Relationship of Social Deprivation Among Living Kidney Donor–Recipient Pairs

IF 1.9 Q3 TRANSPLANTATION
MD Anne M. Huml, MD Yara Bilen, PhD Jesse D. Schold, MA Susana Arrigain, PhD R. Blake Buchalter
{"title":"Relationship of Social Deprivation Among Living Kidney Donor–Recipient Pairs","authors":"MD Anne M. Huml, MD Yara Bilen, PhD Jesse D. Schold, MA Susana Arrigain, PhD R. Blake Buchalter","doi":"10.1097/TXD.0000000000001559","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background. Living kidney transplant is the most effective renal replacement therapy for patients with end-stage kidney disease. Community-level factors contribute to pervasive socioeconomic and racial disparities in access to living donor kidney transplantation. Little is known about social and environmental conditions between living donors and recipients. Further understanding of these relationships may enhance opportunities for transplantation. Methods. From 2010 to 2020, 59 575 living kidney donor–recipient pairs (≥18 y old) were identified using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Living donors and recipients were geocoded to area-level social deprivation index (SDI). The primary outcome was difference between recipient and donor SDI. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine recipient and donor characteristics association with residence in different SDI communities. Results. Living kidney donation occurs across all strata of social deprivation; including when donors, recipients or both reside in more disadvantaged communities. Donor–recipient race combination and biological relationship are associated with differences in SDI. When compared with White recipients of White donors, Black and Hispanic recipients were more likely to reside in more disadvantaged areas (odds ratio = 2.41 [2.19-2.66] and 1.97 [1.78-2.19]). Recipients in anonymous and paired donations were more likely to reside in areas of more disadvantage than their donors (odds ratio = 1.27 [1.15-1.40] and 1.32 [1.23-1.41] compared with biological); attenuating socioeconomic disparities in access to living donor transplantation. Conclusions. Findings illustrate the social and environmental relationships between living kidney donor–recipient pairs that are important to develop targeted approaches and address barriers to living kidney transplantation. Best practices from areas of high deprivation with successful living kidney transplantation can be shared.","PeriodicalId":23225,"journal":{"name":"Transplantation Direct","volume":"42 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transplantation Direct","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TXD.0000000000001559","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"TRANSPLANTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background. Living kidney transplant is the most effective renal replacement therapy for patients with end-stage kidney disease. Community-level factors contribute to pervasive socioeconomic and racial disparities in access to living donor kidney transplantation. Little is known about social and environmental conditions between living donors and recipients. Further understanding of these relationships may enhance opportunities for transplantation. Methods. From 2010 to 2020, 59 575 living kidney donor–recipient pairs (≥18 y old) were identified using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Living donors and recipients were geocoded to area-level social deprivation index (SDI). The primary outcome was difference between recipient and donor SDI. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine recipient and donor characteristics association with residence in different SDI communities. Results. Living kidney donation occurs across all strata of social deprivation; including when donors, recipients or both reside in more disadvantaged communities. Donor–recipient race combination and biological relationship are associated with differences in SDI. When compared with White recipients of White donors, Black and Hispanic recipients were more likely to reside in more disadvantaged areas (odds ratio = 2.41 [2.19-2.66] and 1.97 [1.78-2.19]). Recipients in anonymous and paired donations were more likely to reside in areas of more disadvantage than their donors (odds ratio = 1.27 [1.15-1.40] and 1.32 [1.23-1.41] compared with biological); attenuating socioeconomic disparities in access to living donor transplantation. Conclusions. Findings illustrate the social and environmental relationships between living kidney donor–recipient pairs that are important to develop targeted approaches and address barriers to living kidney transplantation. Best practices from areas of high deprivation with successful living kidney transplantation can be shared.
活体肾脏捐献者与受捐者配对之间的社会贫困关系
背景。活体肾移植是终末期肾病患者最有效的肾脏替代疗法。社区层面的因素导致在获得活体肾移植方面普遍存在社会经济和种族差异。人们对活体捐赠者和接受者之间的社会和环境条件知之甚少。进一步了解这些关系可能会增加移植的机会。方法。从2010年到2020年,使用移植接受者科学登记处确定了59575对活体肾脏供体-受体(≥18岁)。活体供体和受者按区域社会剥夺指数(SDI)进行地理编码。主要结局是受者和供者SDI之间的差异。我们使用多变量逻辑回归来检验不同SDI社区的受者和供者特征与居住地的关系。结果。活体肾脏捐献发生在社会贫困的各个阶层;包括当捐助者、受援者或两者都居住在更弱势的社区时。供受体种族组合和生物学关系与SDI差异有关。与白人捐赠者的白人接受者相比,黑人和西班牙裔接受者更有可能居住在更贫困的地区(优势比分别为2.41[2.19-2.66]和1.97[1.78-2.19])。匿名捐赠和配对捐赠的接受者比其捐赠者更有可能居住在更不利的地区(优势比为1.27[1.15-1.40]和1.32 [1.23-1.41]);减少获得活体供体移植的社会经济差异。结论。研究结果说明了活体肾供体-受体对之间的社会和环境关系,这对于开发有针对性的方法和解决活体肾移植障碍非常重要。可以分享来自高贫困地区成功活体肾移植的最佳实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Transplantation Direct
Transplantation Direct TRANSPLANTATION-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
4.30%
发文量
193
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信