BackgroundThere is a high prevalence of non-adherence to immunosuppressants in kidney transplant recipients. Although limited health literacy is common in kidney recipients and is linked to adverse outcomes in other medical populations, its effect on medication adherence in kidney transplant recipients remains poorly understood. The objective was to investigate the effect of lower health literacy on immunosuppressant adherence.MethodsKidney recipients who were at least 6 months post-transplant and outpatients of Vancouver General Hospital in B.C., Canada were recruited through invitation letters. A total of 96 recipients completed the Health Literacy Questionnaire, which provides a multifactorial profile of self-reported health literacy and the Transplant Effects Questionnaire-Adherence subscale measuring self-reported immunosuppressant adherence. Hierarchical linear regression was used to analyze the association between health literacy and adherence after controlling for identified risk factors of non-adherence.ResultsOur sample was on average 53 years old, 56% male and 9 years post-transplant. Kidney recipients reported low levels of health literacy on scales measuring active health management and critical appraisal of information and 75% reported non-perfect adherence. Worse adherence was associated with poorer overall health literacy (ΔR2 = 0.08, P = 0.004) and lower scores on six of nine of the health literacy factors.ConclusionsPoorer health literacy is associated with lower immunosuppressant adherence in adult kidney transplant recipients suggesting the importance of considering a recipient's level of health literacy in research and clinical contexts. Medication adherence interventions can target the six factors of health literacy identified as being risk factors for lower medication adherence.

Background Health literacy refers to the ability of individuals to gain access to, use, and understand health information and services in order to maintain a good health. It is especially important in nephrology due to the complexity of chronic kidney disease (CKD). The present study sought to define health literacy levels in patients followed in predialysis clinic, in-center dialysis (ICHD), peritoneal dialysis (PD) and home hemodialysis (HHD). Methods This transversal monocentric observational study analysed 363 patients between October 2016 and April 2017. The Brief Health Literacy Screen (BHLS) and the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ) were used to measure health literacy. Multivariate linear regressions were used to compare the mean scores on the BHLS and HLQ, across the four groups. Results Patients on PD had a significantly higher BHLS’score than patients on ICHD (p = 0.04). HLQ’s scores differed across the groups: patients on HHD (p = 0.01) and PD (p = 0.002) were more likely to feel understood by their healthcare providers. Compared to ICHD, patients on HHD were more likely to have sufficient information to manage their health (p = 0.02), and patients in the predialysis clinic were more likely to report high abilities for health information appraisal (p < 0.001). Conclusion In a monocentric study, there is a significant proportion of CKD patients, especially in predialysis clinic and in-centre hemodialysis, with limited health literacy. Patients on home dialysis (HHD and PD) had a higher level of health literacy compared to the other groups.

Purpose:The purpose of this review is to provide a summary of the rationale for engaging patients in research as well as to review the established and envisioned advantages and strategies for patient-researcher partnerships. The authors of this article, which include a patient and 4 researchers in kidney disease, discuss the expected benefits and opportunities for patient engagement in their respective research programs. The 4 research programs span the spectrum of kidney disease and focus on enhancing bone health, increasing living donor kidney transplants, improving medication adherence, and preventing kidney transplant rejection.Sources of Information:The sources of information for this review include published studies on the topics of patient engagement and the 4 research programs of the new investigators.Key Findings:(1) Patient, health care provider, and researcher partnerships can contribute useful insights capable of enhancing research in kidney disease. (2) Regardless of the research program, there are various strategies and opportunities for engagement of patients with lived experience across the various stages of research in kidney disease. (3) Envisioned advantages of patient-researcher partnerships include: targeting patient-identified research priorities, integrating patients’ experiential knowledge, improving study design and feasibility through patient-researcher input, facilitating dissemination of research findings to other patients, effectively responding to patient concerns about studies, and inspiring researchers to conduct their research.Limitations:The limitations of the current review include the relative scarcity of literature on patient engagement within the field of kidney disease.Implications:The findings of the current review suggest that it will be important for future studies to identify optimal strategies for patient engagement in setting research priorities, study design, participant recruitment, execution of research projects, and knowledge dissemination and translation.

In organ transplant, prevalence estimates of negative affect (e.g., depressive symptoms) are higher than in the general population and self-agency is required for successful regimen selfmanagement. Nonetheless, the roles of these psychological factors for immunosuppressant adherence in this population remain unclear. Method: Meta-analytic techniques were used to determine the associations between negative affect and self-agency with adherence and to identify moderators of these associational effect sizes (ES). Results: Across 50 studies and 46,106 adult organ recipients, there is a small negative association between negative affect and adherence (mean weighted ES: r ϭ Ϫ.14, p Ͻ .001; 95% confidence interval, CI [Ϫ.175, Ϫ.096]) and a small positive association between self-agency and adherence (ES: r ϭ .17, p Ͻ .001; 95% CI [.094, .251]). Studies conducted outside of Europe and North America, assessing illness-specific negative affect and utilizing questionnaire adherence measures, and studies of better quality were associated with a larger ES, explaining 54% of the heterogeneity in the negative affect and adherence association. For the association between self-agency and adherence, a higher percentage of females and medication-specific self-agency were associated with a larger ES, explaining 34% of the heterogeneity. Conclusions: By elucidating overlooked trends in the existing literature for the associations between negative affect and self-agency with adherence, the current meta-analyses clarify previously contradicting findings in organ transplant. The findings also shed light on factors contributing to the existing variability and highlight the importance of careful consideration of methodology in studies of adherence postorgan transplant.

Background: Prevalence of immunosuppressant nonadherence in renal transplant recipients is high despite negative clinical outcomes associated with nonadherence. Simplification of dosing has been demonstrated to improve adherence in renal transplant recipients as measured through electronic monitoring and self-report. Objective: The purpose of this study was to replicate and extend previous findings by measuring adherence with multiple methods in a Canadian sample. Design: The study design was a randomized controlled medication dosing trial in adult renal transplant patients. The trial length was 4 months. Setting: This study was conducted within the Solid Organ Transplant (SOT) Clinic at Vancouver General Hospital (VGH; Vancouver, Canada). Patients: A total of 46 adult renal recipients (at least 1 year post-transplant) were recruited through the SOT clinic. With 8 withdrawals, 38 individuals completed all phases of the study. Measurements: Medication adherence was measured for a period of 4 months using multiple methods, including electronic monitoring (MEMS [Medication Event Monitoring System]), pharmacy refill data (medication possession ratio [MPR]), and by self-report using the Adherence subscale of the Transplant Effects Questionnaire (TEQ). Methods: Participants were randomized to twice-daily (n = 19) or once-daily tacrolimus dosing (n = 19) and followed over a 4-month period via monthly clinic study visits. Comparisons between the treatment groups were performed using the Mann-Whitney U and chi-square tests, for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Results: As outlined in Table 3, the once-daily dosing group showed significantly better MEMS Dose Adherence ( P = .001), whereas MEMS Timing Adherence showed a tendency toward better adherence for this group, but was not significant ( P = .052). MEMS Days Adherent ( P = .418), MPR% ( P = .123), and self-reported adherence ( P = .284) did not differ between the once- and twice-daily dosing groups when measured as continuous variables. The MPR% was significantly better for the once-daily dosing group when measured dichotomously but not continuously ( P = .044). Notably, most of those exposed to once-daily dosing (63.2%) preferred this to the twice-daily regimen. Limitations: Limitations included small sample size and short follow-up period, precluding the examination of clinical outcome differences. Conclusions: Results for dose adherence replicate the finding that dose simplification increases adherence to immunosuppressants as measured through electronic monitoring. Such an advantage for the once-daily dosing group was not seen across the 2 other electronic monitoring measurement variables (days and timing adherence). This study extends previous research by examining adherence in once versus twice-daily dosing via prescription refill data in a Canadian sample. Given the gravity of potential health outcomes associated with nonadherence, although results indicate inconsistencies in significance testing across measurement methods, the medium to large effect sizes seen in the data favoring better adherence with once-daily dosing provide an indication of the potential clinical significance of these findings. Trial registration: This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01334333) on April 11, 2011.