Skip to content

Creating a Patient-centered Report Card for Solid Organ Transplant Candidates

Creating a Patient-centered Report Card for Solid Organ Transplant Candidates

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03610555
Enrollment
268
Registered
2018-08-01
Start date
2016-11-01
Completion date
2023-04-01
Last updated
2025-12-16

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Transplants

Brief summary

Choosing a transplant center that will accept a particular candidate can be difficult and challenging for patients with end-stage organ failure. As transplant centers have varying levels of expertise, interests, and outcomes of solid organ transplant, patient health-related characteristics influence the variation in candidates centers will accept. Most transplant candidates undergo waitlist work-ups as outpatients and many undergo transplant at centers not closest to their homes. Some are listed at more than one center. Several studies suggest that patients have a choice of centers. The PI, as Deputy Director of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR), provides comparative information to the public about each solid organ transplant center in the United States. The risk adjusted outcomes, in the report cards, account for the transplant recipient's health-related characteristics, donor characteristics and transplant related factors. Unfortunately, in their current format, the report cards are not designed for transplant candidates, many of whom may have low health literacy and numeracy. The proposed work aims to develop and evaluate a patient-centered website and printouts of the SRTR report cards that will effectively communicate comparative information to transplant candidates about their alternatives when choosing transplant centers. We will develop a novel tool to allow candidates to tailor the report cards to their clinical profiles based on their health-related characteristics and to communicate information on alternative transplant centers that perform transplants in patients like them. Aim 1 will use focus groups to determine which transplant center characteristics to present to transplant candidates and how to present these characteristics clearly in a patient centered report card. Using this information, Aim 2 will develop a patient-centered website and printouts of the SRTR report card that effectively communicate comparative information about transplant centers to transplant candidates. Lastly, Aim 3 will conduct a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effectiveness of the patient centered SRTR report card. We will determine transplant candidates' comprehension and the value of the comparative quality reports, and the effect on clinical decision making and status on the waiting list. After the RCT, a convenience sample of online visitors to the new website will be assessed for similar outcomes.

Detailed description

Before the intervention, the study design with use of hypothetical scenarios will be explained to the participant. The concept of randomization will be also be explained. The participants will be asked a few questions to assess their understanding of the study design, specifically the hypothetical nature of the scenarios. We will also assess whether they understand the concept of being randomized to see one website first and then the other. Only those participants that understand the study design will be invited to participate in the intervention and will be randomized. For subjects that are randomized, a survey will be administered verbally to collect demographic information and information about their kidney disease and comorbidities. The functional health literacy and numeracy assessment and health status questionnaire will be completed. Subjects will be stratified by the transplant center site and then block randomized. One group will be shown the existing SRTR website with its existing SRTR report cards and then the website with the new patient-centered AHRQ report cards for kidney transplants. The other group will be shown the two websites in opposite order. Each participant will have at most 30 minutes to view each of the websites. After viewing each website, responses to the intervention will be collected. Sessions where participants are reviewing the websites will be recorded using Zoom. Figure 2 shows the study design whereby subjects will be block randomized once to one of the four groups consisting of 18 subjects each. At the end of the study, the patients will have access to both the websites. The study interventions can be administered in person on a laptop. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the intervention can be administered remotely via email and zoom. The link to the websites will be sent via encrypted email and the intervention will be recorded via zoom. The recordings for subjects at Hennepin Healthcare will be stored on computers at that site. If participant does not have your own electronic device or internet, the study will send the participant a study iPad with internet that participant can use for the intervention and then to send back to the study team. We will provide detailed instructions on how to use the iPad and Zoom application. The study will also pay for a FedEx pick up from the participants' home to return the iPad to the study team after the completion of the intervention.

Interventions

OTHERIntervention 2 - SRTR (BMI question 1st)

Participants first viewed the SRTR website to answer Question 2. Subsequently, participants crossed over to view the TCST website to answer Question 1.

OTHERIntervention 3 - TCST (age question 1st)

Participants first viewed the TCST website to answer Question 1. Subsequently, participants crossed over to view the SRTR website to answer Question 2.

OTHERIntervention 4 - TCST (BMI question 1st)

Participants first viewed the TCST website to answer Question 2. Subsequently, participants crossed over to view the SRTR website to answer Question 1.

OTHERIntervention 1 - SRTR (age question 1st)

Participants first viewed the SRTR website to answer Question 1 (Which transplant program within a prespecified area had the most recipients over 70 years of age?). Subsequently, participants crossed over to view the TCST website to answer Question 2 (Which program within a prespecified area had the most recipients with BMI \>40?)

Sponsors

Ajay Israni, MD
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Intervention model description

Participants were stratified by transplant center site and block randomized to one of the four groups using permuted block randomization with blocks of size four. * Arm 1: SRTR website first, Question 1 first * Arm 2: SRTR website first, Question 2 first * Arm 3: TCST first, Question 1 first * Arm 4: TCST first, Question 2 first

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

All adults seeking a kidney transplant are eligible for the RCT. We will focus on recruiting kidney waitlist candidates.

Exclusion criteria

are inability to speak or understand English, visual impairment, and inability to give consent. All vulnerable populations except for those listed in the table titled vulnerable populations, will be excluded. . .

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 230 minutesThe primary outcome is the comprehension of the report card. To assess comprehension, the correct response to the following question will be assessed, Which transplant program within a prespecified area had the most recipients over 70 years of age; and which programs had the most recipients with BMI \>40

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Perceived Value of Information30 minutesPerceived value of information will be determined via patient responses to the following question, How useful is the information in the report card in helping you choose a transplant center for you or your family? Response choices to the questions will be based on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = extremely useful to 5 = not useful at all; score 1 indicates the better outcome and score 5 indicates worse outcome).
Measurement of Satisfaction With Decision Making30 minutesWe measured satisfaction with decision-making and decisional conflict using the Ottawa Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). Participants were asked to answer four items to assess satisfaction with decision making. These four items are: a) summed; b) divided by 4; and c) multiplied by 25. Scores ranges from 0 \[great satisfaction\] to 100 \[lower satisfaction\].

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Adults (age 18+) were recruited to participate from the waiting list or in the process of being evaluated for deceased donor kidney transplants at two urban transplant programs in the Midwest. Patients were approached by mail with follow-up via a phone call with an institutional review board-approved script for attaining consent and conducting the intervention.

Pre-assignment details

A total of (n=6) were excluded from the study. Reasons for exclusion include the following: Not meeting exclusion criteria (n=1) and excluded since part of vanguard study (n=5).

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Arm 1: SRTR Website First, Question 1 First
Show patient SRTRT website first, then question 1 first
12
Arm 2: SRTR Website First, Question 2 First
Show patient SRTRT website first, then question 2 first
19
Arm 3: TCST First, Question 1 First
Show patient TCST website first, then question 1 first.
18
Arm 4: TCST First, Question 2 First
Show patient TCST website first, then question 2 first.
19
Total68

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001FG002FG003
Crossover to 2nd Website and QuestionWithdrawal by Subject0110

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicArm 1: SRTR Website First, Question 1 FirstArm 2: SRTR Website First, Question 2 FirstArm 4: TCST First, Question 2 FirstArm 3: TCST First, Question 1 FirstTotal
Age, Customized
Age
50 < 65 years
3 Participants10 Participants8 Participants10 Participants31 Participants
Age, Customized
Age
<50 years
1 Participants4 Participants6 Participants3 Participants14 Participants
Age, Customized
Age
65+ years
7 Participants5 Participants5 Participants5 Participants22 Participants
Age, Customized
Age
Missing
1 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants1 Participants
Education Level
College
5 Participants4 Participants6 Participants1 Participants16 Participants
Education Level
High School
2 Participants8 Participants2 Participants3 Participants15 Participants
Education Level
Less than high school
0 Participants1 Participants0 Participants1 Participants2 Participants
Education Level
More than college (e.g. M.A., PHD, MD)
1 Participants4 Participants7 Participants5 Participants17 Participants
Education Level
Some college
4 Participants2 Participants4 Participants8 Participants18 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Ethnicity
Latino
0 Participants1 Participants3 Participants1 Participants5 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Ethnicity
Missing
0 Participants0 Participants1 Participants0 Participants1 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Ethnicity
Non-Latino
12 Participants18 Participants15 Participants17 Participants62 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Race
African American
3 Participants5 Participants2 Participants4 Participants14 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Race
Non-Hispanic White
9 Participants11 Participants17 Participants12 Participants49 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Race
Other
0 Participants3 Participants0 Participants2 Participants5 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
5 Participants8 Participants6 Participants9 Participants28 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
7 Participants11 Participants13 Participants9 Participants40 Participants
Single Item Literacy Scale (mean)1.33 Score on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.49
1.84 Score on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.01
1.47 Score on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.84
1.39 Score on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.78
1.53 Score on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.84
Single Item Literacy Scale (score >2)
No
12 Participants13 Participants17 Participants15 Participants57 Participants
Single Item Literacy Scale (score >2)
Yes
0 Participants6 Participants2 Participants3 Participants11 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 680 / 68
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 680 / 68
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 680 / 68

Outcome results

Primary

Number of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2

The primary outcome is the comprehension of the report card. To assess comprehension, the correct response to the following question will be assessed, Which transplant program within a prespecified area had the most recipients over 70 years of age; and which programs had the most recipients with BMI \>40

Time frame: 30 minutes

Population: To assess comprehension, the correct response to the following question will be assessed, Which transplant program within a prespecified area had the most recipients over 70 years of age; and which programs had the most recipients with BMI \>40

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Arm 1: SRTR Website First, Question 1 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Comprehension : Question 1 - age over 705 Participants
Arm 1: SRTR Website First, Question 1 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Comprehension : Question 2 - BMI12 Participants
Arm 1: SRTR Website First, Question 1 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Missing : Question 1 - age over 700 Participants
Arm 1: SRTR Website First, Question 1 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Missing : Question 2 - BMI0 Participants
Arm 2: SRTR Website First, Question 2 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Comprehension : Question 2 - BMI17 Participants
Arm 2: SRTR Website First, Question 2 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Missing : Question 1 - age over 700 Participants
Arm 2: SRTR Website First, Question 2 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Missing : Question 2 - BMI0 Participants
Arm 2: SRTR Website First, Question 2 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Comprehension : Question 1 - age over 7017 Participants
Arm 3: TCST First, Question 1 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Missing : Question 1 - age over 700 Participants
Arm 3: TCST First, Question 1 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Comprehension : Question 2 - BMI16 Participants
Arm 3: TCST First, Question 1 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Missing : Question 2 - BMI1 Participants
Arm 3: TCST First, Question 1 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Comprehension : Question 1 - age over 7017 Participants
Arm 4: TCST First, Question 2 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Missing : Question 2 - BMI0 Participants
Arm 4: TCST First, Question 2 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Comprehension : Question 2 - BMI18 Participants
Arm 4: TCST First, Question 2 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Comprehension : Question 1 - age over 7011 Participants
Arm 4: TCST First, Question 2 FirstNumber of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2Missing : Question 1 - age over 700 Participants
Secondary

Measurement of Satisfaction With Decision Making

We measured satisfaction with decision-making and decisional conflict using the Ottawa Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). Participants were asked to answer four items to assess satisfaction with decision making. These four items are: a) summed; b) divided by 4; and c) multiplied by 25. Scores ranges from 0 \[great satisfaction\] to 100 \[lower satisfaction\].

Time frame: 30 minutes

Population: This was a cross-over study design.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Arm 1: SRTR Website First, Question 1 FirstMeasurement of Satisfaction With Decision Making15.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.6
Arm 2: SRTR Website First, Question 2 FirstMeasurement of Satisfaction With Decision Making13.4 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.7
Secondary

Perceived Value of Information

Perceived value of information will be determined via patient responses to the following question, How useful is the information in the report card in helping you choose a transplant center for you or your family? Response choices to the questions will be based on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = extremely useful to 5 = not useful at all; score 1 indicates the better outcome and score 5 indicates worse outcome).

Time frame: 30 minutes

Population: 1 participant did not respond to the study question and 1 participant was unable to view the Current website. Using an intention to treat approach, we included both participants in the final analysis.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Arm 1: SRTR Website First, Question 1 FirstPerceived Value of Information2.16 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.03
Arm 2: SRTR Website First, Question 2 FirstPerceived Value of Information1.97 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.02

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 5, 2026