Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Use of Telehealth to Expand Living Kidney Donation and Living Kidney Donor Transplantation

  • Live Kidney Donation (K. Lentine and R. Schaffer, Section Editors)
  • Published:
Current Transplantation Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) remains the treatment of choice for suitable candidates with advanced kidney disease. Despite excellent outcomes for living kidney donors, the rate of living kidney donation has remained relatively stable over the past decade despite the growing number of those in need of kidney transplants. Telehealth may represent an opportunity to increase access to evaluation and donation for living donor candidates and improve care and follow-up of living donors. This review discusses current and potential opportunities in the utilization of telehealth throughout the donation process.

Recent Findings

There are numerous computer-based and mobile application (app) resources for living kidney donor candidates and patients with advanced kidney disease listed for kidney transplantation which provide education on LDKT. Many of these apps allow for home education and interactions to occur without the need for travel. Donor advocacy is being seen increasingly on social media campaigns via apps. Additionally, donor candidates are often able to go online and refer themselves directly to transplant centers which can be done at any time. Finally, the use of mobile apps and telehealth videoconferencing may improve transplant center compliance with postdonation regulatory requirements for living kidney donors.

Summary

Although regulatory, reimbursement, and privacy requirements will need to be addressed, telehealth appears to be an important opportunity to engage living kidney donor candidates and donors. By increasing living donor recruitment and LDKT, the widening chasm of organ supply and demand may narrow.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Neipp M, Karavul B, Jackobs S, Meyer zu Vilsendorf A, Richter N, Becker T, et al. Quality of life in adult transplant recipients more than 15 years after kidney transplantation. Transplantation. 2006;81:1640–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Laupacis A, Keown P, Pus N, Krueger H, Ferguson B, Wong C, et al. A study of the quality of life and cost-utility of renal transplantation. Kidney Int. 1996;50:235–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hunsicker LG. A survival advantage for renal transplantation. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:1762–3.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Teraski PI, Cecka JM, Gjertson DW, Takemoto S. High survival rates of kidney transplants from spousal and living unrelated donors. N Engl J Med. 1995;333:333–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Wolfe RA, Ashby VB, Milford EL, Ojo AO, Ettenger RE, Agodoa LY, et al. Comparison of mortality in all patients on dialysis, patients on dialysis awaiting transplantation, and recipients of a first cadaveric transplant. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:1725–30.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Mange KC, Joffe MM, Feldman HI. Effect of the use or non-use of long-term dialysis on the subsequent survival of renal transplants from living donors. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:726–31.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Loubeau PR, Loubeau JM, Jantzen R. The economics of kidney transplantation versus hemodialysis. Prog Transplant. 2011;11:291–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Tarantino A. Why should we implement living donation in renal transplantation? Clin Nephrol. 2000;53:55–63.

    Google Scholar 

  9. USRDS 2018 Annual Report: Atlas of Chronic Kidney Disease and End-Stage Renal Disease in the United States [http://usrds.org]. Accessed 21 March 2020.

  10. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network: National Data: Kidney Donor by Type. https://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/data/view-data-reports/national-data/ Accessed. 21 March 2020.

  11. Gore JL, Danovitch GM, Litwin MS, Pham PT, Singer JS. Disparities in the utilization of live donor renal transplantation. Am J Transplant. 2009;9:1124–33.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Purnell TS, Luo X, Cooper LA, Massie AB, Kucirka LM, Henderson ML, et al. Association of race and ethnicity with live donor kidney transplantation in the United States from 1995 to 2014. JAMA. 2018;319:49–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Axelrod DA, Dzebiasashvili N, Schnitzler MA, Salvalaggio PR, Segev DL, Gentry SE, et al. The interplay of socioeconomic status, distance to center, and interdonor service area travel on kidney transplant access and outcomes. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010;5:2276–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. O’Hare AM, Johansen KL, Rodriquez RA. Dialysis and kidney transplantation among patients living in rural areas of the United States. Kidney Int. 2006;69:343–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Boulware LE, Hill-Briggs F, Kraus ES, Melancon JK, Falcone B, Ephraim PL, et al. Effectiveness of educational and social worker interventions to activate patients’ discussion and pursuit of preemptive living donor kidney transplantation: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Kidney Dis. 2013;61:476–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Waterman AD, Robbins ML, Paiva AL, Peipert JD, Davis LA, Hyland SS, et al. Measuring kidney patients’ motivation to pursue living donor kidney transplant: development of stage of change, decisional balance, and self -efficacy measures. J Health Psychol. 2015;20:210–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Weng FL, Reese PP, Mulgaonkar S, Patel AM. Barriers to living donor kidney transplantation among black or older transplant candidates. CJASN. 2010;5:2338–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Arcury TA, Preisser JS, Gesler WM, Powers JM. Access to transportation and health care utilization in a rural region. J Rural Health. 2005;21:31–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Moore DR, Feurer ID, Zavala EY, Shaffer D, Karp S, Hoy H, et al. A web-based application for initial screening of living kidney donors: development, implementation and evaluation. Am J Transplant. 2013;13:450–7. This study shows how providing donor candidates an online platform can increase access.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Perlis N, Connelly M, D’A Honey JR, Pace KT, Stewart R. Evaluating potential live-renal donors: causes for rejection, deferral and planned procedure type, a single-centre experience. Can Urol Assoc J. 2013;7:41–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Larson DB, Wiseman JF, Vock DM, Berglund DM, Roman AM, Ibrahim HN, et al. Financial burden associated with time to return to work after living kidney donation. Am J Transplant. 2019;19:204–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Casagrande LH, Collins S, Warren AT, Ommen ES. Lack of health insurance in living kidney donors. Clin Transpl. 2012;26:E101–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Segev DL, Muzaale AD, Caffo BS, Mehta SH, Singer AL, Taranto SE, et al. Perioperative mortality and long-term survival following live kidney donation. JAMA. 2010;393:959–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lentine KL, Lam NN, Axelrod D, Schnitzler MA, Garg AX, Xiao H, et al. Perioperative complications after living kidney donation: a national study. Am J Transplant. 2016;16:1848–57.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. O’Keeffe LM, Ramond A, Oliver-Williams C, Willeit P, Paige E, Trotter P, et al. Mid- and long-term health risks in living kidney donors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168:276–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. What is telehealth? How is telehealth different from telemedicine? https://www.healthit.gov/faq/what-telehealth-how-telehealth-different-telemedicine. Accessed 26 Dec 2019.

  27. Waterman AD, Robbins ML, Paiva AL, Peipert JD, Kynard-Amerson CS, Goalby CJ, et al. Your Path to Transplant: a randomized controlled trial of a tailored computer education intervention to increase living donor kidney transplant. BMC Nephrol. 2014;15:166–80. This study is a randomized controlled trial that shows the computer-based interventions for education can increase kidney transplant waitlisted patients’ readiness and ability to engage live donors.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Waterman AD, Cui Y, Peipert JD, Beaumont JL, Anderson CS, Paiva AL, et al. Your Path to Transplant education increases patients’ transplant knowledge, attitudes, informed decision-making, and pursuit: a randomized controlled trial [abstract]. Am J Transplnat. 2019; 19 (suppl 3). https://atcmeetingabstracts.com/abstract/your-path-to-transplant-increases-patients-transplant-knowledge-attitudes-informed-decision-making-and-pursuit-an-randomized-controlled-trial/. Accessed 26 Dec 2019.

  29. Top countries by smartphone users. Newzoo.com/insights/rankings/top-countries-by-smartphone-penetrations-and users/. Accessed 26 Dec 2019.

  30. Anderson M. Mobile technology and home broadband 2019. http://pewresearch.org/internet/2019/06/13/mobile-technology-and-home-broadband-2019/. Accessed 26 Dec 2019.

  31. Sieverdes JC, Nemeth LS, Magwood GS, Blaiga PK, Chavin KD, Brunner-Jackson B, et al. Patient-centered mHealth living donor transplant education program for African Americans: development and analysis. JMIR Res Protoc. 2015;4:e84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Axelrod DA, Kynard-Amerson CS, Wojciechowski D, Jacobs M, Lentine KL, Schnitzler M, et al. Cultural competency of a mobile, customized patient education tool for improving potential kidney transplant recipients’ knowledge and decision making. Clin Transpl. 2017;31:e12944. This study shows how a mobile app with outcomes can improve candidate knowledge and decision making including the importance of LDKT.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Cabacungan AN, Diamantidis CJ, St. Clair Russell J, Strigo TS, Pounds I, Alkon A, et al. Development of telehealth intervention to improve access to live donor kidney transplantation. Transplant Proc. 2019;51:665–75. An important study that translates a standard educational program into one with telehealth options which may allow for increased utilization.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Kumar K, King EA, Muzaale AD, Konel JM, Bramstedt KA, Massie AB, et al. A smartphone app for increasing live organ donation. Am J Transplant. 2016;16:3548–53. A pioneer study on the advantages of social media in live organ donation.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. DuBray BJ, Shawar S, Rega S, Smith K, Centanni K, Warmke K, et al. The impact of social media on self-referral patter for living kidney donation: characteristics of respondents. Accepted for presentation at the American Society of Transplant Surgeons 2020, Miami, Florida.

  36. Moorlock G, Draper H. Empathy, social media, and directed altruistic living organ donation. Bioethics. 2018;32:289–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Forbes RC, Kummerow Broman K, Johnson TB, Rybacki DB, Hannah Gillis AE, Hagemann Williams M, et al. Implementation of telehealth is associated with improved timeliness to kidney transplant waitlist evaluation. J Telemed Telecare. 2018;24:485–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Forbes RC, Rybacki DB, Johnson TB, Hannah Gillis A, Shaffer D, Hale DA. A cost comparison for telehealth utilization in the kidney transplant waitlist evaluation process. Transplantation. 2018;102:279–83. A study which demonstrates cost and time-savings in a systematic fashion for a transplant population.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. OPTN Policy 18. 5.A Reporting requirements after living kidney donation. January 21 ed. 2016: 2013.

  40. Henderson ML, Thomas AG, Shaffer A, Massie AB, Luo X, Hoscher CM, et al. The national landscape of living kidney donor follow-up in the United States. Am J Transplant. 2017;17:3131–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Waterman AD, Dew MA, Davis CL, McCabe M, Wainright JL, Forland CL, et al. Living-donor follow-up attitudes and practices in U.S. kidney and liver donor programs. Transplantation. 2013;95:883–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Mandelbrot DA, Pavlakis M, Karp SJ, Johnson SR, Hanto DW, Rodrigue JR. Practice and barriers in long-term living kidney donor follow-up: a survey of U.S. transplant centers. Transplantation. 2009;88:855–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Henderson ML, Thomas AG, Eno AK, Waldram MW, Bannon J, Massie AB, et al. The impact of the mKidney mHealth system on live donor follow-up compliance: a protocol for a randomized controlled trial. JMIR Res Protoc. 2019;9:e11000. Proposal of a randomized controlled trial utilizing an mHealth app, mKidney for regulatory compliance and transplant center and patient ease.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Ertel AE, Kaiser T, Shah SA. Using telehealth to enable patient-centered care for liver transplantation. JAMA Surg. 2015;150:674–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Sidhu A, Chapparo C, Chung-Wai C, Davies M, Singer LG. Outcomes of telehealth care for lung transplant recipients. Clin Transpl. 2019;33:e13580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. US Department of Veterans Afffairs. Improving Access to Specialized Care: The Telehealth Kidney Transplant Clinic at the Iowa City VAMC [Issue Brief]. Veterans Rural Health Resource Center-Central Region; Washington (DC): VHA Office of Rural Health. Fall 2013.

  47. Fleming JN, Taber DJ, McElligott J, McGillicuddy JW, Treiber F. Mobile health in solid organ transplant: the time is now. Am J Transplant. 2017;17:2263–76. A timely review of that state of mobile health in solid organ transplantation.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Blumenthal D. Stimulating the adoption of health information technology. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1477–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Trump DJ. Executive order on protecting and improving medicare for our nation’s seniors. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-protecting-improving-medicare-nations-seniors/ Accessed 27 Dec 2019.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Division of Kidney and Pancreas Transplantation, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 912 Oxford House, Nashville, TN, 37232-4750, USA

    Rachel C. Forbes

  2. Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA

    Beatrice P. Concepcion

Authors
  1. Rachel C. Forbes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Beatrice P. Concepcion
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rachel C. Forbes.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Live Kidney Donation

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Forbes, R.C., Concepcion, B.P. Use of Telehealth to Expand Living Kidney Donation and Living Kidney Donor Transplantation. Curr Transpl Rep 7, 56–61 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40472-020-00276-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40472-020-00276-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation