Access to Cadaveric Kidney Transplantation
ResearchPublished 1993
ResearchPublished 1993
This study examined access to kidney transplant waiting lists and the allocation of cadaver kidneys to individuals who are waiting for a transplant. The authors found that blacks were almost 50 percent less likely than whites to be placed on a waiting list. This result held even after controlling for age, previous hospitalizations, primary cause of renal failure or geographic location of the patient. The authors also determined that patients in the southern half of the United States were less likely than those in many other regions of the country to be placed on a waiting list. However, they also found that blacks were 11.4 percent more likely than whites to be biologically incompatible with cadaver kidneys being retrieved, and this difference could explain all of the differences in waiting time to transplant between the races. Therefore, while access to cadaveric kidney transplant waiting lists remains a problem for black Americans, once on a waiting list biologic factors determine allocation decisions.
This publication is part of the RAND monograph report series. The monograph report was a product of RAND from 1993 to 2003. RAND monograph reports presented major research findings that addressed the challenges facing the public and private sectors. They included executive summaries, technical documentation, and synthesis pieces.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.