Background and objectivesBlack patients have a higher incidence of kidney failure but lower rate of deceased- and living-donor kidney transplantation compared with White patients, even after taking differences in comorbidities into account. We assessed whether social determinants of health (e.g., demographics, cultural, psychosocial, knowledge factors) could account for race differences in receiving deceased- and living-donor kidney transplantation.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsVia medical record review, we prospectively followed 1056 patients referred for kidney transplant (2010–2012), who completed an interview soon after kidney transplant evaluation, until their kidney transplant. We used multivariable competing risk models to estimate the cumulative incidence of receipt of any kidney transplant, deceased-donor transplant, or living-donor transplant, and the factors associated with each outcome.ResultsEven after accounting for social determinants of health, Black patients had a lower likelihood of kidney transplant (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.55 to 0.99) and living-donor transplant (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.26 to 0.95), but not deceased-donor transplant (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.67 to 1.26). Black race, older age, lower income, public insurance, more comorbidities, being transplanted before changes to the Kidney Allocation System, greater religiosity, less social support, less transplant knowledge, and fewer learning activities were each associated with a lower probability of any kidney transplant. Older age, more comorbidities, being transplanted before changes to the Kidney Allocation System, greater religiosity, less social support, and fewer learning activities were each associated with a lower probability of deceased-donor transplant. Black race, older age, lower income, public insurance, higher body mass index, dialysis before kidney transplant, not presenting with a potential living donor, religious objection to living-donor transplant, and less transplant knowledge were each associated with a lower probability of living-donor transplant.ConclusionsRace and social determinants of health are associated with the likelihood of undergoing kidney transplant.
Background. African Americans (AA) have lower rates of kidney transplantation (KT) compared with Whites (WH), even after adjusting for demographic and medical factors. In this study, we examined whether the racial disparity in KT waitlisting persists after adjusting for social determinants of health (eg, cultural, psychosocial, and knowledge). Methods. We prospectively followed a cohort of 1055 patients who were evaluated for KT between 3 of 10 to 10 of 12 and followed through 8 of 18. Participants completed a semistructured telephone interview shortly after their first KT evaluation appointment. We used the Wilcoxon rank-sum and Pearson chi-square tests to examine race differences in the baseline characteristics. We then assessed racial differences in the probability of waitlisting while accounting for all predictors using cumulative incidence curves and Fine and Gray proportional subdistribution hazards models. Results. There were significant differences in the baseline characteristics between non-Hispanic AA and non-Hispanic WH. AA were 25% less likely (95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.96) to be waitlisted than WH even after adjusting for medical factors and social determinants of health. In addition, being older, having lower income, public insurance, more comorbidities, and being on dialysis decreased the probability of waitlisting while having more social support and transplant knowledge increased the probability of waitlisting. Conclusions. Racial disparity in kidney transplant waitlisting persisted even after adjusting for medical factors and social determinants of health, suggesting the need to identify novel factors that impact racial disparity in transplant waitlisting. Developing interventions targeting cultural and psychosocial factors may enhance equity in access to transplantation.
Background Mindfulness-based interventions, Tai Chi/Qigong, and Yoga (defined here as meditative cancer interventions [MCIs]) have demonstrated small to medium effects on psychosocial outcomes in female breast cancer patients. However, no summary exists of how effective these interventions are for men with cancer. Purpose A meta-analysis was performed to determine the effectiveness of MCIs on psychosocial outcomes (e.g., quality of life, depression, and posttraumatic growth) for men with cancer. Methods A literature search yielded 17 randomized controlled trials (N = 666) meeting study inclusion criteria. The authors were contacted to request data for male participants in the study when not reported. Results With the removal of one outlier, there was a small effect found in favor of MCIs across all psychosocial outcomes immediately postintervention (g = .23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.02 to 0.44). Studies using a usual care control arm demonstrated a small effect in favor of MCIs (g = .26, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.42). However, there was insufficient evidence of a superior effect for MCIs when compared to an active control group, including attention control. Few studies examined both short-term and long-term outcomes. Conclusions There is evidence for MCIs improving psychosocial outcomes in male cancer survivors. However, this effect is not demonstrated when limited to studies that used active controls. The effect size found in this meta-analysis is smaller than those reported in MCI studies of mixed gender and female cancer patient populations. More rigorously designed randomized trials are needed that include active control groups, which control for attention, and long-term follow-up. There may be unique challenges for addressing the psychosocial needs of male cancer patients that future interventions should consider.
Fatigue is often one of the most commonly reported symptoms in prostate cancer survivors, but it is also one of the least understood cancer-related symptoms. Fatigue is associated with psychological distress, disruptions in sleep quality, and impairments in health-related quality of life. Moreover, inflammatory processes and changes related to the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis and/or autonomic nervous system may also play a role in cancer-related fatigue. Thus, effective treatments for fatigue in prostate cancer survivors represent a current unmet need. Prior research has shown that Tai Chi Qigong, a mind-body exercise intervention, can improve physical and emotional health. Herein, we describe the protocol of the ongoing 3-arm randomized controlled Health Empowerment & Recovery Outcomes (HERO) clincal trial. One hundred sixty-six prostate cancer survivors with fatigue are randomized to a modified Tai Chi Qigong intervention (TCQ), intensity-matched body training intervention (BT), or usual care (UC) condition. Guided by biopsychosocial and psychoneuroimmunology models, we propose that TCQ, as compared to BT or UC will: i) reduce fatigue (primary outcome) in prostate cancer survivors; ii) reduce inflammation; and iii) regulate the expression of genes from two major functional clusters: a) inflammation, vasodilation and metabolite sensing and b) energy and adrenergic activation. Assessments are conducted at baseline, the 6-week midpoint of the intervention, and 1 week, 3 months, and 12 months post-intervention. If our findings show that TCQ promotes recovery from prostate cancer and its treatment, this type of intervention can be integrated into survivorship care plans as the standard of care. The study's findings will also provide novel information about underlying biobehavioral mechanisms of cancer-related fatigue.Trial registration numberNCT03326713; clinicaltrials.gov.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.