Personality traits and clinical/biochemical course in the first year after kidney transplant

Figures & data

Figure 1. Average scores for the five personality traits by the cluster.

Table 1. Mean, standard deviation, percentage classification of each personality trait in Clusters 1 and 2.

	Clusters
	Cluster 1 (n = 61)				Cluster 2 (n = 53)
Traits	Mean	SD	Percentile	CLA^a		Mean	SD	Percentile	CLA^a
Neuroticism	2.90	0.65	40–45	Average		4.44	0.76	85–90	High
Surgency	4.96	0.74	75–80	High		4.16	0.79	40–45	Average
Agreeableness	5.78	0.40	70–75	High		5.14	0.47	35–40	Average
Conscientiousness	5.44	0.68	70–75	High		5.00	0.72	45–50	Average
Openness	4.26	0.60	25–30	Low		3.97	0.60	15–20	Low

a CLA: classification.

Table 2. Socio-demographic data—total for the sample and by cluster.

	Total sample (n = 114)^a		Clusters^b
Variables	n	%	1 (n = 61)		2 (n = 53)		p
Sex							0.167^c
Male	68	59.6	40	65.6	28	52.8
Age (years)							0.918^d
Mean ± SD (Amplitude)	47.7 ± 11.4 (20–64)		47.7 ± 11.8 (20–64)		47.9 ± 11.1 (21–64)
Race							0.598^e
White	101	88.6	56	91.8	45	84.9
Other races	13	11.4	5	7.2	8	15.1
Marital status							0.566^c
Single/separated/widow(er)	42	36.8	21	34.4	21	39.6
Married/living together	72	63.2	40	65.6	32	60.4
Children—MD =2 (1.8%)							0.393^c
No	21	18.4	13	21.3	8	15.1
Yes	93	81.6	48	78.7	45	84.9
Occupation—MD =2 (1.8%)
No	48	42.1	25	41.0	23	45.1	0.554^c
Yes	25	21.9	16	26.2	9	17.6
Retried	39	34.2	20	32.8	19	37.3

MD: missing data.

a Percentages based on the total number of valid cases for the sample.

b Percentages based on the total for each category.

c Pearson’s Chi-square test.

d Student’s t-test for independent groups.

e Fisher’s exact test by Monte Carlo simulation.

Table 3. Absolute and relative distribution for type of donor, psychological/psychiatric treatment, use of medication and central tendency, and variability measures for time on the waiting list. Total for the sample and by cluster.

	Total sample (n = 114)^a		Clusters^b
Variables	n	%	1 (n = 61)		2 (n = 53)		p
Type of donor							0.334^c
Living donor	12	10.5	8	13.1	4	7.5
Cadaveric donor	102	89.5	53	86.9	49	92.5
Undergoing psychological/psychiatric treatment							>0.999^c
No	105	92.1	56	91.8	49	92.5
Yes	9	7.9	5	8.2	4	7.5
Taking medication for depression							>0.999^d
No	95	83.3	51	83.6	44	83.0
Yes	19	16.7	10	16.4	9	17.0
Time on waiting list (in days)
Mean ± SD (Amplitude)	527 ± 554.3 (3–3817)		504.3 ± 545.3 (3–3187)		554.1 ± 568.5 (8–2840)		0.174^e
Median (1st–3rd quartile)	338.0 (127.5–766.5)		324 (122–713)		380.0 (147–824)

a Percentages based on the total number of valid cases for the sample.

b Percentages based on the total for each category.

c Fisher’s Exact Test by Monte Carlo simulation

d Pearson’s Chi-square test.

e Mann–Whitney U-test.

Table 4. Absolute and relative distribution for the presence of hypertension, infection, acute rejection, graft loss, and death in assessments at 3, 6, and 9 months—total for the sample and by cluster.

	Total sample (n = 114)
	3 months		6 months		9 months
Variables	n	%	n	%	n	%	p^a
Hypertension
Cluster 1	39	63.9	41	67.2	41	69.5	0.884
Cluster 2	29	54.7	35	66.0	31	60.8	0.602
p^b	0.618		0.552		0.518
Infection
Cluster 1	18	29.5	14	23.0	10	16.9	0.337
Cluster 2	15	28.3	12	22.6	9	17.6	0.463
p^b	>0.999		>0.999		>0.999
Acute rejection
Cluster 1	6	9.8	1	1.7	1	1.7	0.134
Cluster 2	3	5.7	2	3.8	2	3.9	0.378
p^c	>0.999		>0.999		>0.999
Graft loss
Cluster 1	1	1.6	0	0.0	0	0.0	–
Cluster 2	0	0.0	1	1.9	0	0.0	–
p	–		–		–
Death
Cluster 1	0	0.0	1	1.6	0	0.0	–
Cluster 2	0	0.0	1	1.9	2	3.8	–

a Friedman test.

b Chi-square test of homogeneity.

c Fisher?s exact test by Monte Carlo simulation.

Table 5. Mean, SD, and median for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in the assessments/total for the sample and by the cluster.

	Assessments
	3M			6M			9M
Estimated glomerularfiltration rate	Mean	SD	Median	Mean	SD	Median	Mean	SD	Median	p^a	Interaction(assessments*cluster)^c	Assessments^d	Cluster^e
eGFR	46.1	18.0	46.0	45.2	16.9	46.0	45.0	16.7	46.0	0.488
Cluster 1	46.5	21.2	46.0	44.4	18.5	46.0	43.0	17.9	45.0	0.061	0.049	0.307	0.544
Cluster 2	45.7	13.6	46.0	46.2	15.0	46.0	47.5	15.1	49.5	0.730
p^b	0.811			0.558			0.163

a INTRAGROUP comparative analysis—comparison of means over time analysis of variance for repeated measures one-way post hoc Bonferroni.

b Comparative analysis between clusters—Mann–Whitney U-test.

Analysis of repeated measures two-way post hoc Bonferroni.

c effect of time versus group interaction.

d time effect.

e group effect.

Figure 2. Average eGFR per cluster according to assessments (3, 6, and 9 months).