Sudeshna Paul1, Laura C Plantinga2,3, Stephen O Pastan3,4, Jennifer C Gander5, Sumit Mohan6,7, Rachel E Patzer8,4,5. 1. Nell Hodgson Woodruff School of Nursing, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. 3. Renal Division, Department of Medicine and. 4. Emory Transplant Center, Atlanta, Georgia. 5. Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia. 6. Department of Medicine, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York; and. 7. Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, New York, New York. 8. Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia; rpatzer@emory.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: For patients with ESRD, referral from a dialysis facility to a transplant center for evaluation is an important step toward kidney transplantation. However, a standardized measure for assessing clinical performance of dialysis facilities transplant access is lacking. We describe methodology for a new dialysis facility measure: the Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Transplant referral data from 8308 patients with incident ESRD within 249 dialysis facilities in the United States state of Georgia were linked with US Renal Data System data from January of 2008 to December of 2011, with follow-up through December of 2012. Facility-level expected referrals were computed from a two-stage Cox proportional hazards model after patient case mix risk adjustment including demographics and comorbidities. The Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio (95% confidence interval) was calculated as a ratio of observed to expected referrals. Measure validity and reliability were assessed. RESULTS: Over 2008-2011, facility Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios in Georgia ranged from 0 to 4.87 (mean =1.16, SD=0.76). Most (77%) facilities had observed referrals as expected, whereas 11% and 12% had Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios significantly greater than and less than expected, respectively. Age, race, sex, and comorbid conditions were significantly associated with the likelihood of referral, and they were included in risk adjustment for Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio calculations. The Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios were positively associated with evaluation, waitlisting, and transplantation (r=0.46, 0.35, and 0.20, respectively; P<0.01). On average, approximately 33% of the variability in Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios was attributed to between-facility variation, and 67% of the variability in Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios was attributed to within-facility variation. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of observed variation in dialysis facility referral performance was due to characteristics within a dialysis facility rather than patient factors included in risk adjustment models. Our study shows a method for computing a facility-level standardized measure for transplant referral on the basis of a pilot sample of Georgia dialysis facilities that could be used to monitor transplant referral performance of dialysis facilities.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: For patients with ESRD, referral from a dialysis facility to a transplant center for evaluation is an important step toward kidney transplantation. However, a standardized measure for assessing clinical performance of dialysis facilities transplant access is lacking. We describe methodology for a new dialysis facility measure: the Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Transplant referral data from 8308 patients with incident ESRD within 249 dialysis facilities in the United States state of Georgia were linked with US Renal Data System data from January of 2008 to December of 2011, with follow-up through December of 2012. Facility-level expected referrals were computed from a two-stage Cox proportional hazards model after patient case mix risk adjustment including demographics and comorbidities. The Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio (95% confidence interval) was calculated as a ratio of observed to expected referrals. Measure validity and reliability were assessed. RESULTS: Over 2008-2011, facility Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios in Georgia ranged from 0 to 4.87 (mean =1.16, SD=0.76). Most (77%) facilities had observed referrals as expected, whereas 11% and 12% had Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios significantly greater than and less than expected, respectively. Age, race, sex, and comorbid conditions were significantly associated with the likelihood of referral, and they were included in risk adjustment for Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio calculations. The Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios were positively associated with evaluation, waitlisting, and transplantation (r=0.46, 0.35, and 0.20, respectively; P<0.01). On average, approximately 33% of the variability in Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios was attributed to between-facility variation, and 67% of the variability in Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios was attributed to within-facility variation. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of observed variation in dialysis facility referral performance was due to characteristics within a dialysis facility rather than patient factors included in risk adjustment models. Our study shows a method for computing a facility-level standardized measure for transplant referral on the basis of a pilot sample of Georgia dialysis facilities that could be used to monitor transplant referral performance of dialysis facilities.
Authors: Harlan M Krumholz; Ralph G Brindis; John E Brush; David J Cohen; Andrew J Epstein; Karen Furie; George Howard; Eric D Peterson; Saif S Rathore; Sidney C Smith; John A Spertus; Yun Wang; Sharon-Lise T Normand Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-12-19 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Laura C Plantinga; Stephen O Pastan; Adam S Wilk; Jenna Krisher; Laura Mulloy; Eric M Gibney; Rachel E Patzer Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2016-11-20 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: David A Axelrod; Krista L Lentine; Huiling Xiao; Thomas Bubolz; David Goodman; Richard Freeman; Janet E Tuttle-Newhall; Mark A Schnitzler Journal: Surgery Date: 2013-12-14 Impact factor: 3.982
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: Sumit Mohan; Richard Mutell; Rachel E Patzer; James Holt; David Cohen; William McClellan Journal: Transplantation Date: 2014-09-27 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Rachel E Patzer; Jennifer Gander; Leighann Sauls; M Ahinee Amamoo; Jenna Krisher; Laura L Mulloy; Eric Gibney; Teri Browne; Laura Plantinga; Stephen O Pastan Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2014-10-28 Impact factor: 2.388
Authors: Andrew Wey; Sally K Gustafson; Nicholas Salkowski; Bertram L Kasiske; Melissa Skeans; Cory R Schaffhausen; Ajay K Israni; Jon J Snyder Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2018-08-21 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Catherine M Sullivan; Kitty V Barnswell; Kate Greenway; Cindy M Kamps; Derrick Wilson; Jeffrey M Albert; Jacqueline Dolata; Anne Huml; Julie A Pencak; John T Ducker; Roberto Gedaly; Christopher M Jones; Todd Pesavento; Ashwini R Sehgal Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2018-08-22 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Rachel E Patzer; Samantha Retzloff; Jade Buford; Jennifer Gander; Teri Browne; Heather Jones; Matt Ellis; Kelley Canavan; Alexander Berlin; Laura Mulloy; Eric Gibney; Leighann Sauls; Dori Muench; Amber Reeves-Daniel; Carlos Zayas; Derek DuBay; Rich Mutell; Stephen O Pastan Journal: Curr Transplant Rep Date: 2021-10-31
Authors: Rasheeda Hall; Alyssa Platt; Jonathan Wilson; Patti L Ephraim; Angelina S Hwang; Angel Chen; Daniel E Weiner; L Ebony Boulware; Jane Pendergast; Julia J Scialla Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2020-10-12 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Laura J McPherson; Elizabeth R Walker; Yi-Ting Hana Lee; Jennifer C Gander; Zhensheng Wang; Amber M Reeves-Daniel; Teri Browne; Matthew J Ellis; Ana P Rossi; Stephen O Pastan; Rachel E Patzer Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2021-05-26 Impact factor: 10.614