Background: Improving access to optimal healthcare may depend on the attributes of neighborhoods where patients receive healthcare services. We investigated whether the characteristics of dialysis facility neighborhoods - where most patients with end-stage renal disease are treated - were associated with facility-level kidney transplantation. Methods: We examined the association between census tract (neighborhood)-level sociodemographic factors and facility-level kidney transplantation rate in 3,983 U.S. dialysis facilities where kidney transplantation rates were high. Number of kidney transplants and total person-years contributed at the facility level in 2007-2010 were obtained from the Dialysis Facility Report and linked to the census tract data on sociodemographic characteristics from the American Community Survey 2006-2010 by dialysis facility location. We used multivariable Poisson models with generalized estimating equations to estimate the link between the neighborhood characteristics and transplant incidence. Results: Dialysis facilities in the United States were located in neighborhoods with substantially greater proportions of black and poor residents, relative to the national average. Most facility neighborhood characteristics were associated with transplant, with incidence rate ratios (95% CI) for standardized increments (in percentage) of neighborhood exposures of: living in poverty, 0.88 (0.84-0.92), black race, 0.83 (0.78-0.89); high school graduates, 1.22 (1.17-1.26); and unemployed, 0.90 (0.85-0.95). Conclusion: Dialysis facility neighborhood characteristics may be modestly associated with facility rates of kidney transplantation. The success of dialysis facility interventions to improve access to kidney transplantation may partially depend on reducing neighborhood-level barriers.

Keywords:
Neighborhood, Dialysis Facility, Kidney Transplantation, Socioeconomic Status
1.
Subramanian SV, Chen JT, Rehkopf DH, Waterman PD, Krieger N: Comparing individual- and area-based socioeconomic measures for the surveillance of health disparities: a multilevel analysis of Massachusetts births, 1989-1991. Am J Epidemiol 2006;164:823-834.
2.
Cubbin C, Winkleby MA: Protective and harmful effects of neighborhood-level deprivation on individual-level health knowledge, behavior changes, and risk of coronary heart disease. Am J Epidemiol 2005;162:559-568.
3.
Nordstrom CK, Diez Roux AV, Jackson SA, Gardin JM: The association of personal and neighborhood socioeconomic indicators with subclinical cardiovascular disease in an elderly cohort. The cardiovascular health study. Soc Sci Med 2004;59:2139-2147.
4.
Rossen LM: Neighbourhood economic deprivation explains racial/ethnic disparities in overweight and obesity among children and adolescents in the USA. J Epidemiol Commun Health 2014;68:123-129.
5.
Kershaw KN, Diez Roux AV, Burgard SA, Lisabeth LD, Mujahid MS, Schulz AJ: Metropolitan-level racial residential segregation and black-white disparities in hypertension. Am J Epidemiol 2011;174:537-545.
6.
Volkova N, McClellan W, Klein M, Flanders D, Kleinbaum D, Soucie JM, et al: Neighborhood poverty and racial differences in ESRD incidence. J Am Soc Nephrol 2008;19:356-364.
7.
Krieger N, Chen JT, Waterman PD, Rehkopf DH, Subramanian SV: Painting a truer picture of US socioeconomic and racial/ethnic health inequalities: the Public Health Disparities Geocoding Project. Am J Public Health 2005;95:312-323.
8.
Port FK, Wolfe RA, Mauger EA, Berling DP, Jiang K: Comparison of survival probabilities for dialysis patients vs cadaveric renal transplant recipients. J Am Med Assoc 1993;270:1339-1343.
9.
Ojo AO, Port FK, Wolfe RA, Mauger EA, Williams L, Berling DP: Comparative mortality risks of chronic dialysis and cadaveric transplantation in black end-stage renal disease patients. Am J Kidney Dis 1994;24:59-64.
10.
Wolfe RA, Ashby VB, Milford EL, Ojo AO, Ettenger RE, Agodoa LY, et al: Comparison of mortality in all patients on dialysis, patients on dialysis awaiting transplantation, and recipients of a first cadaveric transplant. New Engl J Med 1999;341:1725-1730.
11.
Evans RW, Manninen DL, Garrison LP Jr, Hart LG, Blagg CR, Gutman RA, et al: The quality of life of patients with end-stage renal disease. New Engl J Med 1985;312:553-559.
12.
Kutner NG, Brogan D, Kutner MH: End-stage renal disease treatment modality and patients' quality of life. Longitudinal assessment. Am J Nephrol 1986;6:396-402.
13.
Patzer RE, Amaral S, Klein M, Kutner N, Perryman JP, Gazmararian JA, et al: Racial disparities in pediatric access to kidney transplantation: does socioeconomic status play a role? Am J Transplant 2012;12:369-378.
14.
Patzer RE, Sayed BA, Kutner N, McClellan WM, Amaral S: Racial and ethnic differences in pediatric access to preemptive kidney transplantation in the United States. Am J Transplant 2013;13:1769-1781.
15.
Patzer RE, Amaral S, Wasse H, Volkova N, Kleinbaum D, McClellan WM: Neighborhood poverty and racial disparities in kidney transplant waitlisting. J Am Soc Nephrol 2009;20:1333-1340.
16.
Patzer RE, Perryman JP, Schrager JD, Pastan S, Amaral S, Gazmararian JA, et al: The role of race and poverty on steps to kidney transplantation in the southeastern United States. Am J Transplant 2012;12:358-368.
17.
Saunders MR, Cagney KA, Ross LF, Alexander GC: Neighborhood poverty, racial composition and renal transplant waitlist. Am J Transplant 2010;10:1912-1917.
18.
Garg PP, Frick KD, Diener-West M, Powe NR: Effect of the ownership of dialysis facilities on patients' survival and referral for transplantation. New Engl J Med 1999;341:1653-1660.
19.
Patzer RE, Plantinga L, Krishner J, Pastan SO: Dialysis facility and network factors associated with low kidney transplantation rates among United States dialysis facilities. Am J Transplant 2014;14:1562-1572.
20.
Wish JB, Meyer KB: ESRD Networks: past, present, and challenges for the future. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2012;7:1907-1914.
21.
Patzer RE, Pastan SO: Kidney transplant access in the Southeast: view from the bottom. Am J Transplant 2014;14:1499-1505.
22.
Guide to the 2011 region profiles for dialysis patients and facilities: overview, methodology, and interpretation. Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Kidney Epidemiology and Cost Center. Available at: http://www.dialysisreports.org/pdf/esrd/public/RegionGuide.pdf.
23.
Messer LC, Kaufman JS: Using census data to approximate neighborhood effects; in Oakes JM, Kaufman JS (eds): Methods in Social Epidemiology, ed 1, San Francisco, John Wiley & Sons, 2006, pp 209-236.
24.
Sampson RJ, Morenoff JD, Gannon-Rowley T: Assessing ‘neighborhood effects': social processes and new directions in research. Annu Rev Sociol 2002;28:443-478.
25.
Sen A, Foster JE: On economic inequality. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1997.
26.
Vonesh EF: Generalized Linear and Nonlinear Models for Correlated Data: Theory and Applications Using SAS. Cary, SAS Institute, Inc., 2012.
27.
Hall YN, O'Hare AM, Young BA, Boyko EJ, Chertow GM: Neighborhood poverty and kidney transplantation among US Asians and Pacific Islanders with end-stage renal disease. Am J Transplant 2008;8:2402-2409.
28.
Diez Roux AV: The study of group-level factors in epidemiology: rethinking variables, study designs, and analytical approaches. Epidemiol Rev 2004;26:104-111.
29.
Maripuri S, Ikizler TA, Cavanaugh KL: Prevalence of pre-end-stage renal disease care and associated outcomes among urban, micropolitan, and rural dialysis patients. Am J Nephrol 2013;37:274-280.
30.
Plantinga LC, Kim M, Goetz M, Kleinbaum DG, McClellan W, Patzer RE: Pre-end-stage renal disease care not associated with dialysis facility neighborhood poverty in the United States. Am J Nephrol 2014;39:50-58.
31.
Smith MD, Robson AM, Woodward RS, Michelman JE, Valerius TJ, Hong BA: Geographic access to health care services: the case of maintenance hemodialysis. Am J Kidney Dis 1985;5:19-26.
© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel
2014
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.