Prehabilitation is the process of enhancing pre-operative functional capacity to improve tolerance for the upcoming stressor; it was associated with improved post-operative outcomes in a handful of studies, but never evaluated in transplantation. Kidney transplant (KT) candidates may be uniquely suited for prehabilitation because they experience a profound loss of functional capacity while waiting years on dialysis. To better understand the feasibility and effectiveness of prehabilitation in KT, we conducted a pilot study of center-based prehabilitation for candidates; this intervention consisted of weekly physical therapy sessions at an outpatient center with at home exercises. We enrolled 24 participants; 18 participated in prehabilitation (75% of enrolled; 17% of eligible). 61% were male, 72% were African American, and mean age=52 (SD=12.9); 71% of participants had lower extremity impairment and 31% were frail. By 2 months of prehabilitation, participants improved their physical activity by 64% (p=0.004) based on accelerometry. Participants reported high satisfaction. Among 5 prehabilitation participants who received KT during the study, length of stay was shorter than for age, sex, and race-matched control (5 vs. 10 days; RR=0.69; 95%CI:0.50–0.94;P=0.02). These pilot study findings suggest that prehabilitation is feasible in pre-transplant patients and may potentially be a strategy to improve post-KT outcomes.

†Co-first authors.Prediction models for post-kidney transplantation mortality have had limited success (C-statistics ≤0.70). Adding objective measures of potentially modifiable factors may improve prediction and, consequently, kidney transplant (KT) survival through intervention. The Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) is an easily administered objective test of lower extremity function consisting of three parts (balance, walking speed, chair stands), each with scores of 0-4, for a composite score of 0-12, with higher scores indicating better function. SPPB performance and frailty (Fried frailty phenotype) were assessed at admission for KT in a prospective cohort of 719 KT recipients at Johns Hopkins Hospital (8/2009 to 6/2016) and University of Michigan (2/2013 to 12/2016). The independent associations between SPPB impairment (SPPB composite score ≤10) and composite score with post-KT mortality were tested using adjusted competing risks models treating graft failure as a competing risk. The 5-year posttransplantation mortality for impaired recipients was 20.6% compared to 4.5% for unimpaired recipients (p < 0.001). Impaired recipients had a 2.30-fold (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-4.74, p = 0.02) increased risk of postkidney transplantation mortality compared to unimpaired recipients. Each one-point decrease in SPPB score was independently associated with a 1.19-fold (95% CI 1.09-1.30, p < 0.001) higher risk of post-KT mortality. SPPB-derived lower extremity function is a potentially highly useful and modifiable objective measure for pre-KT risk prediction.

BACKGROUND: Women remain underrepresented in top leadership positions in academic medicine. In business settings, a person with power and influence actively supporting the career advancement of a junior person is referred to as a sponsor and sponsorship programs have been used to diversify leadership. Little is known about how sponsorship functions in academic medicine. OBJECTIVE: To explore perceptions of sponsorship and its relationship to gender and career advancement in academic medicine. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured, oneon-one interviews with sponsors and protégés. PARTICIPANTS: Twelve sponsors (clinical department chairs) and 11 protégés (participants of a school of medicine executive leadership program [N = 23]) at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. KEY RESULTS: All sponsors were men and all were professors, six of the 11 protégés were women, and four of the 23 participants were underrepresented minorities in medicine. We identified three themes: (1) people (how and who): women seek out and receive sponsorship differently; (2) process (faster and further): sponsorship provides an extra boost, especially for women; and (3) politics and culture (playing favorites and paying it forward): sponsorship and fairness. Informants acknowledge that sponsorship provides an extra boost for career advancement especially for women. Sponsors and protégés differ in their perceptions of how sponsorship happens. Informants describe gender differences in how sponsorship is experienced and specifically noted that women were less likely to actively seek out sponsorship and be identified as protégés compared to men. Informants describe a tension between sponsorship and core academic values such as transparency, fairness, and merit. CONCLUSION: Sponsorship is perceived to be critical to high-level advancement and is experienced differently by women. Increased understanding of how sponsorship works in academic medicine may empower individual faculty to utilize this professional relationship for career advancement and provide institutions with a strategy to diversify top leadership positions.