Acceptable outcomes of liver transplantation in uninsured patients under the coverage of a state assistance program.

Abstract

The lack of health insurance is a major barrier to access to health care, even in the case of life-saving procedures such as liver transplantation (LT). Concerns about worse outcomes in uninsured patients have also discouraged the evaluation and transplantation of patients without adequate health insurance coverage. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes from the largest cohort of uninsured patients who underwent LT with the support of a state payment assistance program (also called charity care). This study included all consecutive patients who underwent LT at a single center from 2002 to 2020. Demographic, clinical, and social variables and outcome metrics were collected and compared between insured and uninsured patients. Among a total of 978 LT recipients, 594 had private insurance, 324 government insurance (Medicare/Medicaid), and 60 were uninsured and covered under a state charity care program. In the charity care group, there was a higher proportion of Hispanic subjects, single marital status, younger age, and high-MELD score patients. The 1- and 3-year patient survival rates were 89.0% and 81.8% in private insurance patients, 88.8% and 80.1% in government insurance recipients, and 93.3% and 79.6% in those with charity care ( p =0.49). There was no difference in graft survival between insured and uninsured patients ( p =0.62). The 3 insurance groups presented similar hospital length-of-stay and 30-day readmission rates. In both univariate and multivariate analysis, uninsured status (charity care) was not associated with worse patient survival (HR: 1.23, 95% CI: 0.84-1.80, p =0.29) or graft survival (HR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.84-1.78, p =0.29). In conclusion, there was no difference in outcomes after LT between insured and uninsured patients. A charity care program may be an effective tool to mitigate socioeconomic disparities in both outcomes and access to LT.