1
|
Perera R, Stevens R, Aronson JK, Banerjee A, Evans J, Feakins BG, Fleming S, Glasziou P, Heneghan C, Hobbs FDR, Jones L, Kurtinecz M, Lasserson DS, Locock L, McLellan J, Mihaylova B, O’Callaghan CA, Oke JL, Pidduck N, Plüddemann A, Roberts N, Schlackow I, Shine B, Simons CL, Taylor CJ, Taylor KS, Verbakel JY, Bankhead C. Long-term monitoring in primary care for chronic kidney disease and chronic heart failure: a multi-method research programme. Programme Grants Appl Res 2021. [DOI: 10.3310/pgfar09100] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
Background
Long-term monitoring is important in chronic condition management. Despite considerable costs of monitoring, there is no or poor evidence on how, what and when to monitor. The aim of this study was to improve understanding, methods, evidence base and practice of clinical monitoring in primary care, focusing on two areas: chronic kidney disease and chronic heart failure.
Objectives
The research questions were as follows: does the choice of test affect better care while being affordable to the NHS? Can the number of tests used to manage individuals with early-stage kidney disease, and hence the costs, be reduced? Is it possible to monitor heart failure using a simple blood test? Can this be done using a rapid test in a general practitioner consultation? Would changes in the management of these conditions be acceptable to patients and carers?
Design
Various study designs were employed, including cohort, feasibility study, Clinical Practice Research Datalink analysis, seven systematic reviews, two qualitative studies, one cost-effectiveness analysis and one cost recommendation.
Setting
This study was set in UK primary care.
Data sources
Data were collected from study participants and sourced from UK general practice and hospital electronic health records, and worldwide literature.
Participants
The participants were NHS patients (Clinical Practice Research Datalink: 4.5 million patients), chronic kidney disease and chronic heart failure patients managed in primary care (including 750 participants in the cohort study) and primary care health professionals.
Interventions
The interventions were monitoring with blood and urine tests (for chronic kidney disease) and monitoring with blood tests and weight measurement (for chronic heart failure).
Main outcome measures
The main outcomes were the frequency, accuracy, utility, acceptability, costs and cost-effectiveness of monitoring.
Results
Chronic kidney disease: serum creatinine testing has increased steadily since 1997, with most results being normal (83% in 2013). Increases in tests of creatinine and proteinuria correspond to their introduction as indicators in the Quality and Outcomes Framework. The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation had 2.7% greater accuracy (95% confidence interval 1.6% to 3.8%) than the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation for estimating glomerular filtration rate. Estimated annual transition rates to the next chronic kidney disease stage are ≈ 2% for people with normal urine albumin, 3–5% for people with microalbuminuria (3–30 mg/mmol) and 3–12% for people with macroalbuminuria (> 30 mg/mmol). Variability in estimated glomerular filtration rate-creatinine leads to misclassification of chronic kidney disease stage in 12–15% of tests in primary care. Glycaemic-control and lipid-modifying drugs are associated with a 6% (95% confidence interval 2% to 10%) and 4% (95% confidence interval 0% to 8%) improvement in renal function, respectively. Neither estimated glomerular filtration rate-creatinine nor estimated glomerular filtration rate-Cystatin C have utility in predicting rate of kidney function change. Patients viewed phrases such as ‘kidney damage’ or ‘kidney failure’ as frightening, and the term ‘chronic’ was misinterpreted as serious. Diagnosis of asymptomatic conditions (chronic kidney disease) was difficult to understand, and primary care professionals often did not use ‘chronic kidney disease’ when managing patients at early stages. General practitioners relied on Clinical Commissioning Group or Quality and Outcomes Framework alerts rather than National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance for information. Cost-effectiveness modelling did not demonstrate a tangible benefit of monitoring kidney function to guide preventative treatments, except for individuals with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 60–90 ml/minute/1.73 m2, aged < 70 years and without cardiovascular disease, where monitoring every 3–4 years to guide cardiovascular prevention may be cost-effective. Chronic heart failure: natriuretic peptide-guided treatment could reduce all-cause mortality by 13% and heart failure admission by 20%. Implementing natriuretic peptide-guided treatment is likely to require predefined protocols, stringent natriuretic peptide targets, relative targets and being located in a specialist heart failure setting. Remote monitoring can reduce all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalisation, and could improve quality of life. Diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care N-terminal prohormone of B-type natriuretic peptide (sensitivity, 0.99; specificity, 0.60) was better than point-of-care B-type natriuretic peptide (sensitivity, 0.95; specificity, 0.57). Within-person variation estimates for B-type natriuretic peptide and weight were as follows: coefficient of variation, 46% and coefficient of variation, 1.2%, respectively. Point-of-care N-terminal prohormone of B-type natriuretic peptide within-person variability over 12 months was 881 pg/ml (95% confidence interval 380 to 1382 pg/ml), whereas between-person variability was 1972 pg/ml (95% confidence interval 1525 to 2791 pg/ml). For individuals, monitoring provided reassurance; future changes, such as increased testing, would be acceptable. Point-of-care testing in general practice surgeries was perceived positively, reducing waiting time and anxiety. Community heart failure nurses had greater knowledge of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance than general practitioners and practice nurses. Health-care professionals believed that the cost of natriuretic peptide tests in routine monitoring would outweigh potential benefits. The review of cost-effectiveness studies suggests that natriuretic peptide-guided treatment is cost-effective in specialist settings, but with no evidence for its value in primary care settings.
Limitations
No randomised controlled trial evidence was generated. The pathways to the benefit of monitoring chronic kidney disease were unclear.
Conclusions
It is difficult to ascribe quantifiable benefits to monitoring chronic kidney disease, because monitoring is unlikely to change treatment, especially in chronic kidney disease stages G3 and G4. New approaches to monitoring chronic heart failure, such as point-of-care natriuretic peptide tests in general practice, show promise if high within-test variability can be overcome.
Future work
The following future work is recommended: improve general practitioner–patient communication of early-stage renal function decline, and identify strategies to reduce the variability of natriuretic peptide.
Study registration
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015017501, CRD42019134922 and CRD42016046902.
Funding
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 9, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rafael Perera
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Richard Stevens
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Jeffrey K Aronson
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Amitava Banerjee
- Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK
| | - Julie Evans
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Benjamin G Feakins
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Susannah Fleming
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Paul Glasziou
- Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences & Medicine, Bond University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia
| | - Carl Heneghan
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - FD Richard Hobbs
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Louise Jones
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Milena Kurtinecz
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Daniel S Lasserson
- Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Louise Locock
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Julie McLellan
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Borislava Mihaylova
- Health Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- Institute of Population Health Sciences, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | | | - Jason L Oke
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Nicola Pidduck
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Annette Plüddemann
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Nia Roberts
- Bodleian Health Care Libraries, Knowledge Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Iryna Schlackow
- Health Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Brian Shine
- Department of Clinical Biochemistry, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
| | - Claire L Simons
- Health Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Clare J Taylor
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Kathryn S Taylor
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Jan Y Verbakel
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Community Healthcare MedTech and In Vitro Diagnostics Co-operative (MIC), Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Clare Bankhead
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Schlackow I, Simons C, Oke J, Feakins B, O’Callaghan CA, Hobbs FDR, Lasserson D, Stevens RJ, Perera R, Mihaylova B. Long-term health outcomes of people with reduced kidney function in the UK: A modelling study using population health data. PLoS Med 2020; 17:e1003478. [PMID: 33326459 PMCID: PMC7769604 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003478] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/19/2019] [Revised: 12/28/2020] [Accepted: 11/30/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND People with reduced kidney function have increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. We present a policy model that simulates individuals' long-term health outcomes and costs to inform strategies to reduce risks of kidney and CVDs in this population. METHODS AND FINDINGS We used a United Kingdom primary healthcare database, the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), linked with secondary healthcare and mortality data, to derive an open 2005-2013 cohort of adults (≥18 years of age) with reduced kidney function (≥2 measures of estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <90 mL/min/1.73 m2 ≥90 days apart). Data on individuals' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics at entry and outcomes (first occurrences of stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and hospitalisation for heart failure; annual kidney disease stages; and cardiovascular and nonvascular deaths) during follow-up were extracted. The cohort was used to estimate risk equations for outcomes and develop a chronic kidney disease-cardiovascular disease (CKD-CVD) health outcomes model, a Markov state transition model simulating individuals' long-term outcomes, healthcare costs, and quality of life based on their characteristics at entry. Model-simulated cumulative risks of outcomes were compared with respective observed risks using a split-sample approach. To illustrate model value, we assess the benefits of partial (i.e., at 2013 levels) and optimal (i.e., fully compliant with clinical guidelines in 2019) use of cardioprotective medications. The cohort included 1.1 million individuals with reduced kidney function (median follow-up 4.9 years, 45% men, 19% with CVD, and 74% with only mildly decreased eGFR of 60-89 mL/min/1.73 m2 at entry). Age, kidney function status, and CVD events were the key determinants of subsequent morbidity and mortality. The model-simulated cumulative disease risks corresponded well to observed risks in participant categories by eGFR level. Without the use of cardioprotective medications, for 60- to 69-year-old individuals with mildly decreased eGFR (60-89 mL/min/1.73 m2), the model projected a further 22.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] 21.8-22.3) years of life if without previous CVD and 18.6 (18.2-18.9) years if with CVD. Cardioprotective medication use at 2013 levels (29%-44% of indicated individuals without CVD; 64%-76% of those with CVD) was projected to increase their life expectancy by 0.19 (0.14-0.23) and 0.90 (0.50-1.21) years, respectively. At optimal cardioprotective medication use, the projected health gains in these individuals increased by further 0.33 (0.25-0.40) and 0.37 (0.20-0.50) years, respectively. Limitations include risk factor measurements from the UK routine primary care database and limited albuminuria measurements. CONCLUSIONS The CKD-CVD policy model is a novel resource for projecting long-term health outcomes and assessing treatment strategies in people with reduced kidney function. The model indicates clear survival benefits with cardioprotective treatments in this population and scope for further benefits if use of these treatments is optimised.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iryna Schlackow
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Claire Simons
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Jason Oke
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Benjamin Feakins
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | | | - F. D Richard Hobbs
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Daniel Lasserson
- Warwick Medical School, Population Evidence and Technologies, University of Warwick, Warwick, United Kingdom
| | - Richard J. Stevens
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Rafael Perera
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Borislava Mihaylova
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
- Institute of Population Health Sciences, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hill NR, Fatoba ST, Oke JL, Hirst JA, O’Callaghan CA, Lasserson DS, Hobbs FDR. Global Prevalence of Chronic Kidney Disease - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PLoS One 2016; 11:e0158765. [PMID: 27383068 PMCID: PMC4934905 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158765] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1967] [Impact Index Per Article: 245.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/19/2015] [Accepted: 06/21/2016] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a global health burden with a high economic cost to health systems and is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). All stages of CKD are associated with increased risks of cardiovascular morbidity, premature mortality, and/or decreased quality of life. CKD is usually asymptomatic until later stages and accurate prevalence data are lacking. Thus we sought to determine the prevalence of CKD globally, by stage, geographical location, gender and age. A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies estimating CKD prevalence in general populations was conducted through literature searches in 8 databases. We assessed pooled data using a random effects model. Of 5,842 potential articles, 100 studies of diverse quality were included, comprising 6,908,440 patients. Global mean(95%CI) CKD prevalence of 5 stages 13·4%(11·7-15·1%), and stages 3-5 was 10·6%(9·2-12·2%). Weighting by study quality did not affect prevalence estimates. CKD prevalence by stage was Stage-1 (eGFR>90+ACR>30): 3·5% (2·8-4·2%); Stage-2 (eGFR 60-89+ACR>30): 3·9% (2·7-5·3%); Stage-3 (eGFR 30-59): 7·6% (6·4-8·9%); Stage-4 = (eGFR 29-15): 0·4% (0·3-0·5%); and Stage-5 (eGFR<15): 0·1% (0·1-0·1%). CKD has a high global prevalence with a consistent estimated global CKD prevalence of between 11 to 13% with the majority stage 3. Future research should evaluate intervention strategies deliverable at scale to delay the progression of CKD and improve CVD outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nathan R. Hill
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Samuel T. Fatoba
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Jason L. Oke
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Jennifer A. Hirst
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | | | - Daniel S. Lasserson
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - F. D. Richard Hobbs
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|