Evaluation of Virtual Care in Kidney Transplant Recipients in the Early Posttransplant Period

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Saad Almarzouk, Monther Alazwari, Evangelyn Grace Matias, Catherine M. Clase, Seychelle Yohanna
{"title":"Evaluation of Virtual Care in Kidney Transplant Recipients in the Early Posttransplant Period","authors":"Saad Almarzouk,&nbsp;Monther Alazwari,&nbsp;Evangelyn Grace Matias,&nbsp;Catherine M. Clase,&nbsp;Seychelle Yohanna","doi":"10.1111/ctr.15459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Though virtual care was widely adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic, evidence to support its use in kidney transplant recipients early after transplantation is limited.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a retrospective cohort study comparing post kidney transplant outcomes in patients who received in-person transplant care before the COVID-19 pandemic with those who received mainly virtual transplant care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The usual-care group included 69 patients who received a kidney transplant from March 1, 2019 to September 1, 2019, and the virtual-care group included 64 patients who received a kidney transplant from September 1, 2020 to March 1, 2021.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>At 6 months, five patients in the usual-care group and three patients in the virtual-care group died. There was one graft loss and one episode of acute rejection in the usual-care group, and two episodes of acute rejection in the virtual-care group (<i>p</i> = 0.60). Estimated glomerular filtration rate was higher for patients in the virtual-care group (59 mL/min/1.73 m<sup>2</sup> vs. 52 mL/min/1.73 m<sup>2</sup>, <i>p</i> = 0.046) and serum creatinine was not different (138 µmol/L vs. 127 µmol/L, <i>p</i> = 0.27). There was no difference in mean blood pressure or hospitalizations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Outcomes were similar among recipients of a kidney transplant prior to the COVID-19 pandemic when care was mainly in person and during the pandemic when care was mainly virtual, without a signal of harm. Patient and donor selection may have led to unmeasured differences between groups.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10467,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Transplantation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ctr.15459","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ctr.15459","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Though virtual care was widely adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic, evidence to support its use in kidney transplant recipients early after transplantation is limited.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study comparing post kidney transplant outcomes in patients who received in-person transplant care before the COVID-19 pandemic with those who received mainly virtual transplant care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The usual-care group included 69 patients who received a kidney transplant from March 1, 2019 to September 1, 2019, and the virtual-care group included 64 patients who received a kidney transplant from September 1, 2020 to March 1, 2021.

Results

At 6 months, five patients in the usual-care group and three patients in the virtual-care group died. There was one graft loss and one episode of acute rejection in the usual-care group, and two episodes of acute rejection in the virtual-care group (p = 0.60). Estimated glomerular filtration rate was higher for patients in the virtual-care group (59 mL/min/1.73 m2 vs. 52 mL/min/1.73 m2, p = 0.046) and serum creatinine was not different (138 µmol/L vs. 127 µmol/L, p = 0.27). There was no difference in mean blood pressure or hospitalizations.

Conclusion

Outcomes were similar among recipients of a kidney transplant prior to the COVID-19 pandemic when care was mainly in person and during the pandemic when care was mainly virtual, without a signal of harm. Patient and donor selection may have led to unmeasured differences between groups.

评估肾移植受者在移植后早期的虚拟护理。
背景:尽管虚拟医疗在COVID-19大流行期间被广泛采用,但支持在肾移植受者移植后早期使用虚拟医疗的证据却很有限:我们进行了一项回顾性队列研究,比较了在 COVID-19 大流行之前接受面对面移植护理的患者与在 COVID-19 大流行期间主要接受虚拟移植护理的患者的肾移植后效果。常规护理组包括 69 名在 2019 年 3 月 1 日至 2019 年 9 月 1 日期间接受肾移植的患者,虚拟护理组包括 64 名在 2020 年 9 月 1 日至 2021 年 3 月 1 日期间接受肾移植的患者:6个月后,常规护理组有5名患者死亡,虚拟护理组有3名患者死亡。常规护理组有一次移植物丢失和一次急性排斥反应,虚拟护理组有两次急性排斥反应(P = 0.60)。虚拟治疗组患者的估计肾小球滤过率较高(59 mL/min/1.73 m2 对 52 mL/min/1.73 m2,p = 0.046),血清肌酐无差异(138 µmol/L 对 127 µmol/L,p = 0.27)。平均血压和住院次数没有差异:结论:在COVID-19大流行之前,肾移植受者主要是亲自接受治疗,而在大流行期间,肾移植受者主要是接受虚拟治疗,两者的治疗结果相似,但没有危害信号。患者和捐赠者的选择可能导致了组间未测量的差异。
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
Clinical Transplantation
Clinical Transplantation 医学-外科
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
286
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Transplantation: The Journal of Clinical and Translational Research aims to serve as a channel of rapid communication for all those involved in the care of patients who require, or have had, organ or tissue transplants, including: kidney, intestine, liver, pancreas, islets, heart, heart valves, lung, bone marrow, cornea, skin, bone, and cartilage, viable or stored. Published monthly, Clinical Transplantation’s scope is focused on the complete spectrum of present transplant therapies, as well as also those that are experimental or may become possible in future. Topics include: Immunology and immunosuppression; Patient preparation; Social, ethical, and psychological issues; Complications, short- and long-term results; Artificial organs; Donation and preservation of organ and tissue; Translational studies; Advances in tissue typing; Updates on transplant pathology;. Clinical and translational studies are particularly welcome, as well as focused reviews. Full-length papers and short communications are invited. Clinical reviews are encouraged, as well as seminal papers in basic science which might lead to immediate clinical application. Prominence is regularly given to the results of cooperative surveys conducted by the organ and tissue transplant registries. Clinical Transplantation: The Journal of Clinical and Translational Research is essential reading for clinicians and researchers in the diverse field of transplantation: surgeons; clinical immunologists; cryobiologists; hematologists; gastroenterologists; hepatologists; pulmonologists; nephrologists; cardiologists; and endocrinologists. It will also be of interest to sociologists, psychologists, research workers, and to all health professionals whose combined efforts will improve the prognosis of transplant recipients.
×
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