TY - JOUR
T1 - Direct Delivery of Kidney Transplant Education to Black and Low-Income Patients Receiving Dialysis
T2 - A Randomized Controlled Trial
AU - Waterman, Amy D.
AU - Peipert, John Devin
AU - McSorley, Anna Michelle
AU - Goalby, Christina J.
AU - Beaumont, Jennifer L.
AU - Peace, Leanne
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 National Kidney Foundation, Inc.
PY - 2019/11
Y1 - 2019/11
N2 - Rationale & Objective: Compared with others, black and low-income patients receiving dialysis are less likely to receive kidney transplantation (KT) education within dialysis centers. We examined the efficacy of 2 supplementary KT education approaches delivered directly to patients. Study Design: Prospective, 3-arm parallel-group, randomized, controlled trial. Settings & Participants: Adult, black, and white low-income patients receiving dialysis in Missouri. Intervention: Patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 educational conditions: (1) standard of care, usual KT education provided in dialysis centers (control); (2) Explore Transplant @ Home patient-guided, 4 modules of KT education sent directly to patients using print, video, and text messages; and (3) Explore Transplant @ Home educator-guided, the patient-guided intervention plus 4 telephonic discussions with an educator. Outcomes: Primary: patient knowledge of living (LDKT) and deceased donor KT (DDKT). Secondary: informed decision making, change in attitudes in favor of LDKT and DDKT, and change in the number of new steps taken toward KT. Results: In intent-to-treat analyses, patients randomly assigned to educator- and patient-guided interventions had greater knowledge gains (1.4 point increase) than control patients (0.8 point increase; P = 0.02 and P = 0.01, respectively). Compared with control patients, more patients randomly assigned to educator- and patient-guided interventions were able to make informed decisions about starting KT evaluation (82% vs 91% and 95%; P = 0.003), pursuing DDKT (70% vs 84% and 84%; P = 0.003), and pursuing LDKT (73% vs 91% and 92%; P < 0.001). Limitations: Potential contamination because of patient-level randomization; no assessment of clinical end points. Conclusions: Education presented directly to dialysis patients, with or without coaching by telephone, increased dialysis patients’ KT knowledge and informed decision making without increasing educational burden on providers. Funding Source: This project was funded by the National Institutes of Health and Health Resources and Services Administration. Trial Registration: Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with study number NCT02268682.
AB - Rationale & Objective: Compared with others, black and low-income patients receiving dialysis are less likely to receive kidney transplantation (KT) education within dialysis centers. We examined the efficacy of 2 supplementary KT education approaches delivered directly to patients. Study Design: Prospective, 3-arm parallel-group, randomized, controlled trial. Settings & Participants: Adult, black, and white low-income patients receiving dialysis in Missouri. Intervention: Patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 educational conditions: (1) standard of care, usual KT education provided in dialysis centers (control); (2) Explore Transplant @ Home patient-guided, 4 modules of KT education sent directly to patients using print, video, and text messages; and (3) Explore Transplant @ Home educator-guided, the patient-guided intervention plus 4 telephonic discussions with an educator. Outcomes: Primary: patient knowledge of living (LDKT) and deceased donor KT (DDKT). Secondary: informed decision making, change in attitudes in favor of LDKT and DDKT, and change in the number of new steps taken toward KT. Results: In intent-to-treat analyses, patients randomly assigned to educator- and patient-guided interventions had greater knowledge gains (1.4 point increase) than control patients (0.8 point increase; P = 0.02 and P = 0.01, respectively). Compared with control patients, more patients randomly assigned to educator- and patient-guided interventions were able to make informed decisions about starting KT evaluation (82% vs 91% and 95%; P = 0.003), pursuing DDKT (70% vs 84% and 84%; P = 0.003), and pursuing LDKT (73% vs 91% and 92%; P < 0.001). Limitations: Potential contamination because of patient-level randomization; no assessment of clinical end points. Conclusions: Education presented directly to dialysis patients, with or without coaching by telephone, increased dialysis patients’ KT knowledge and informed decision making without increasing educational burden on providers. Funding Source: This project was funded by the National Institutes of Health and Health Resources and Services Administration. Trial Registration: Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with study number NCT02268682.
KW - Kidney transplantation
KW - dialysis
KW - end-stage renal disease (ESRD)
KW - low income
KW - patient education
KW - poverty
KW - racial disparities
KW - randomized controlled trial (RCT)
KW - socioeconomic disparities
KW - socioeconomic status (SES)
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85067272734&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85067272734&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1053/j.ajkd.2019.03.430
DO - 10.1053/j.ajkd.2019.03.430
M3 - Article
C2 - 31227225
AN - SCOPUS:85067272734
SN - 0272-6386
VL - 74
SP - 640
EP - 649
JO - American Journal of Kidney Diseases
JF - American Journal of Kidney Diseases
IS - 5
ER -