| Literature DB >> 29316241 |
Jesse D Schold1, Kenneth A Andreoni2, Anil K Chandraker3, Robert S Gaston4, Jayme E Locke4, Amit K Mathur5, Timothy L Pruett6, Abbas Rana7, Lloyd E Ratner8, Laura D Buccini9.
Abstract
Outcomes of patients receiving solid organ transplants in the United States are systematically aggregated into bi-annual Program-Specific Reports (PSRs) detailing risk-adjusted survival by transplant center. Recently, the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) issued 5-tier ratings evaluating centers based on risk-adjusted 1-year graft survival. Our primary aim was to examine the reliability of 5-tier ratings over time. Using 10 consecutive PSRs for adult kidney transplant centers from June 2012 to December 2016 (n = 208), we applied 5-tier ratings to center outcomes and evaluated ratings over time. From the baseline period (June 2012), 47% of centers had at least a 1-unit tier change within 6 months, 66% by 1 year, and 94% by 3 years. Similarly, 46% of centers had at least a 2-unit tier change by 3 years. In comparison, 15% of centers had a change in the traditional 3-tier rating at 3 years. The 5-tier ratings at 4 years had minimal association with baseline rating (Kappa 0.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.002 to 0.158). Centers had a median of 3 different 5-tier ratings over the period (q1 = 2, q3 = 4). Findings were consistent for center volume, transplant rate, and baseline 5-tier rating. Cumulatively, results suggest that 5-tier ratings are highly volatile, limiting their utility for informing potential stakeholders, particularly transplant candidates given expected waiting times between wait listing and transplantation.Entities:
Keywords: ethics and public policy; graft survival; health services and outcomes research; kidney transplantation/nephrology; organ transplantation in general; patient education; statistics
Year: 2018 PMID: 29316241 DOI: 10.1111/ajt.14659
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Am J Transplant ISSN: 1600-6135 Impact factor: 8.086