Putting patients at the center of kidney care transitions: PREPARE NOW, a cluster randomized controlled trial

Clinical Decision Support Tools in the Electronic Medical Record

The integration of clinical decision support (CDS) tools into electronic medical record (EMR) systems has become common. Although there are many benefits for both patients and providers from successful integration, barriers exist that prevent consistent and effective use of these tools. Such barriers include tool alert fatigue, lack of interoperability between tools and medical record systems, and poor acceptance of tools by care providers. However, successful integration of CDS tools into EMR systems have been reported; examples of these include the Statin Choice Decision Aid, and the Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE). This article reviews the history of EMR systems and its integration with CDS tools, the barriers preventing successful integration, and the benefits reported from successful integration. This article also provides suggestions and strategies for improving successful integration, making these tools easier to use and more effective for care providers.

Patient engagement during the transition from nondialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease to dialysis: A meta-ethnography

INTRODUCTION

Patient engagement, encompassing both patient experience and opportunities for involvement in care, has been associated with increased patient satisfaction and the overall quality of care. Despite its importance, there is limited knowledge regarding patient engagement in the transition from nondialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease (CKD) to dialysis-dependent treatment. This systematic review employs meta-ethnography to synthesize findings from qualitative studies examining patients' experiences of engagement during this transition, with the aim of developing a comprehensive theoretical understanding of patient engagement in the transition from nondialysis-dependent CKD to dialysis.

METHODS

A systematic search of six databases, namely the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Scopus, Embase, PubMed and Web of Science was conducted to identify eligible articles published between 1990 and 2022. Meta-ethnography was utilized to translate and synthesize the findings and develop a novel theoretical interpretation of 'patient engagement' during the transition to dialysis.

RESULTS

A total of 24 articles were deemed eligible for review, representing 21 studies. Patient engagement during a transition to dialysis was found to encompass three major domains: psychosocial adjustment, decision-making and engagement in self-care. These three domains could be experienced as an iterative and mutually reinforcing process, guiding patients toward achieving control and proficiency in their lives as they adapt to dialysis. Additionally, patient engagement could be facilitated by factors including patients' basic capability to engage, the provision of appropriate education, the establishment of supportive relationships and the alignment with values and resources.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review underscore the necessity of involving patients in transitional dialysis care, emphasizing the need to foster their engagement across multiple domains. Recommendations for future interventions include the provision of comprehensive support to enhance patient engagement during this critical transition phase. Additional research is warranted to explore the effects of various facilitators at different levels.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The studies included in our review involved 633 participants (547 patients, 14 family members, 63 healthcare providers and 9 managers). Based on their experiences, views and beliefs, we developed a deeper understanding of patient engagement and how to foster it in the future.

Utility of the Kidney Failure Risk Equation and Estimated GFR for Estimating Time to Kidney Failure in Advanced CKD

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

The Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE) predicts the 2-year risk of kidney failure for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Translating KFRE-predicted risk or estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) into time to kidney failure could inform decision making for patients approaching kidney failure.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

CKD Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (CKDOPPS) cohort of patients with an eGFR<60mL/min/1.73m2 from 34 US nephrology practices (2013-2021).

EXPOSURE

2-year KFRE risk or eGFR.

OUTCOME

Kidney failure defined as initiation of dialysis or kidney transplantation.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Accelerated failure time (Weibull) models used to estimate the median, 25th, and 75th percentile times to kidney failure starting from KFRE values of 20%, 40%, and 50%, and from eGFR values of 20, 15, and 10mL/min/1.73m2. We examined variability in time to kidney failure by age, sex, race, diabetes status, albuminuria, and blood pressure.

RESULTS

Overall, 1,641 participants were included (mean age 69±13 years; median eGFR of 28mL/min/1.73m2 [IQR 20-37mL/min/1.73 m2]). Over a median follow-up period of 19 months (IQR, 12-30 months), 268 participants developed kidney failure, and 180 died before reaching kidney failure. The median estimated time to kidney failure was widely variable across patient characteristics from an eGFR of 20mL/min/1.73m2 and was shorter for younger age, male sex, Black (versus non-Black), diabetes (vs no diabetes), higher albuminuria, and higher blood pressure. Estimated times to kidney failure were comparably less variable across these characteristics for KFRE thresholds and eGFR of 15 or 10mL/min/1.73m2.

LIMITATIONS

Inability to account for competing risks when estimating time to kidney failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Among those with eGFR<15mL/min/1.73m2 or KFRE risk>40%), both KFRE risk and eGFR showed similar relationships with time to kidney failure. Our results demonstrate that estimating time to kidney failure in advanced CKD can inform clinical decisions and patient counseling on prognosis, regardless of whether estimates are based on eGFR or the KFRE.

PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Clinicians often talk to patients with advanced chronic kidney disease about the level of kidney function expressed as the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and about the risk of developing kidney failure, which can be estimated using the Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE). In a cohort of patients with advanced chronic kidney disease, we examined how eGFR and KFRE risk predictions corresponded to the time patients had until reaching kidney failure. Among those with eGFR<15mL/min/1.73m2 or KFRE risk > 40%), both KFRE risk and eGFR showed similar relationships with time to kidney failure. Estimating time to kidney failure in advanced CKD using either eGFR or KFRE can inform clinical decisions and patient counseling on prognosis.

Decision aids to assist patients and professionals in choosing the right treatment for kidney failure

Background

Kidney services vary in the way they involve people with kidney failure (PwKF) in treatment decisions as management needs change. We discuss how decision-science applications support proactively PwKF to make informed decisions between treatment options with kidney professionals.

Methods

A conceptual review of findings about decision making and use of decision aids in kidney services, synthesized with reference to: the Making Informed Decisions-Individually and Together (MIND-IT) multiple stakeholder decision makers framework; and the Medical Research Council-Complex Intervention Development and Evaluation research framework.

Results

This schema represents the different types of decision aids that support PwKF and professional reasoning as they manage kidney disease individually and together; adjustments at micro, meso and macro levels supports integration in practice.

Conclusion

Innovating services to meet clinical guidelines on enhancing shared decision making processes means enabling all stakeholders to use decision aids to meet their goals within kidney pathways at individual, service and organizational levels.

Electronic health records to capture primary outcome measures: two case studies in HIV prevention research

BACKGROUND

There is increasing interest in the use of electronic health records (EHRs) to improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of clinical trials, including the capture of outcome measures.

MAIN TEXT

We describe our experience of using EHRs to capture the primary outcome measure - HIV infection or the diagnosis of HIV infection - in two randomised HIV prevention trials conducted in the UK. PROUD was a clinic-based trial evaluating pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), and SELPHI was an internet-based trial evaluating HIV self-testing kits. The EHR was the national database of HIV diagnoses in the UK, curated by the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA). In PROUD, linkage to the UKHSA database was performed at the end of the trial and identified five primary outcomes in addition to the 30 outcomes diagnosed by the participating clinics. Linkage also produced an additional 345 person-years follow-up, an increase of 27% over clinic-based follow-up. In SELPHI, new HIV diagnoses were primarily identified via UKHSA linkage, complemented by participant self-report through internet surveys. Rates of survey completion were low, and only 14 of the 33 new diagnoses recorded in the UKHSA database were also self-reported. Thus UKHSA linkage was essential for capturing HIV diagnoses and the successful conduct of the trial.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience of using the UKHSA database of HIV diagnoses as a source of primary outcomes in two randomised trials in the field of HIV prevention was highly favourable and encourages the use of a similar approach in future trials in this disease area.

Understanding the Current Landscape of Kidney Disease in Canada to Advance Precision Medicine Guided Personalized Care

Purpose of Review

To understand the impact of kidney disease in Canada and the priority areas of kidney research that can benefit from patient-oriented, precision medicine research using novel technologies.

Sources of Information

Information was collected through discussions between health care professionals, researchers, and patient partners. Literature was compiled using search engines (PubMed, PubMed central, Medline, and Google) and data from the Canadian Organ Replacement Register.

Methods

We reviewed the impact, prevalence, economic burden, causes of kidney disease, and priority research areas in Canada. After reviewing the priority areas for kidney research, potential avenues for future research that can integrate precision medicine initiatives for patient-oriented research were outlined.

Key Findings

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) remains among the top causes of morbidity and mortality in the world and exerts a large financial strain on the health care system. Despite the increasing number of people with CKD, funding for basic kidney research continues to trail behind other diseases. Current funding strategies favor existing clinical treatment and patient educational strategies. The identification of genetic factors for various forms of kidney disease in the adult and pediatric populations provides mechanistic insight into disease pathogenesis. Allocation of resources and funding toward existing high-yield personalized research initiatives have the potential to significantly affect patient-oriented research outcomes but will be difficult due to a constant decline of funding for kidney research.

Limitations

This is an overview primarily focused on Canadian-specific literature rather than a comprehensive systematic review of the literature. The scope of our findings and conclusions may not be applicable to health care systems in other countries.

Shared decision-making in advanced kidney disease: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

To provide a comprehensive overview of interventions that support shared decision-making (SDM) for treatment modality decisions in advanced kidney disease (AKD). To provide summarised information on their content, use and reported results. To provide an overview of interventions currently under development or investigation.

DESIGN

The JBI methodology for scoping reviews was followed. This review conforms to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Emcare, PsycINFO, PROSPERO and Academic Search Premier for peer-reviewed literature. Other online databases (eg, clinicaltrials.gov, OpenGrey) for grey literature.

ELIGIBILITY FOR INCLUSION

Records in English with a study population of patients >18 years of age with an estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m². Records had to be on the subject of SDM, or explicitly mention that the intervention reported on could be used to support SDM for treatment modality decisions in AKD.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently screened and selected records for data extraction. Interventions were categorised as prognostic tools (PTs), educational programmes (EPs), patient decision aids (PtDAs) or multicomponent initiatives (MIs). Interventions were subsequently categorised based on the decisions they were developed to support.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-five interventions were identified in a total of 158 included records: 52 PTs, 51 EPs, 29 PtDAs and 13 MIs. Sixteen (n=16, 11%) were novel interventions currently under investigation. Forty-six (n=46, 35.7%) were reported to have been implemented in clinical practice. Sixty-seven (n=67, 51.9%) were evaluated for their effects on outcomes in the intended users.

CONCLUSION

There is no conclusive evidence on which intervention is the most efficacious in supporting SDM for treatment modality decisions in AKD. There is a lot of variation in selected outcomes, and the body of evidence is largely based on observational research. In addition, the effects of these interventions on SDM are under-reported.

Decisional Conflict About Kidney Failure Treatment Modalities Among Adults With Advanced CKD

Rationale & Objective

Choosing from multiple kidney failure treatment modalities can create decisional conflict, but little is known about this experience before decision implementation. We explored decisional conflict about treatment for kidney failure and its associated patient characteristics in the context of advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD).

Study Design

Cross-sectional study.

Setting & Participants

Adults (N = 427) who had advanced CKD, received nephrology care in Pennsylvania-based clinics, and had no history of dialysis or transplantation.

Predictors

Participants' sociodemographic, physical health, nephrology care/knowledge, and psychosocial characteristics.

Outcomes

Participants' results on the Sure of myself; Understand information; Risk-benefit ratio; Encouragement (SURE) screening test for decisional conflict (no decisional conflict vs decisional conflict).

Analytical Approach

We used multivariable logistic regression to quantify associations between aforementioned participant characteristics and decisional conflict. We repeated analyses among a subgroup of participants at highest risk of kidney failure within 2 years.

Results

Most (76%) participants reported treatment-related decisional conflict. Participant characteristics associated with lower odds of decisional conflict included complete satisfaction with patient-kidney team treatment discussions (OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.03-0.88; P = 0.04), attendance of treatment education classes (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.16-0.90; P = 0.03), and greater treatment-related decision self-efficacy (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.94-0.99; P < 0.01). Sensitivity analyses showed a similarly high prevalence of decisional conflict (73%) and again demonstrated associations of class attendance (OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.07-0.96; P = 0.04) and decision self-efficacy (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91-0.99; P = 0.03) with decisional conflict.

Limitations

Single-health system study.

Conclusions

Decisional conflict was highly prevalent regardless of CKD progression risk. Findings suggest efforts to reduce decisional conflict should focus on minimizing the mismatch between clinical practice guidelines and patient-reported engagement in treatment preparation, facilitating patient-kidney team treatment discussions, and developing treatment education programs and decision support interventions that incorporate decision self-efficacy-enhancing strategies.

'It's the empathy'-defining a role for peer support among people living with chronic kidney disease: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Persons with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) have unique support needs associated with managing a chronic yet often silent condition, complex treatment-related decisions and care transitions. The aim of this study was to explore perspectives on how peer support could address CKD support needs and augment care.

DESIGN

This study employed a qualitative descriptive methodology. Data were collected through focus groups (cofacilitated by patient partners) and semistructured interviews.

SETTING

Four multidisciplinary CKD clinics across Southern Alberta, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

We purposively sampled among adult patients with advanced, non-dialysis CKD and their caregivers, as well as trained peer mentors from The Kidney Foundation of Canada's Kidney Connect programme.

ANALYSIS

Transcripts were coded in duplicate, and themes were generated inductively through a thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

We conducted seven focus groups with a total of 39 patient and caregiver participants. Seven patients and caregivers who were unable to attend a focus group and 13 peer mentors participated in a telephone interview. Although patients and caregivers had limited awareness of peer support, participants acknowledged its central role in affirming their experiences and enabling confidence to live well with kidney disease. We identified four themes related to the anticipated role of peer support in addressing support needs for people with non-dialysis CKD: (1) creating connection; (2) preparing for uncertainty; (3) adapting to new realities; and (4) responsive peer support delivery. Aligning peer support access with patient readiness and existing CKD management supports can promote optimism, community and pragmatic adaptations to challenges.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients, caregivers and peer mentors highlighted a unique value in the shared experiences of CKD peers to anticipate and manage disease-related challenges and confidently face a future living with kidney disease.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Patient, Family Member, and Stakeholder Research Engagement: Insights from the PREPARE NOW Study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the impact of COVID-19 on patient, family member, and stakeholder patient-centered outcomes research engagement.

OBJECTIVE

To answer the research questions: (1) What is the impact of COVID-19 on the lives of patients with kidney disease and their families? (2) What is the impact of COVID-19 on research engagement for patient and family member research team members who are themselves at very high risk for poor COVID-19 outcomes? and (3) How can we help patients, family members, and stakeholder team members engage in research during COVID-19?

DESIGN

We conducted virtual semi-structured interviews with patient and family member co-investigators and kidney disease stakeholders from the PREPARE NOW study during November 2020. The interview guide included questions about participants' experiences with the impact of COVID-19 on research engagement.

PARTICIPANTS

Seven patient and family member co-investigators and eight kidney disease stakeholders involved in a kidney disease patient-centered outcomes research project participated in the interviews, data analysis, and writing this manuscript.

APPROACH

We used a content analysis approach and identified the main themes using an inductive process.

KEY RESULTS

Respondents reported three main ways that COVID-19 has impacted their lives: emotional impact, changing behaviors, and changes in health care delivery. The majority of respondents reported no negative impact of COVID-19 on their ability to engage in this research project. Suggestions for patient-centered outcomes research during COVID-19 and other emergencies include virtual research activities; active engagement; and promoting trust, honesty, transparency, and authenticity.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 has had a significant negative impact on patient, family member, and stakeholder research team members; however, this has not resulted in less research engagement.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02722382.

Use of the kidney failure risk equation to inform clinical care of patients with chronic kidney disease: a mixed-methods systematic review

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE

The Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE) predicts the risk of end-stage kidney disease in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the utility of KFRE in clinical practice.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING AND STUDY POPULATIONS

Adult patients with CKD but not receiving renal replacement therapy enrolled in studies where KFRE was used in clinical care pathways.

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES

All studies published from April 2011 to October 2021 identified from Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase and reference and citation searches of included studies.

DATA EXTRACTION

Relevant data were extracted, and two reviewers independently assessed study quality using appropriate appraisal tools.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Findings reported as a narrative synthesis due to heterogeneity of the included studies.

RESULTS

Of 1635 studies identified, 440 duplicates were removed. The remaining 1195 titles and abstracts were screened. All five studies for full-text review were included in the analysis. Three uses of KFRE were assessed: (1) primary to specialty care interface; (2) general nephrology to multidisciplinary care transition; and (3) treatment planning. Evidence of impact on number of patient referrals into nephrology care was conflicting. However, wait times improved in one study. Although KFRE identified high-risk patients for increased multidisciplinary support, there was concern patients stepped down, no longer meeting eligibility criteria, may lack access to services.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first systematic review of studies that have assessed the actual impact of KFRE in clinical practice with five studies of varying quality reported to date. Trials are in progress assessing the impact on clinical outcomes of using KFRE in clinical practice, and KFRE is being incorporated into guidelines for CKD management. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of KFRE on clinical care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Protocol registered on PROSPERO before initiation of the study (Ref: CRD42020219926).

Shared Decision-Making for a Dialysis Modality

The prevalence of kidney failure continues to rise globally. Dialysis is a treatment option for individuals with kidney failure; after the decision to initiate dialysis has been made, it is critical to involve individuals in the decision on which dialysis modality to choose. This review, based on evidence arising from the literature, examines the role of shared decision-making (SDM) in helping those with kidney failure to select a dialysis modality. SDM was found to lead to more people with kidney failure feeling satisfied with their choice of dialysis modality. Individuals with kidney failure must be cognizant that SDM is an active and iterative process, and their participation is essential for success in empowering them to make decisions on dialysis modality. The educational components of SDM must be easy to understand, high quality, unbiased, up to date, and targeted to the linguistic, educational, and cultural needs of the individual. All individuals with kidney failure should be encouraged to participate in SDM and should be involved in the design and implementation of SDM approaches.

Preferences for and Experiences of Shared and Informed Decision Making Among Patients Choosing Kidney Replacement Therapies in Nephrology Care

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) can progress rapidly, and patients are often unprepared to make kidney failure treatment decisions. We aimed to better understand patients' preferences for and experiences of shared and informed decision making (SDM) regarding kidney replacement therapy before kidney failure.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Adults receiving nephrology care at CKD clinics in rural Pennsylvania.

PREDICTORS

Estimated glomerular filtration rate, 2-year risk for kidney failure, duration and frequency of nephrology care, and preference for SDM.

OUTCOMES

Occurrence and extent of kidney replacement therapy discussions and participants' satisfaction with those discussions.

ANALYTIC APPROACH

Multivariable logistic regression to quantify associations between participants' characteristics and whether they had discussions.

RESULTS

The 447 study participants had a median age of 72 (IQR, 64-80) years and mean estimated glomerular filtration rate of 33 (SD, 12) mL/min/1.73 m2. Most (96%) were White, high school educated (67%), and retired (65%). Most (72%) participants preferred a shared approach to kidney treatment decision making, and only 35% discussed dialysis or transplantation with their kidney teams. Participants who had discussions (n = 158) were often completely satisfied (63%) but infrequently discussed potential treatment-related impacts on their lives. In multivariable analyses, those with a high risk for kidney failure within 2 years (OR, 3.24 [95% CI, 1.72-6.11]; P < 0.01), longer-term nephrology care (OR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.05-1.20] per 1 additional year; P < 0.01), and more nephrology visits in the prior 2 years (OR, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.20-1.51] per 1 additional visit; P < 0.01) had higher odds of having discussed dialysis or transplantation.

LIMITATIONS

Single health system study.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients preferred sharing CKD treatment decisions with their providers, but treatment discussions were infrequent and often did not address key treatment impacts. Longitudinal nephrology care and frequent visits may help ensure that patients have optimal SDM experiences.

Integrated Digital Health System Tools to Support Decision Making and Treatment Preparation in CKD: The PREPARE NOW Study

Rationale & Objective

Digital health system tools to support shared decision making and preparation for kidney replacement treatments for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are needed.

Study Design

Descriptive study of the implementation of digital infrastructure to support a patient-centered health system intervention.

Setting & Participants

4 CKD clinics within a large integrated health system.

Exposure

We developed an integrated suite of digital engagement tools to support patients’ shared decision making and preparation for kidney failure treatments. Tools included an automated CKD patient registry and risk prediction algorithm within the electronic health record (EHR) to identify and prioritize patients in need of nurse case management to facilitate shared decision making and preparation for kidney replacement treatments, an electronic patient-facing values clarification tool, a tracking application to document patients’ preparation for treatments, and an EHR work flow to broadcast patients’ treatment preferences to all health care providers.

Outcomes

Uptake and acceptability.

Analytic Approach

Mixed methods.

Results

From July 1, 2017, through June 30, 2018, the CKD registry identified 1,032 patients in 4 nephrology clinics, of whom 243 (24%) were identified as high risk for progressing to kidney failure within 2 years. Kidney Transitions Specialists enrolled 117 (48%) high-risk patients by the end of year 1. The values tool was completed by 30/33 (91%) patients who attended kidney modality education. Nurse case managers used the tracking application for 100% of patients to document 287 planning steps for kidney replacement therapy. Most (87%) high-risk patients had their preferred kidney replacement modality documented and displayed in the EHR. Nurse case managers reported that the tools facilitated their identification of patients needing support and their navigation activities.

Limitations

Single institution, short duration.

Conclusions

Digital health system tools facilitated rapid identification of patients needing shared and informed decision making and their preparation for kidney replacement treatments.

Funding

This work was supported through a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Project Program Award (IHS-1409-20967).

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02722382.

Targeting Patient and Health System Barriers To Improve Rates of Hemodialysis Initiation with an Arteriovenous Access

Background

Guidelines recommend pre-emptive creation of arteriovenous (AV) access. However, <20% of US patients initiate hemodialysis (HD) with a functional AV access. We implemented a quality improvement (QI) program to improve pre-HD vascular access care.

Methods

After conducting qualitative research with key informants, we implemented a 7-month vascular access support QI program at Geisinger Health. The program targeted patient and health system barriers to AV access through education, needs assessment, peer support, care navigation, and electronic supports. We performed pre-, intra-, and postprogram stakeholder interviews to identify program barriers and facilitators and to assess acceptability. In a research substudy, we compared pre- and postprogram self-efficacy, knowledge, and confidence navigating vascular access care.

Results

There were 37 patient and 32 clinician/personnel participants. Of the 37 patients, 34 (92%) completed vascular access-specific education, 33 (89%) underwent needs assessment, eight (22%) engaged with peer mentors, 21 (57%) had vein mapping, 18 (49%) had an initial surgical appointment, 15 (40%) underwent AV access surgery, and six (16%) started HD during the 7-month program. Qualitative findings demonstrated program acceptability to participants and suggested that education provision and emotional barrier identification were important to engaging patients in vascular access care. Research findings showed pre- to postprogram improvements in patient self-efficacy (28.1-30.8, P=0.05) and knowledge (4.9-6.9, P=0.004), and trends toward improvements in confidence among patients (8.0-8.7, P=0.2) and providers (7.5-7.8, P=0.1).

Conclusions

Our intervention targeting patient and health system barriers improved patient vascular access knowledge and self-efficacy.

Clinical Trial registry name and registration number

Breaking Down Care Process and Patient-level Barriers to Arteriovenous Access Creation Prior to Hemodialysis Initiation, NCT04032613.

Patient-Centered Self-Management in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease: Challenges and Implications

This review aims to identify attributes of patient-centered self-management (PCSM) in the current literature and explore its implementation in resolving patient obstacles in chronic kidney disease (CKD) treatment and management. A search of relevant articles and literature on PCSM, integrated care, and challenges of CKD management was conducted. Vital attributes of PCSM and current self-management interventions employed to resolve patient obstacles in CKD management were identified from inclusion studies. Findings affirm that PCSM strategies have positive effects on CKD management, but a lack of quality primary study, and long-term evidence presents the need for further development. Future research should focus on the development of a standardized and universal integrated PCSM model and a uniform system of data collection in the clinical setting. The difficulty of CKD management lies in how it is a comorbid and progressive disease. A pure biomedical approach is inadequate. Our review recommends that an integrated PCSM approach with health literacy and information technology intervention, which unifies and integrates patient education, can address the difficulties that are contributing to unsuccessful treatment outcomes. An integrated PCSM model should be implemented systematically and methodologically into future CKD management and health policies.

Engaging patients and family members to design and implement patient-centered kidney disease research

We need more research projects that partner and engage with patients and family members as team members. Doing this requires that patients and family members set research priorities and fully participate in research teams. Models for this patient and family member engagement as research partners can help increase patient centered outcomes research. In this article, we describe how we have successfully engaged patients with kidney disease and family members as Co-Investigators on a 5-year research project testing a health system intervention to improve kidney disease care. Background This article describes a method for successful engagement of patients and family members in all stages of a 5-year comparative effectiveness research trial to improve transitions of care for patients from chronic kidney disease to end-stage kidney disease. Methods This project utilized the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute's conceptual model for engagement with patients and family members. We conducted a qualitative analysis of grant planning meetings to determine patient and family member Co-Investigators' priorities for research and to include these engagement efforts in the research design. Patient and family member Co-Investigators partnered in writing this paper. Results Patients and family members were successfully engaged in remote and in-person meetings to contribute actively to research planning and implementation stages. Three patient-centered themes emerged from our data related to engagement that informed our research plan: kidney disease treatment decision-making, care transitions from chronic to end-stage kidney disease, and patient-centered outcomes. Conclusions The model we have employed represents a new paradigm for kidney disease research in the United States, with patients and family members engaged as full research partners. As a result, the study tests an intervention that directly responds to their needs, and it prioritizes the collection of outcomes data most relevant to patient and family member Co-Investigators. Trial registration NCT02722382 .

Advanced CKD Care and Decision Making: Which Health Care Professionals Do Patients Rely on for CKD Treatment and Advice?

Rationale & Objective

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) care is often fragmented across multiple health care providers. It is unclear whether patients rely mostly on their nephrologists or non-nephrologist providers for medical care, including CKD treatment and advice.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study.

Setting & Participants

Adults receiving nephrology care at CKD clinics in Pennsylvania.

Predictors

Frequency, duration, and patient-centeredness (range, 1 [least] to 4 [most]) of participants’ nephrology care.

Outcome

Participants’ reliance on nephrologists, primary care providers, or other specialists for medical care, including CKD treatment and advice.

Analytical Approach

Multivariable logistic regression to quantify associations between participants’ reliance on their nephrologists (vs other providers) and their demographics, comorbid conditions, kidney function, and nephrology care.

Results

Among 1,412 patients in clinics targeted for the study, 676 (48%) participated. Among these, 453 (67%) were eligible for this analysis. Mean age was 71 (SD, 12) years, 59% were women, 97% were white, and 65% were retired. Participants were in nephrology care for a median of 3.8 (IQR, 2.0-6.6) years and completed a median of 4 (IQR, 3-5) nephrology appointments in the past 2 years. Half (56%) the participants relied primarily on their nephrologists, while 23% relied on primary care providers, 18% relied on all providers equally, and 3% relied on other specialists. Participants’ adjusted odds of relying on their nephrologists were higher for those in nephrology care for longer (OR, 1.08 [95% CI, 1.02-1.15]; P = 0.02), those who completed more nephrology visits in the previous 2 years (OR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.05-1.29]; P = 0.005), and those who perceived their last interaction with their nephrologists as more patient-centered (OR, 2.63 [95% CI, 1.70-4.09]; P < 0.001).

Limitations

Single health system study.

Conclusions

Many nephrology patients relied on non-nephrologist providers for medical care. Longitudinal patient-centered nephrology care may encourage more patients to follow nephrologists’ recommendations.