N/A
Completed N=68
Creating a Patient-centered Report Card for Solid Organ Transplant Candidates
Transplants
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03610555 ↗
Enrolled (actual)
68
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Dec 2025
Primary outcomePrimary: Number of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2 — 5; 17; 17; 11 Participants
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.
Outcome Measures
| Outcome | Result | p-value |
|---|---|---|
| PRIMARY Number of Participants With Correct Response to Question 1 and 2 |
5; 17; 17; 11; 12; 17 | — |
| SECONDARY Perceived Value of Information |
2.16; 1.97 | — |
| SECONDARY Measurement of Satisfaction With Decision Making |
15.5; 13.4 | — |
Eligibility Criteria
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.
.
.
Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03610555). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication. Informational only — not medical advice.