Brief Summary:

Our parent award compares two patient-centered methods to facilitate KT evaluation: kidney transplant fast track (FT), a streamlined KT evaluation process; and peer navigators (PN), a peer assisted evaluation program that incorporates motivational interviewing. This pragmatic randomized trial uses a comparative effectiveness approach to assess whether FT or PN can help patients overcome barriers to transplant listing. The aims of the parent study are to: (1) compare FT and PN to assess improvements in kidney transplant (KT) related outcomes and cost effectiveness; (2) examine how each approach effects changes in cultural/contextual factors, concerns about, and ambivalence to KT; and (3) develop a framework for widespread implementation of either approach. Recent guidelines encourage using PhenX toolkit measures for kidney-disease research and clinical data reporting, but research to date has been limited by cross sectional or retrospective analyses, and incomplete or missing data on key variables, and show limited clinical application or interventions. In addition to the several PhenX individual social determinants of health (SDOH) already collected for the parent award, we propose to add PhenX structural SDOH, including concentrated poverty, food swamp, race/ethnic segregation, and social vulnerability, to our baseline data collection for all 398 patient participants under the proposed administrative supplement. Also, we will add a third assessment to determine how and whether the intervention affected post-transplant outcomes. We will follow patients via their medical records through receipt of KT to determine time to receive transplant (from time evaluation started), and type of transplant received (living or deceased donor KT). At ~6 months post-KT, participants will complete a third interview to assess KT patient reported outcomes, including health-related quality of life (QOL) and satisfaction with service.