Cross-sectional study shows employment factors in kidney transplant recipients, indicating rehabilitation programs need improvement.
Background: Kidney transplantation enables not only longer survival but also reintegration into professional and social life. Understanding the determinants of post-transplant employment is crucial for optimizing rehabilitation programs. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted between 2019 and 2021 among 94 kidney transplant recipients treated in two outpatient clinics. Data were collected using a structured interview and medical record analysis. Sociodemographic and clinical variables were assessed. Statistical analysis included chi-square tests, Spearman’s correlation, and logistic regression. All variables that demonstrated statistical significance in the univariate analysis were entered into the multivariate logistic regression model to identify independent predictors of post-transplant employment. A p-value < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: Prior to transplantation, 67.0% of patients were professionally inactive. After transplantation, 66.0% resumed employment, with 41.9% returning to work within six months. Return to work was positively correlated with higher education (p < 0.009), good financial status (p < 0.040), and longer time since transplantation (p < 0.001). Employment prior to transplantation, donor type, and duration of dialysis also significantly influenced outcomes. In the multivariate logistic regression, only marital status and place of residence remained independent predictors of return to work. Conclusions: More than half of transplant recipients successfully returned to work. Sociodemographic (education, marital status, financial situation, residence) and medical factors (dialysis duration, donor type, time since transplantation, prior employment) determined vocational reintegration. Further multicenter, longitudinal studies are needed to identify modifiable factors and design interventions enhancing post-transplant employability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Piątak et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: