OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of community health indicators with outcomes for kidney transplant recipients. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. SETTING: Transplant recipients in the United States from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients merged with health indicators compiled from several national databases and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, including the National Center for Health Statistics, the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, and the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. PATIENTS: A total of 100 164 living and deceased donor adult (aged 18 years) kidney transplant recipients who underwent a transplant between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2010. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Risk-adjusted time to posttransplant mortality and graft loss. RESULTS: Multiple health indicators from recipients' residence were independently associated with outcomes, including low birth weight, preventable hospitalizations, inactivity rate, and smoking and obesity prevalence. Recipients in the highest-risk counties were more likely to be African American (adjusted odds ratio, 1.59, 95% CI, 1.51-1.68), to be younger (aged 18-39 years; 1.46; 1.32-1.60), to have lower educational attainment (<high school; 1.84; 1.62-2.08), and to have public insurance (1.46; 1.38-1.54). Proportions of recipients from higher-risk counties varied dramatically by center and region. There was an independent graded effect between health indicators and posttransplant mortality, including notable hazard associated with the highest-risk counties (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.13-1.40). CONCLUSIONS: In a national cohort of patients undergoing complex medical procedures, health indicators from patients' communities are strong independent predictors of all-cause mortality. Findings highlight the importance of community conditions for risk stratification of patients and development of individualized treatment protocols. Findings also demonstrate that standard risk adjustment does not capture important factors that may affect unbiased performance evaluations of transplant centers.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of community health indicators with outcomes for kidney transplant recipients. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. SETTING: Transplant recipients in the United States from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients merged with health indicators compiled from several national databases and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, including the National Center for Health Statistics, the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, and the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. PATIENTS: A total of 100 164 living and deceased donor adult (aged 18 years) kidney transplant recipients who underwent a transplant between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2010. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Risk-adjusted time to posttransplant mortality and graft loss. RESULTS: Multiple health indicators from recipients' residence were independently associated with outcomes, including low birth weight, preventable hospitalizations, inactivity rate, and smoking and obesity prevalence. Recipients in the highest-risk counties were more likely to be African American (adjusted odds ratio, 1.59, 95% CI, 1.51-1.68), to be younger (aged 18-39 years; 1.46; 1.32-1.60), to have lower educational attainment (<high school; 1.84; 1.62-2.08), and to have public insurance (1.46; 1.38-1.54). Proportions of recipients from higher-risk counties varied dramatically by center and region. There was an independent graded effect between health indicators and posttransplant mortality, including notable hazard associated with the highest-risk counties (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.13-1.40). CONCLUSIONS: In a national cohort of patients undergoing complex medical procedures, health indicators from patients' communities are strong independent predictors of all-cause mortality. Findings highlight the importance of community conditions for risk stratification of patients and development of individualized treatment protocols. Findings also demonstrate that standard risk adjustment does not capture important factors that may affect unbiased performance evaluations of transplant centers.
Authors: Suma Prakash; Rudolph A Rodriguez; Peter C Austin; Refik Saskin; Alicia Fernandez; Louise M Moist; Ann M O'Hare Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2010-06-17 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Sandro Galea; Melissa Tracy; Katherine J Hoggatt; Charles Dimaggio; Adam Karpati Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2011-06-16 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Martin P Gallagher; Patrick J Kelly; Meg Jardine; Vlado Perkovic; Alan Cass; Jonathan C Craig; Josette Eris; Angela C Webster Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2010-04-29 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Jesse D Schold; Jon A Gregg; Jeffrey S Harman; Allyson G Hall; Pamela R Patton; Herwig-Ulf Meier-Kriesche Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2011-05-19 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: David A Axelrod; Nino Dzebisashvili; Mark A Schnitzler; Paolo R Salvalaggio; Dorry L Segev; Sommer E Gentry; Janet Tuttle-Newhall; Krista L Lentine Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2010-08-26 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Elisa J Gordon; Thomas R Prohaska; Mary P Gallant; Ashwini R Sehgal; David Strogatz; David Conti; Laura A Siminoff Journal: Clin Transplant Date: 2009-11-18 Impact factor: 2.863
Authors: Meera N Harhay; Michael O Harhay; Karthik Ranganna; Suzanne M Boyle; Lissa Levin Mizrahi; Stephen Guy; Gregory E Malat; Gary Xiao; David J Reich; Rachel E Patzer Journal: Clin Transplant Date: 2018-09-15 Impact factor: 2.863
Authors: Jesse D Schold; Joshua J Augustine; Anne M Huml; John O'Toole; John R Sedor; Emilio D Poggio Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2019-11-15 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Elizabeth A King; Mary Grace Bowring; Allan B Massie; Lauren M Kucirka; Mara A McAdams-DeMarco; Fawaz Al-Ammary; Niraj M Desai; Dorry L Segev Journal: Transplantation Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: J D Schold; L D Buccini; E L G Heaphy; D A Goldfarb; A R Sehgal; J Fung; E D Poggio; M W Kattan Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2013-05-24 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: J D Schold; E L G Heaphy; L D Buccini; E D Poggio; T R Srinivas; D A Goldfarb; S M Flechner; J R Rodrigue; J D Thornton; A R Sehgal Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2013-08-22 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Sarah L White; Dawn M Zinsser; Matthew Paul; Gregory N Levine; Tempie Shearon; Valarie B Ashby; John C Magee; Yi Li; Alan B Leichtman Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2014-05-19 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Sanghee Hong; Ruta Brazauskas; Kyle M Hebert; Siddhartha Ganguly; Hisham Abdel-Azim; Miguel Angel Diaz; Sara Beattie; Stefan O Ciurea; David Szwajcer; Sherif M Badawy; Alois A Gratwohl; Charles LeMaistre; Mahmoud D S M Aljurf; Richard F Olsson; Neel S Bhatt; Nosha Farhadfar; Jean A Yared; Ayami Yoshimi; Sachiko Seo; Usama Gergis; Amer M Beitinjaneh; Akshay Sharma; Hillard Lazarus; Jason Law; Matthew Ulrickson; Hasan Hashem; Hélène Schoemans; Jan Cerny; David Rizzieri; Bipin N Savani; Rammurti T Kamble; Bronwen E Shaw; Nandita Khera; William A Wood; Shahrukh Hashmi; Theresa Hahn; Stephanie J Lee; J Douglas Rizzo; Navneet S Majhail; Wael Saber Journal: Cancer Date: 2020-10-21 Impact factor: 6.860