of the Medicare CKD education benefit. Am J Kidney Dis 2011;57:381–386.
12.
Ayanian JZ, Cleary PD, Weissman JS, Epstein AM: The effect of patients’ preferences on racial differences in access to renal transplantation. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1661–1669.
13.
Coorey GM, Paykin C, Singleton-Driscoll LC, Gaston RS: Barriers to preemptive kidney transplantation. Am J Nurs 2009;109:28–37.
14.
Kasiske BL, Neylan JF 3rd, Riggio RR, Danovitch GM, Kahana L, Alexander SR, White MG: The effect of race on access and outcome in transplantation. N Engl J Med 1991;324:302–307.
15.
Eggers PW: Racial disparities in access to transplantation: a tough nut to crack. Kidney Int 2009;76:589–590.
16.
Gordon EJ, Lash JP: A timely change in CKD delivery: promoting patient education. Am J Kidney Dis 2011;57:375–377.
17.
Eggers P: Comparison of treatment costs between dialysis and transplantation. Semin Nephrol 1992;12:284–289.
18.
Hall YN, Choi AI, Xu P, O’Hare AM, Chertow GM: Racial ethnic differences in rates and determinants of deceased donor kidney transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol 2011;22:743–751.
19.
Kutner NG, Johansen KL, Zhang R, Huang Y, Amaral S: Perspectives on the new Kidney Disease Education benefit: early awareness, race and kidney transplant access in a USRDS study. Am J Transplant 2012, E-pub ahead of print. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600–6143. 2011.03898.x.
20.
Vamos EP, Novak M, Mucsi I: Non-medical factors influencing access to renal transplantation. Int Urol Nephrol 2009;41:607–616.
© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel
2012
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.