Survey of Kidney Biopsy Clinical Practice and Training in the United States

Simulation-based learning in nephrology

Simulation is a technique to replace and amplify real experiences with guided ones that evoke or replicate substantial aspects of the real world in a fully interactive fashion. In nephrology (a particularly complex specialty), simulation can be used by patients, nurses, residents, and attending physicians alike. It allows one to learn techniques outside the stressful environment of care such as central venous catheter placement, arteriovenous fistula management, learning about peritoneal dialysis, or performing a kidney biopsy. Serious games and virtual reality are emerging methods that show promise. Simulation could also be important in relational aspects of working in a team or with the patient. The development of simulation as a teaching tool in nephrology allows for maintaining high-quality training for residents, tailored to their future practice, and minimizing risks for patients. Additionally, this education helps nephrologists maintain mastery of technical procedures, making the specialty attractive to younger generations. Unfortunately, the inclusion of simulation training programmes faces occasional logistical or funding limitations that universities must overcome with the assistance and innovation of teaching nephrologists. The impact of simulation-based teaching on clinical outcomes needs to be investigated in clinical studies.

Global variability of vascular and peritoneal access for chronic dialysis

AIM

Vascular and peritoneal access are essential elements for sustainability of chronic dialysis programs. Data on availability, patterns of use, funding models, and workforce for vascular and peritoneal accesses for dialysis at a global scale is limited.

METHODS

An electronic survey of national leaders of nephrology societies, consumer representative organizations, and policymakers was conducted from July to September 2018. Questions focused on types of accesses used to initiate dialysis, funding for services, and availability of providers for access creation.

RESULTS

Data from 167 countries were available. In 31 countries (25% of surveyed countries), >75% of patients initiated haemodialysis (HD) with a temporary catheter. Seven countries (5% of surveyed countries) had >75% of patients initiating HD with arteriovenous fistulas or grafts. Seven countries (5% of surveyed countries) had >75% of their patients starting HD with tunnelled dialysis catheters. 57% of low-income countries (LICs) had >75% of their patients initiating HD with a temporary catheter compared to 5% of high-income countries (HICs). Shortages of surgeons to create vascular access were reported in 91% of LIC compared to 46% in HIC. Approximately 95% of participating countries in the LIC category reported shortages of surgeons for peritoneal dialysis (PD) access compared to 26% in HIC. Public funding was available for central venous catheters, fistula/graft creation, and PD catheter surgery in 57%, 54% and 54% of countries, respectively.

CONCLUSION

There is a substantial variation in the availability, funding, workforce, and utilization of vascular and peritoneal access for dialysis across countries regions, with major gaps in low-income countries.

Percutaneous kidney biopsy trends in the Medicare population by specialty from 2011 to 2021: implications for nephrology training requirements and radiology referral patterns

PURPOSE

To study trends in volume and reimbursement for percutaneous kidney biopsy (PKB) by physicians and advanced practice providers (APPs) for Medicare enrollees from 2011-2021.

METHODS

Claims from the Medicare Part B Physician/Supplier Procedure Master File (a national Medicare database) for 2011-2021 were extracted using Current Procedural Terminology codes for PKB. Total volumes were compared by provider specialty. Non-facility reimbursement, work Relative Value Unit (RVU) non-facility practice expense RVU, and malpractice RVU were compared.

RESULTS

Between 2011 and 2021, total volume of PKB by physicians and APPs increased from 30,753 to 34,090 (10.9%), with a peak of 37,882 in 2019 prior to the COVID 19 pandemic. Radiology performed the majority of procedures during the study period. Relative share for radiology increased from 67.6% to 81.1% while the relative share for internal medicine/nephrology decreased from 24.3% to 14.3%, accelerating between 2019 and 2020. Volume and relative share for APPs marginally increased (from 0.9% to 1.2%). Non-facility reimbursement decreased from $578.96 in 2010 to $568.76 in 2021 (1.7%), work RVU decreased from 2.63 to 2.38 (9.5%), non-facility practice expense RVU decreased from 14.10 to 13.71 (2.8%), and malpractice RVU decreased from 0.31 to 0.21 (32.3%).

CONCLUSION

Volume and total share of PKB performed by radiology increased over the study period. Conversely, internal medicine/nephrology performed fewer kidney biopsies. Despite the expanding role for APPs in other image-guided procedures, very few PKBs were performed by APPs throughout the study period. Reimbursement and RVU for PKB declined over the study period.

Interventional nephrology and vascular access practice: A perspective from South and Southeast Asia

South and Southeast Asia is the most populated, heterogeneous part of the world. The Association of Vascular Access and InTerventionAl Renal physicians (AVATAR Foundation), India, gathered trends on epidemiology and Interventional Nephrology (IN) for this region. The countries were divided as upper-middle- and higher-income countries as Group-1 and lower and lower-middle-income countries as Group-2. Forty-three percent and 70% patients in the Group 1 and 2 countries had unplanned hemodialysis (HD) initiation. Among the incident HD patients, the dominant Vascular Access (VA) was non-tunneled central catheter (non-TCC) in 70% of Group 2 and tunneled central catheter (TCC) in 32.5% in Group 1 countries. Arterio-Venous Fistula (AVF) in the incident HD patients was observed in 24.5% and 35% of patients in Group-2 and Group-1, respectively. Eight percent and 68.7% of the prevalent HD patients in Group-2 and Group-1 received HD through an AVF respectively. Nephrologists performing any IN procedure were 90% and 60% in Group-2 and Group 1, respectively. The common procedures performed by nephrologists include renal biopsy (93.3%), peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter insertion (80%), TCC (66.7%) and non-TCC (100%). Constraints for IN include lack of time (73.3%), lack of back-up (40%), lack of training (73.3%), economic issues (33.3%), medico-legal problems (46.6%), no incentive (20%), other interests (46.6%) and institution not supportive (26%). Routine VA surveillance is performed in 12.5% and 83.3% of Group-2 and Group-1, respectively. To conclude, non-TCC and TCC are the most common vascular access in incident HD patients in Group-2 and Group-1, respectively. Lack of training, back-up support and economic constraints were main constraints for IN growth in Group-2 countries.

The evolution of performing a kidney biopsy: a single center experience comparing native and transplant kidney biopsies performed by interventional radiologists and nephrologists

BACKGROUND

Kidney biopsy is the most vital tool guiding a nephrologist in diagnosis and treatment of kidney disease. Over the last few years, we have seen an increasing number of kidney biopsies being performed by interventional radiologists. The goal of our study was to compare the adequacy and complication rates between kidney biopsies performed by interventional radiology versus nephrology.  METHODS : We performed a single center retrospective analysis of a total of all kidney biopsies performed at our Institution between 2015 and 2021. All biopsies were performed using real-time ultrasound. Patients were monitored for four hours post biopsy and repeat ultrasound or hemoglobin checks were done if clinically indicated. The entire cohort was divided into two groups (Interventional radiology (IR) vs nephrology) based on who performed the biopsy. Baseline characteristics, comorbidities, blood counts, blood pressure, adequacy of the biopsy specimen and complication rates were recorded. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare complication rates (microscopic hematuria, gross hematuria and need for blood transfusion combined) between these two groups, controlling for covariates of interest. ANCOVA (analysis of variance, controlling for covariates) was used to compare differences in biopsy adequacy (number of glomeruli per biopsy procedure) between the groups.

RESULTS

446 kidney biopsies were performed in the study period (229 native and 147 transplant kidney biopsies) of which 324 were performed by IR and 122 by nephrologist. There was a significantly greater number of core samples obtained by IR (mean = 3.59, std.dev. = 1.49) compared to nephrology (mean = 2.47, std.dev = 0.79), p < 0.0001. IR used 18-gauge biopsy needles while nephrologist exclusively used 16-gauge needles. IR used moderate sedation (95.99%) or general anesthesia (1.85%) for the procedures more often than nephrology, which used them only in 0.82% and 0.82% of cases respectively (p < 0.0001). Trainees (residents or fellows) participated in the biopsy procedures more often in nephrology compared to IR (97.4% versus 69.04%, p < 0.0001). The most frequent complication identified was microscopic hematuria which occurred in 6.8% of biopsies. For native biopsies only, there was no significant difference in likelihood of complication between groups, after adjustment for covariates of interest (OR = 1.01, C.I. = (0.42, 2.41), p = 0.99). For native biopsies only, there was no significant difference in mean number of glomeruli obtained per biopsy procedure between groups, after adjustment for covariates of interest (F(1,251) = 0.40, p = 0.53).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that there is no significant difference in the adequacy or complication rates between kidney biopsies performed by IR or nephrology. This conclusion may indicate that kidney biopsies can be performed safely with adequate results either by IR or nephrologists depending on each institution's resources and expertise.

Increasing Incidence of Inadequate Kidney Biopsy Samples Over Time: A 16-Year Retrospective Analysis From a Large National Renal Biopsy Laboratory

Introduction

Renal biopsy remains an essential tool for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with medical kidney disease. Recently, there has been a perceived change in the number of inadequate samples. The aim of this study was to determine the native renal biopsy miss rate from 2005 to 2020 at Arkana Laboratories, a nationwide kidney biopsy service.

Methods

From 2005 to 2020, a total of 123,372 native kidney biopsies were received from >2500 nephrologists practicing across 44 US states. The miss rate was determined by age and year. In a subset of biopsies received in 2005 and 2018, the biopsy operator was determined, nephrologist or radiologist. Furthermore, the miss rate, needle gauge, biopsy depth by operator, and biopsy core width by gauge were measured.

Results

The miss rate increased markedly from 2% in 2005 to 14% in 2020. Radiologists performed 5% of biopsies in 2005 and 95% in 2018 using smaller diameter (18g/20g) needles 92% of the time. Glomeruli per centimeter of core biopsy and mean core width were significantly lower with smaller needles. The miss rate deep was significantly lower for nephrologists and remained consistent within operator between the 2 time points. The miss rate did not correlate with the increasing age of the population who had biopsies.

Conclusion

This increase in kidney biopsy miss rate significantly affects patient care in the management of medical kidney disease. Its correlation with the complete reversal in operators suggests an urgent need for interaction with and training of radiologists in this critical technique.

Performing an Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Needle Kidney Biopsy: An Up-To-Date Procedural Review

Ultrasound-guided percutaneous renal biopsy (PRB) has revolutionized the clinical practice of nephrology in the last decades. PRB remains an essential tool for the diagnosis, prognosis, and therapeutic management of several renal diseases and for the assessment of renal involvement in systemic diseases. In this study, we examine the different applications and provide a review of the current evidence on the periprocedural management of patients. PRB is recommended in patients with significant proteinuria, hematuria, acute kidney injury, unexpected worsening of renal function, and allograft dysfunction after excluding pre- and post-renal causes. A preliminary ultrasound examination is needed to assess the presence of anatomic anomalies of the kidney and to identify vessels that might be damaged by the needle during the procedure. Kidney biopsy is usually performed in the prone position on the lower pole of the left kidney, whereas in patients with obesity, the supine antero-lateral position is preferred. After preparing a sterile field and the injection of local anesthetics, an automatic spring-loaded biopsy gun is used under ultrasound guidance to obtain samples of renal parenchyma for histopathology. After the procedure, an ultrasound scan must be performed for the prompt identification of potential early bleeding complications. As 33% of complications occur after 8 h and 91% occur within 24 h, the ideal post-procedural observation time is 24 h. PRB is a safe procedure and should be considered a routine part of the clinical practice of nephrology.

Kidney biopsy practice amongst Australasian nephrologists

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous kidney biopsy is the gold standard investigation for the diagnosis of kidney diseases. The associated risks of the procedure depend on the skill and experience of the proceduralist as well as the characteristics of the patient. The Kidney Health Australia - Caring for Australasians with Renal Impairment (KHA-CARI) guidelines on kidney biopsies, published in 2019, are the only published national kidney biopsy guidelines. As such, this study surveys current kidney biopsy practices in Australasia and examines how they align with the Australian guidelines, as well as international biopsy practice.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, multiple-choice questionnaire was developed examining precautions prior to kidney biopsy; rationalisation of medications prior to kidney biopsy; technical aspects of kidney biopsy; complications of kidney biopsy; and indications for kidney biopsy. This was distributed to all members of the Australian and New Zealand Society of Nephrology (ANZSN).

RESULTS

The response rate for this survey is approximately 21.4 % (182/850). Respondents found agreement (> 75.0 %) in only six out of the twelve questions (50.0 %) which assessed their practice against the KHA-CARI guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study of its kind where kidney biopsy practices are examined against a clinical guideline. Furthermore, responses showed that practices were incongruent with guidelines and that there was a lack of consensus on many issues.

Advancing Nephrology: Division Leaders Advise ASN

New treatments, new understanding, and new approaches to translational research are transforming the outlook for patients with kidney diseases. A number of new initiatives dedicated to advancing the field of nephrology-from value-based care to prize competitions-will further improve outcomes of patients with kidney disease. Because of individual nephrologists and kidney organizations in the United States, such as the American Society of Nephrology, the National Kidney Foundation, and the Renal Physicians Association, and international nephrologists and organizations, such as the International Society of Nephrology and the European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association, we are beginning to gain traction to invigorate nephrology to meet the pandemic of global kidney diseases. Recognizing the timeliness of this opportunity, the American Society of Nephrology convened a Division Chief Retreat in Dallas, Texas, in June 2019 to address five key issues: (1) asserting the value of nephrology to the health system; (2) productivity and compensation; (3) financial support of faculty's and divisions' educational efforts; (4) faculty recruitment, retention, diversity, and inclusion; and (5) ensuring that fellowship programs prepare trainees to provide high-value nephrology care and enhance attraction of trainees to nephrology. Herein, we highlight the outcomes of these discussions and recommendations to the American Society of Nephrology.

Percutaneous Renal Biopsy Using an 18-Gauge Automated Needle Is Not Optimal

BACKGROUND

As percutaneous renal biopsies (PRBs) are increasingly performed by radiologists, an increase in the use of 18-gauge automated needle stands to compromise adequacy. We compare the adequacy and safety of PRB with 14-, 16-, and 18-gauge automated needles.

METHODS

PRB of native (N-592) and transplant (T-1,023) kidneys was performed from January 2002 to December 2019 using real-time ultrasound. Baseline clinical and laboratory data, biopsy data (number of cores, total glomeruli, and total glomeruli per core), and outcome (hematoma on renal US at 1-h, complications, and transfusion) were collected prospectively. PRB with N14g (337) versus N16g (255) and T16g (892) versus T18g (131) needles were compared. A p value of <0.05 was significant.

RESULTS

PRB with an 18-g needle yielded the lowest number of total glomeruli per biopsy (N14g vs. N16g: 33 ± 13 vs. 29 ± 12, p < 0.01 and T16g vs. T18g: 34 ± 16 vs. 21 ± 11, p < 0.0001), significantly fewer total glomeruli per core (T16g vs. T18g: 12.7 ± 6.4 vs. 9.6 ± 5.0, p < 0.001 and N16g vs. T18g: 14.2 ± 6.3 vs. 9.6 ± 5.0, p < 0.001). A hematoma by renal US 1-h post-PRB was similar for native (14g-35% vs. 16g-29%, p = 0.2), and transplant biopsies (16g-10% vs. 18g-9%, p = 0.9) and the complication rate for native (14g-8.9% vs. 16g-7.1%, p = 0.5), transplant biopsies (16g-4.6% vs. 18g-1.5%, p = 0.2) and transfusion rate for native (14g-7.7% vs. 16g-5.8%, p = 0.4), and transplant biopsies (16g-3.8% vs. 18g-0.8%, p = 0.1) were similar irrespective of needle size.

CONCLUSIONS

PRB of native and transplant kidneys with the use of a 16-gauge needle provides an optimal sample. However, our experience in transplant biopsies suggests the use of an 18-gauge needle stands to jeopardize the diagnostic accuracy of the PRB while not improving safety.

Current Paradigms and Emerging Opportunities in Nephrology Training

Nephrology is facing a period of remarkable and unprecedented change. The pipeline of device and therapeutic drug development, the growing success of clinical trials, and the emergence of novel clinical practice and training pathways each hold the promise of transforming patient care. Nephrology is also at the forefront of health policy in the United States, given the recent Advancing American Kidney Health initiative. Despite these developments, significant barriers exist to ensure a robust pipeline of well-qualified nephrologists, including but not limited to trainees' declining trainee interest in the specialty, lower board pass rates, and a perceived erosion in stature of the subspecialty. There is a lack of consensus among training program directors regarding procedural training requirements, the number of fellowship positions needed, and the value of the match. There is widespread agreement, however, that any initiative to reassert the value of nephrology must include significant focus on reinvigorating the trainee experience before and during fellowship. We discuss the current state of education in nephrology (from medical school to beyond fellowship) and highlight ways to increase interest in nephrology to reinvigorate the specialty.

Current State and Future of Private Practice Nephrology in the United States

Chronic kidney disease remains highly prevalent and exerts a heavy economic burden. The practice of nephrology has come a long way in managing this disease, though there remains room for improvement. The private domain, where more than half of the adult nephrology workforce operates, faces serious challenges. Interest has decreased in the field, leading to diminished recruitment. There has been a reduction in both reimbursement rates and revenues. We discuss the current state of private practice nephrology and strategies to reinvigorate our discipline. There needs to be a focus on preparing fellows during training not only for academic careers, but also for effective functioning in the environment of private practice and development of pathways for growth. We believe that private practice nephrology must expand its frontiers to be fulfilling professionally, challenging academically, and successful financially. The United States government has recently announced the Advancing American Kidney Health Executive Order which seeks to prioritize optimal treatments for patients with kidney disease. We are optimistic that there is a renaissance afoot in nephrology and that our field is in the process of rediscovering itself, with its best days yet to come.

The Nephrology Clinician Educator: Pathway and Future

In the medical profession, teaching has always been a routine expectation for practicing physicians. While this remains true today, in recent years, we have seen the emergence of a well-defined career pathway for those practicing physicians who want to focus on education: the clinician educator. This is a physician who is highly active in the practice of teaching, science of learning, service as a role model for young physicians, and leading educational programs. In nephrology, one can have a fruitful and fulfilling career as a lifelong clinician educator. As career interest in our specialty wanes, the clinician educator is the professional well suited to reverse this trend. In this article, we will further define the clinician educator and map out a pathway of skills needed to thrive in this rewarding career. We also provide recommendations to both educators and leaders to ensure the clinician educator pathway continues to grow.

The Electronic Medical Record and Nephrology Fellowship Education in the United States: An Opinion Survey

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

An unintended consequence of electronic medical record use in the United States is the potential effect on graduate physician training. We assessed educational burdens and benefits of electronic medical record use on United States nephrology fellows by means of a survey.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

We used an anonymous online opinion survey of all United States nephrology program directors (n=148), their faculty, and fellows. Program directors forwarded survey links to fellows and clinical faculty, indicating to how many they forwarded the link. The three surveys had parallel questions to permit comparisons.

RESULTS

Twenty-two percent of program directors (n=33) forwarded surveys to faculty (n=387) and fellows (n=216; 26% of United States nephrology fellows). Faculty and fellow response rates were 25% and 33%, respectively; 51% of fellows agreed/strongly agreed that the electronic medical record contributed positively to their education. Perceived positive effects included access flexibility and ease of obtaining laboratory/radiology results. Negative effects included copy-forward errors and excessive, irrelevant documentation. Electronic medical record function was reported to be slow, disrupted, or completely lost monthly or more by >40%, and these were significantly less likely to agree that the electronic medical record contributed positively to their education. Electronic medical record completion time demands contributed to fellow reluctance to do procedures (52%), participate in conferences (57%), prolong patient interactions (74%), and do patient-directed reading (55%). Sixty-five percent of fellows reported often/sometimes exceeding work-hours limits due to documentation time demands; 85% of faculty reported often/sometimes observing copy-forward errors. Limitations include potential nonresponse and social desirability bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Respondents reported that the electronic medical record enhances fellow education with efficient and geographically flexible patient data access, but the time demands of data and order entry reduce engagement in educational activities, contribute to work-hours violations, and diminish direct patient interactions.

A nationwide survey on clinical practice patterns and bleeding complications of percutaneous native kidney biopsy in Japan

Background

Practice patterns and bleeding complications of percutaneous native kidney biopsy (PNKB) have not recently been investigated and the Japanese Society of Nephrology performed a nationwide questionnaire survey in 2018.

Methods

The survey consisted of nine sections about PNKB: (1) general indications; (2) indications for high-risk patients; (3) informed consent; (4) pre-biopsy evaluation; (5) procedures; (6) sedation; (7) post-biopsy hemostasis, bed rest, and examinations; (8) bleeding complications; and (9) specimen processing. A supplementary survey examined bleeding requiring transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE).

Results

Overall, 220 directors of facilities (nephrology facility [NF], 168; pediatric nephrology facility [PF], 52) completed the survey. Indications, procedures, and monitoring protocols varied across facilities. Median lengths of hospital stay were 5 days in NFs and 6 days in PFs. Gauge 14, 16, 18 needles were used in 5%, 56%, 33% in NFs and 0%, 63%, 64% in PFs. Mean limits of needle passes were 5 in NFs and 4 in PFs. The bed rest period was 16–24 h in 60% of NFs and 65% of PFs. Based on 17,342 PNKBs, incidence rates of macroscopic hematuria, erythrocyte transfusion, and TAE were 3.1% (NF, 2.8%; PF, 6.2%), 0.7% (NF, 0.8%; PF, 0%), and 0.2% (NF, 0.2%; PF, 0.06%), respectively. Forty-six percent of facilities processed specimens all for light microscopy, immunofluorescence, and electron microscopy, and 21% processed for light microscopy only. Timing of bleeding requiring TAE varied among PNKB cases.

Conclusion

Wide variations in practice patterns of PNKB existed among facilities, while PNKBs were performed as safely as previously reported.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s10157-020-01869-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Percutaneous Kidney Biopsy and the Utilization of Blood Transfusion and Renal Angiography Among Hospitalized Adults

Introduction

Data on percutaneous kidney biopsy (KBx) incidence and frequencies of hemorrhagic complications among inpatients are limited.

Methods

Using nationally representative US hospitalization discharge data, we report temporal trends in inpatient KBx rates from 2007 to 2014 and estimate frequencies of, and risk factors for, utilization of packed red blood cell (pRBC) transfusion and renal angiography.

Results

From 2007 to 2014, rates of native KBx among adult inpatients increased from 8.2 to 10.0 per 100,000, while transplant KBx rates declined from 3.6 to 3.1 per 100,000. We studied 35,183 and 14,266 discharge records with native and transplant KBx. We found that 5.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.3%–6.0%) of inpatients undergoing native KBx and 4.9% (4.2%–5.5%) of those undergoing transplant KBx received a pRBC transfusion within 2 days of biopsy. Similarly, 0.6% (0.5%–0.7%) of inpatients undergoing native KBx and 0.4% (0.2%–0.5%) undergoing transplant KBx received a renal angiogram within 2 days of KBx. For inpatient native KBx, female sex, older age, higher chronic kidney disease stage, acute renal failure, lupus, vasculitis, cirrhosis, multiple myeloma/paraproteinemia, and anemia of chronic disease were independently associated with increased odds of pRBC transfusion; cirrhosis and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) were associated with increased odds, and nephrotic syndrome was associated with decreased odds, of renal angiography.

Conclusions

In this large population-based study of inpatient KBx practices, we demonstrate increasing rates of inpatient native KBx among US adults and provide accurate estimates of the frequencies of, and risk factors for, pRBC transfusion and renal angiography following inpatient KBx.

Survey of non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheter clinical practice and training

BACKGROUND

Nephrologists are placing fewer non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheters. Requiring competence for nephrology fellow graduation is controversial.

METHODS

Anonymous, online survey of all graduates from a single, military nephrology training program (n = 81; 1985-2017) and all US Nephrology program directors (n = 150).

RESULTS

Graduate response and completion rates were 59% and 100%, respectively; 93% agreed they had been adequately trained; 58% (26/45) place non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheters, independent of academic practice or time in practice, but 12/26 did ⩽5/year and 23/26 referred some or all. The most common reason for continuing non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheter placement was that it is an essential emergency procedure (92%). The single most significant barrier was time to do the procedure (49%). Program director response and completion rates were 50% and 79%, respectively. The single most important barrier to fellow competence was busyness of the service (36%), followed by disinterest (21%); 55% believed that non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheter insertion competence should be required, with 81% indicating it was an essential emergency procedure. The majority of graduates and program directors agreed that simulation training was valuable; 76% of programs employ simulation. Graduates who had simulation training and program directors with ⩽20 years of practice were significantly more likely to agree that simulation training was necessary.

CONCLUSION

Of the graduate respondents from a single training program, 58% continue to place non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheters; 55% of program directors believe non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheter procedural competence should be required. Graduates who had non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheter simulation training and younger program directors consider simulation training necessary. These findings should be considered in the discussion of non-tunneled temporary hemodialysis catheter curriculum requirements.