Impact of Daily Electronic Laboratory Alerting on Early Detection and Clinical Documentation of Acute Kidney Injury in Hospital Settings

Digital health and acute kidney injury: consensus report of the 27th Acute Disease Quality Initiative workgroup

Acute kidney injury (AKI), which is a common complication of acute illnesses, affects the health of individuals in community, acute care and post-acute care settings. Although the recognition, prevention and management of AKI has advanced over the past decades, its incidence and related morbidity, mortality and health care burden remain overwhelming. The rapid growth of digital technologies has provided a new platform to improve patient care, and reports show demonstrable benefits in care processes and, in some instances, in patient outcomes. However, despite great progress, the potential benefits of using digital technology to manage AKI has not yet been fully explored or implemented in clinical practice. Digital health studies in AKI have shown variable evidence of benefits, and the digital divide means that access to digital technologies is not equitable. Upstream research and development costs, limited stakeholder participation and acceptance, and poor scalability of digital health solutions have hindered their widespread implementation and use. Here, we provide recommendations from the Acute Disease Quality Initiative consensus meeting, which involved experts in adult and paediatric nephrology, critical care, pharmacy and data science, at which the use of digital health for risk prediction, prevention, identification and management of AKI and its consequences was discussed.

Incidence and Recovery of Acute Kidney Injury in Diabetic and Nondiabetic Patients with Foot Infections

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence and recovery of acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients admitted to the hospital with and without diabetes mellitus (DM) with foot infections.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 294 patients with DM and 88 without DM admitted to the hospital with foot infections. The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes guidelines were used to define AKI. Recovery was divided into three categories: full, partial, and no recovery within 90 days of the index AKI.

RESULTS

The AKI incidence was 3.0 times higher in patients with DM (DM 48.5% versus no DM 23.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.74-5.19; P < .01). Acute kidney injury incidence was similar at each stage in people with and without DM (stage 1, DM 58.1% versus no DM 47.6%; stage 2, DM 23.3% versus no DM 33.3%, and stage 3, DM 18.6% versus no DM 19.1%). Twenty-nine patients with diabetes had a second AKI event and four had a third event. In patients without DM, one patient had a second AKI. Cumulative AKI incidence was 4.7 times higher in people with DM (DM 60.9% versus no DM 25.0%; 95% CI, 2.72-8.03; P < .01). Patients with diabetes progressed to chronic kidney disease or in chronic kidney disease stage 39.4% of the time. Patients without diabetes progressed 16.7% of the time, but this trend was not significant (P = .07). Complete recovery was 3.8 times more likely in patients without diabetes (95% CI, 1.26-11.16; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Acute kidney injury incidence is higher in patients with diabetes, and complete recovery after an AKI is less likely compared to patients without diabetes.

Effect of clinical decision support systems on clinical outcome for acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Clinical decision support systems including both electronic alerts and care bundles have been developed for hospitalized patients with acute kidney injury.

Methods

Electronic databases were searched for randomized, before-after and cohort studies that implemented a clinical decision support system for hospitalized patients with acute kidney injury between 1990 and 2019. The studies must describe their impact on care processes, patient-related outcomes, or hospital length of stay. The clinical decision support system included both electronic alerts and care bundles.

Results

We identified seven studies involving 32,846 participants. Clinical decision support system implementation significantly reduced mortality (OR 0.86; 95 % CI, 0.75–0.99; p = 0.040, I² = 65.3 %; n = 5 studies; N = 30,791 participants) and increased the proportion of acute kidney injury recognition (OR 3.12; 95 % CI, 2.37–4.10; p < 0.001, I² = 77.1 %; n = 2 studies; N = 25,121 participants), and investigations (OR 3.07; 95 % CI, 2.91–3.24; p < 0.001, I² = 0.0 %; n = 2 studies; N = 25,121 participants).

Conclusions

Nonrandomized controlled trials of clinical decision support systems for acute kidney injury have yielded evidence of improved patient-centered outcomes and care processes. This review is limited by the low number of randomized trials and the relatively short follow-up period.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12882-021-02459-y.

Scoping review exploring the impact of digital systems on processes and outcomes in the care management of acute kidney injury and progress towards establishing learning healthcare systems

OBJECTIVES

Digital systems have long been used to improve the quality and safety of care when managing acute kidney injury (AKI). The availability of digitised clinical data can also turn organisations and their networks into learning healthcare systems (LHSs) if used across all levels of health and care. This review explores the impact of digital systems i.e. on patients with AKI care, to gauge progress towards establishing LHSs and to identify existing gaps in the research.

METHODS

Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane, Scopus and Web of Science databases were searched. Studies of real-time or near real-time digital AKI management systems which reported process and outcome measures were included.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis of 43 studies showed that most interventions used real-time serum creatinine levels to trigger responses to enable risk prediction, early recognition of AKI or harm prevention by individual clinicians (micro level) or specialist teams (meso level). Interventions at system (macro level) were rare. There was limited evidence of change in outcomes.

DISCUSSION

While the benefits of real-time digital clinical data at micro level for AKI management have been evident for some time, their application at meso and macro levels is emergent therefore limiting progress towards establishing LHSs. Lack of progress is due to digital maturity, system design, human factors and policy levers.

CONCLUSION

Future approaches need to harness the potential of interoperability, data analytical advances and include multiple stakeholder perspectives to develop effective digital LHSs in order to gain benefits across the system.

The Value Proposition for Pathologists: A Population Health Approach

The transition to a value-based payment system offers pathologists the opportunity to play an increased role in population health by improving outcomes and safety as well as reducing costs. Although laboratory testing itself accounts for a small portion of health-care spending, laboratory data have significant downstream effects in patient management as well as diagnosis. Pathologists currently are heavily engaged in precision medicine, use of laboratory and pathology test results (including autopsy data) to reduce diagnostic errors, and play leading roles in diagnostic management teams. Additionally, pathologists can use aggregate laboratory data to monitor the health of populations and improve health-care outcomes for both individual patients and populations. For the profession to thrive, pathologists will need to focus on extending their roles outside the laboratory beyond the traditional role in the analytic phase of testing. This should include leadership in ensuring correct ordering and interpretation of laboratory testing and leadership in population health programs. Pathologists in training will need to learn key concepts in informatics and data analytics, health-care economics, public health, implementation science, and health systems science. While these changes may reduce reimbursement for the traditional activities of pathologists, new opportunities arise for value creation and new compensation models. This report reviews these opportunities for pathologist leadership in utilization management, precision medicine, reducing diagnostic errors, and improving health-care outcomes.

Northwell Health Laboratories: The 10-Year Outcomes After Deciding to Keep the Lab

CONTEXT.—

Northwell Health Laboratories were established in 1997, serving the Northwell Health system. In 2008, the health system considered minority entry into a joint venture with a commercial laboratory. Based on arguments made by Northwell laboratory leadership, the decision was made to retain full ownership of the laboratory.

OBJECTIVE.—

To evaluate the 10-year outcomes of the 2008 decision and assess the value of a fully integrated laboratory service line for a regional health network.

DESIGN.—

Ten-year outcomes were analyzed including financial, volume, and value-based activities.

RESULTS.—

First, a fully integrated laboratory service line was created, with unified medical and managerial leadership. Second, Core Laboratory volumes and revenues grew at annualized rates of 4.5% and 16.0%, respectively. Third, hospital-based laboratory costs were held either constant, or grew in accordance with strategic clinical programs. Fourth, laboratory services were able to provide leadership in innovative system clinical programming and value-based payment programs. Fifth, the laboratories became a regional asset, forming a joint venture affiliation with New York City Health + Hospitals, and supporting distressed hospitals in Brooklyn, New York. Lastly, Northwell Health Laboratories have become a reputational asset through leadership in 2 consortia: The Compass Group and Project Santa Fe.

CONCLUSIONS.—

The 10-year outcomes have exceeded projections made in 2008, validating the decision to retain the laboratories as a wholly owned system asset. The laboratories are now well positioned for leading innovation in patient care and for helping to drive a favorable posture for the health system under new payment models for health care.