Cost of Traveling to Follow-up Appointments at Kidney Transplant Clinics

• Published in: Transplantation proceedings 2022-01, Vol.54 (1), p.94-95
• Main Authors: Molina, María, Sorolla, Carolina, Samsó, Elisabet, Carcaña, Monserrat, Martín, María Luisa, Jatem, Elias, Pitarch, Griselda, Montero, Laura, Lauzurica, Ricardo, Segarra, Alfons
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Cross-Sectional Studies; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Kidney Transplantation; Transplant Recipients
• ISSN: 0041-1345; 1873-2623
• DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2021.11.005

•Patients who live far from transplant centers incur displacement costs.•Joint follow-up between transplant centers and referral hospitals may be the most economical and ecological option for follow-up in kidney transplant recipients living far away and visiting their referral hospital.•Professionalism in both centers was rated positively.•This is the first Spanish study that quantifies personal cost after kidney transplant and evaluates the solution. The number of kidney transplant (KT) recipients has increased in recent years, saturating kidney transplant visits at transplant centers (TCs). Furthermore, some patients live far from TCs, which adds displacement costs to their expenses. To solve these problems, joint follow-up of KT recipients has been initiated at TCs and referral hospitals. We performed a cross-sectional study in a cohort of 64 KT recipients during joint follow-up in TCs and the Hospital Arnau de Villanova (HAV) using a survey that evaluated the displacement costs as well as the advantages and disadvantages of each. Distance (320 km [IQR, 300-340 km] vs 15 km [IQR, 4-60 km]; P < .001), time (240 minutes [IQR, 210-240 minutes] vs 40 minutes [IQR, 30-68 minutes]; P < .001), total economic cost per visit (€60 [IQR, €50-90] vs €10 [IQR, €2-15]; P < .001), and annual CO2 emission (32.3 kg vs 1.4 kg; P < .05) were greater when patients traveled to TCs. Nephrologists at both TCs and HAV were rated positively by patients, while the displacement costs associated with travel to the TCs and the smaller size of the HAV were seen as negative aspects. Overall, 93.75% of the KT recipients preferred joint follow-up. This study suggests that joint follow-up between TCs and referral hospitals is an economic and ecological solution for follow-up in KT recipients living far away and visiting their referral hospital, which is the preferred choice for most patients.