Role of patient factors, preferences, and distrust in health care and access to liver transplantation and organ donation.

Despite major improvements in access to liver transplantation (LT), disparities remain. Little is known about how distrust in medical care, patient preferences, and the origins shaping those preferences contribute to differences surrounding access. We performed a single-center, cross-sectional survey of adults with end-stage liver disease and compared responses between LT listed and nonlisted patients as well as by race. Questionnaires were administered to 109 patients (72 nonlisted; 37 listed) to assess demographics, health care system distrust (HCSD), religiosity, and factors influencing LT and organ donation (OD). We found that neither HCSD nor religiosity explained differences in access to LT in our population. Listed patients attained higher education levels and were more likely to be insured privately. This was also the case for white versus black patients. All patients reported wanting LT if recommended. However, nonlisted patients were significantly less likely to have discussed LT with their physician or to be referred to a transplant center. They were also much less likely to understand the process of LT. Fewer blacks were referred (44.4% versus 69.7%; P = 0.03) or went to the transplant center if referred (44.4% versus 71.1%; P = 0.02). Fewer black patients felt that minorities had as equal access to LT as whites (29.6% versus 57.3%; P < 0.001). For OD, there were more significant differences in preferences by race than listing status. More whites indicated OD status on their driver's license, and more blacks were likely to become an organ donor if approached by someone of the same cultural or ethnic background (P < 0.01). In conclusion, our analysis demonstrates persistent barriers to LT and OD. With improved patient and provider education and communication, many of these disparities could be successfully overcome. Liver Transplantation 22 895-905 2016 AASLD.

Prevalence, Incidence and Progression of Myopia in Singaporean Adolescents

The Singapore Cohort Study of the Risk Factors for myopia (SCORM) is a longitudinal school-based study that recruited 1979 children, aged 7 to 9 years old between 1999 and 2001, who were re-examined as adolescents in 2006 and 2007. This current study is to determine the prevalence, incidence and progression of myopia among Singapore teenagers and describe any trend in the SCORM study.

At each visit, participants underwent comprehensive eye examinations that included cycloplegic autorefraction and ocular biometry measurements. The prevalence of myopia (SE<-0.5D) and high myopia (SE<-6.0D) among Singapore teenagers aged 11-18 years old was 69.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 66.5-71.7] and 7.1% (95% CI 5.8-8.7), respectively, with the highest prevalence in people of Chinese ethnicity (p<0.001). The annual incidence was 13.7% (95% CI 9.8-17.6). Males had twice the incidence of females (p=0.043), and adolescents with longer axial lengths (p<0.001) and deeper vitreous chamber (p<0.001) had higher myopia incidence. Annual myopia progression was -0.32 Diopters (D) (SD=0.40), with no difference by age, race or gender. However, adolescents with higher myopia levels at 2006 had significantly faster myopia progression rates (p<0.001).

Myopia prevalence in Singapore teenagers, especially Singapore Chinese teenagers, is one of the highest in the world. In adolescents, there is still a high rate of new onset and rapid progression of myopia. These findings indicate that adolescence may still represent a viable period for intervention programs to mitigate myopia onset and progression.