RESUMEN
The contribution of chronic kidney disease (CKD) towards the risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD) is magnified with co-existing type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Lipids are a modifiable risk factor and good lipid management offers improved outcomes for people with diabetic kidney disease (DKD).The primary purpose of this guideline, written by the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) and UK Kidney Association (UKKA) working group, is to provide practical recommendations on lipid management for members of the multidisciplinary team involved in the care of adults with DKD.
Asunto(s)
Nefropatías Diabéticas , Humanos , Nefropatías Diabéticas/terapia , Adulto , Reino Unido/epidemiología , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/terapia , Lípidos/sangre , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicaciones , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/terapia , Inhibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Reductasas/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Rates of peritoneal dialysis (PD) have been traditionally low in Northern Ireland. With rising numbers of patients reaching end-stage kidney disease, PD is a more cost-effective treatment than haemodialysis and aligns with international goals to increase home-based dialysis options. The aim of our study was to highlight how a service reconfiguration bundle expanded access to PD in Northern Ireland. METHODS: The service reconfiguration bundle consisted of the appointment of a surgical lead, a dedicated interventional radiologist for fluoroscopically guided PD catheter insertion, and a nephrology-led ultrasound-guided PD catheter insertion service in an area of particular need. All patients in Northern Ireland who had a PD catheter inserted in the year following service reconfigurations were included and prospectively followed up for one-year. Patient demographics, PD catheter insertion technique, setting of procedure, and outcome data were summarised. RESULTS: The number of patients receiving PD catheter insertion doubled to 66 in the year following service reconfigurations. The range of approaches to PD catheter insertion (laparoscopic n = 41, percutaneous n = 24 and open n = 1) allowed a wide range of patients to benefit from PD. Six patients had emergency PD catheter insertion, with four receiving urgent or early start PD. Nearly half (48%, 29/60) of the PD catheters inserted electively were in smaller elective hubs rather than the regional unit. A total of 97% of patients successfully started PD. Patients who experienced percutaneous PD catheter insertion were older [median age 76 (range 37-88) vs. 56 (range 18-84), p < 0.0001] and had less previous abdominal surgery than patients who experienced laparoscopic PD catheter insertion (25%, 6/24 vs. 54%, 22/41, p = 0.05). DISCUSSION: Through a service reconfiguration bundle, we were able to double our annual incident PD population. This study highlights how flexible models of service delivery introduced as a bundle can quickly deliver expanded access to PD and home therapy.
RESUMEN
Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) accounts for >40% cases of chronic kidney disease (CKD) globally. Hypertension is a major risk factor for progression of DKD and the high incidence of cardiovascular disease and mortality in these people. Meticulous management of hypertension is therefore crucial to slow down the progression of DKD and reduce cardiovascular risk. Randomized controlled trial evidence differs in type 1 and type 2 diabetes and in different stages of DKD in terms of target blood pressure (BP). Renin-angiotensin blocking agents reduce progression of DKD and cardiovascular events in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes, albeit differently according to the stage of CKD. There is emerging evidence for the benefit of sodium glucose cotransporter 2, nonsteroidal selective mineralocorticoid antagonists, and endothelin-A receptor antagonists in slowing progression and reducing cardiovascular events in DKD. This UK guideline, developed jointly by diabetologists and nephrologists, has reviewed all available current evidence regarding the management of hypertension in DKD to produce a set of comprehensive individualized recommendations for BP control and the use of antihypertensive agents according to age, type of diabetes, and stage of CKD (https://ukkidney.org/sites/renal.org/files/Management-of-hypertension-and-RAAS-blockade-in-adults-with-DKD.pdf). A succinct summary of the guideline, including an infographic, is presented here.
RESUMEN
A significant percentage of people with diabetes develop chronic kidney disease and diabetes is also a leading cause of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). The term diabetic kidney disease (DKD) includes both diabetic nephropathy (DN) and diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease (DM CKD). DKD is associated with high morbidity and mortality, which are predominantly related to cardiovascular disease. Hyperglycaemia is a modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular complications and progression of DKD. Recent clinical trials of people with DKD have demonstrated improvement in clinical outcomes with sodium glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors. SGLT-2 inhibitors have significantly reduced progression of DKD and onset of ESKD and these reno-protective effects are independent of glucose lowering. At the time of this update Canagliflozin and Dapagliflozin have been approved for delaying the progression of DKD. The Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) and UK Kidney Association (UKKA) Diabetic Kidney Disease Clinical Speciality Group have undertaken a literature review and critical appraisal of the available evidence to inform clinical practice guidelines for management of hyperglycaemia in adults with DKD. This 2021 guidance is for the variety of clinicians who treat people with DKD, including GPs and specialists in diabetes, cardiology and nephrology.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Nefropatías Diabéticas , Hiperglucemia , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica , Inhibidores del Cotransportador de Sodio-Glucosa 2 , Adulto , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/terapia , Nefropatías Diabéticas/complicaciones , Femenino , Glucosa , Humanos , Hiperglucemia/complicaciones , Hiperglucemia/tratamiento farmacológico , Hiperglucemia/prevención & control , Masculino , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/complicaciones , Sociedades Médicas , Inhibidores del Cotransportador de Sodio-Glucosa 2/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
Post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM) is common after solid organ transplantation (SOT) and associated with increased morbidity and mortality for allograft recipients. Despite the significant burden of disease, there is a paucity of literature with regards to detection, prevention and management. Evidence from the general population with diabetes may not be translatable to the unique context of SOT. In light of emerging clinical evidence and novel anti-diabetic agents, there is an urgent need for updated guidance and recommendations in this high-risk cohort. The Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) and Renal Association (RA) Diabetic Kidney Disease Clinical Speciality Group has undertaken a systematic review and critical appraisal of the available evidence. Areas of focus are; (1) epidemiology, (2) pathogenesis, (3) detection, (4) management, (5) modification of immunosuppression, (6) prevention, and (7) PTDM in the non-renal setting. Evidence-graded recommendations are provided for the detection, management and prevention of PTDM, with suggested areas for future research and potential audit standards. The guidelines are endorsed by Diabetes UK, the British Transplantation Society and the Royal College of Physicians of London. The full guidelines are available freely online for the diabetes, renal and transplantation community using the link below. The aim of this review article is to introduce an abridged version of this new clinical guideline ( https://abcd.care/sites/abcd.care/files/site_uploads/Resources/Position-Papers/ABCD-RA%20PTDM%20v14.pdf).
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus/etiología , Medicina Interna , Nefrología , Trasplante de Órganos/efectos adversos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/terapia , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Sociedades Médicas , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus/terapia , Humanos , Terapia de Inmunosupresión/métodos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiologíaRESUMEN
Chronic kidney disease (CKD), a collective term for many causes of progressive renal failure, is increasing worldwide due to ageing, obesity and diabetes. However, these factors cannot explain the many environmental clusters of renal disease that are known to occur globally. This study uses data from the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) including CKD of uncertain aetiology (CKDu) to investigate environmental factors in Belfast, UK. Urbanisation has been reported to have an increasing impact on soils. Using an urban soil geochemistry database of elemental concentrations of potentially toxic elements (PTEs), we investigated the association of the standardised incidence rates (SIRs) of both CKD and CKD of uncertain aetiology (CKDu) with environmental factors (PTEs), controlling for social deprivation. A compositional data analysis approach was used through balances (a special class of log contrasts) to identify elemental balances associated with CKDu. A statistically significant relationship was observed between CKD with the social deprivation measures of employment, income and education (significance levels of 0.001, 0.01 and 0.001, respectively), which have been used as a proxy for socio-economic factors such as smoking. Using three alternative regression methods (linear, generalised linear and Tweedie models), the elemental balances of Cr/Ni and As/Mo were found to produce the largest correlation with CKDu. Geogenic and atmospheric pollution deposition, traffic and brake wear emissions have been cited as sources for these PTEs which have been linked to kidney damage. This research, thus, sheds light on the increasing global burden of CKD and, in particular, the environmental and anthropogenic factors that may be linked to CKDu, particularly environmental PTEs linked to urbanisation.
Asunto(s)
Contaminación Ambiental/análisis , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/epidemiología , Contaminantes del Suelo/análisis , Urbanización , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Humanos , Incidencia , Persona de Mediana Edad , Suelo/química , Reino Unido , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Kidney transplant recipients are at increased susceptibility to many viral infections leading to justifiable anxiety about the effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We performed literature searches from multiple resources in April and August 2020 for relevant English and Chinese literature. Abstracts were screened, followed by full-text review with data extraction of reports that included at least 20 kidney transplant recipients with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and completed outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty studies had sufficient data, which we have summarized. Studies were predominantly descriptive and came from France, Italy, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, and United States. Quality assessment demonstrated limitations in selection of comparison groups and controlling for additional factors. Mortality rates from published studies were variable. Based on early data early from Spain, 46% of patients who developed COVID-19 within 60 days of transplantation died. Acute kidney injury was common, and mycophenolate was discontinued in most patients. CONCLUSION: Given the rapid global spread of COVID-19, reliable evidence is needed to inform public health policies. Hospitalized kidney transplant recipients with COVID-19 are at a high risk of death in early reports but interpretation of these data requires caution, as studies were susceptible to period effects. Reassuringly, the quality of observational data is improving. Detailed and comprehensive data collection through linked registries will be necessary to conduct accurate analyses of risk factors for adverse outcomes, not least given the risks of stopping imunosuppression. This report highlights the early mortality excess in transplant recipients but medium- and longer-term outcomes remain uncertain and merit careful investigation.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Despite the presence of a universal health care system, it is unclear if there is intercenter variation in access to kidney transplantation in the United Kingdom. This study aims to assess whether equity exists in access to kidney transplantation in the United Kingdom after adjustment for patient-specific factors and center practice patterns. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: In this prospective, observational cohort study including all 71 United Kingdom kidney centers, incident RRT patients recruited between November 2011 and March 2013 as part of the Access to Transplantation and Transplant Outcome Measures study were analyzed to assess preemptive listing (n=2676) and listing within 2 years of starting dialysis (n=1970) by center. RESULTS: Seven hundred and six participants (26%) were listed preemptively, whereas 585 (30%) were listed within 2 years of commencing dialysis. The interquartile range across centers was 6%-33% for preemptive listing and 25%-40% for listing after starting dialysis. Patient factors, including increasing age, most comorbidities, body mass index >35 kg/m2, and lower socioeconomic status, were associated with a lower likelihood of being listed and accounted for 89% and 97% of measured intercenter variation for preemptive listing and listing within 2 years of starting dialysis, respectively. Asian (odds ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.33 to 0.72) and Black (odds ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.26 to 0.71) participants were both associated with reduced access to preemptive listing; however Asian participants were associated with a higher likelihood of being listed after starting dialysis (odds ratio, 1.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.12 to 1.79). As for center factors, being registered at a transplanting center (odds ratio, 3.1; 95% confidence interval, 2.36 to 4.07) and a universal approach to discussing transplantation (odds ratio, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.08 to 1.78) were associated with higher preemptive listing, whereas using a written protocol was associated negatively with listing within 2 years of starting dialysis (odds ratio, 0.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.58 to 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: Patient case mix accounts for most of the intercenter variation seen in access to transplantation in the United Kingdom, with practice patterns also contributing some variation. Socioeconomic inequity exists despite having a universal health care system.
Asunto(s)
Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Trasplante de Riñón/estadística & datos numéricos , Listas de Espera , Adolescente , Adulto , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Pueblo Asiatico/estadística & datos numéricos , Población Negra/estadística & datos numéricos , Índice de Masa Corporal , Comorbilidad , Femenino , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/etnología , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Estudios Prospectivos , Diálisis Renal , Clase Social , Reino Unido , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
AIM: To assess the comparative effects of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, sulphonylureas (SUs) and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors on cardiometabolic risk factors in routine care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using primary care data on 10 631 new users of SUs, SGLT2 inhibitors or DPP-4 inhibitors added to metformin, obtained from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, we created propensity-score matched cohorts and used linear mixed models to describe changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), systolic blood pressure (BP) and body mass index (BMI) over 96 weeks. RESULTS: HbA1c levels fell substantially after treatment intensification for all drugs: mean change at week 12: SGLT2 inhibitors: -15.2 mmol/mol (95% confidence interval [CI] -16.9, -13.5); SUs: -14.3 mmol/mol (95% CI -15.5, -13.2); and DPP-4 inhibitors: -11.9 mmol/mol (95% CI -13.1, -10.6). Systolic BP fell for SGLT2 inhibitor users throughout follow-up, but not for DPP-4 inhibitor or SU users: mean change at week 12: SGLT2 inhibitors: -2.3 mmHg (95% CI -3.8, -0.8); SUs: -0.8 mmHg (95% CI -1.9, +0.4); and DPP-4 inhibitors: -0.9 mmHg (95% CI -2.1,+0.2). BMI decreased for SGLT2 inhibitor and DPP-4 inhibitor users, but not SU users: mean change at week 12: SGLT2 inhibitors: -0.7 kg/m2 (95% CI -0.9, -0.5); SUs: 0.0 kg/m2 (95% CI -0.3, +0.2); and DPP-4 inhibitors: -0.3 kg/m2 (95% CI -0.5, -0.1). eGFR fell at 12 weeks for SGLT2 inhibitor and DPP-4 inhibitor users. At 60 weeks, the fall in eGFR from baseline was similar for each drug class. CONCLUSIONS: In routine care, SGLT2 inhibitors had greater effects on cardiometabolic risk factors than SUs. Routine care data closely replicated the effects of diabetes drugs on physiological variables measured in clinical trials.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Inhibidores de la Dipeptidil-Peptidasa IV , Metformina , Inhibidores del Cotransportador de Sodio-Glucosa 2 , Simportadores , Estudios de Cohortes , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiología , Inhibidores de la Dipeptidil-Peptidasa IV/efectos adversos , Dipeptidil-Peptidasas y Tripeptidil-Peptidasas , Glucosa , Humanos , Hipoglucemiantes/efectos adversos , Metformina/efectos adversos , Atención Primaria de Salud , Sodio , Inhibidores del Cotransportador de Sodio-Glucosa 2/uso terapéutico , Reino Unido/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Limited health literacy is common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and has been variably associated with adverse clinical outcomes. The prevalence of limited health literacy is lower in kidney transplant recipients than in individuals starting dialysis, suggesting selection of patients with higher health literacy for transplantation. We investigated the relationship between limited health literacy and clinical outcomes, including access to kidney transplantation, in a prospective UK cohort study of 2,274 incident dialysis patients aged 18-75 years. Limited health literacy was defined by a validated Single Item Literacy Screener (SILS). Multivariable regression was used to test for association with outcomes after adjusting for age, sex, socioeconomic status (educational level and car ownership), ethnicity, first language, primary renal diagnosis, and comorbidity. In fully adjusted analyses, limited health literacy was not associated with mortality, late presentation to nephrology, dialysis modality, haemodialysis vascular access, or pre-emptive kidney transplant listing, but was associated with reduced likelihood of listing for a deceased-donor transplant (hazard ratio [HR] 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-0.90), receiving a living-donor transplant (HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.19-0.88), or receiving a transplant from any donor type (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.44-0.96). Limited health literacy is associated with reduced access to kidney transplantation, independent of patient demographics, socioeconomic status, and comorbidity. Interventions to ameliorate the effects of low health literacy may improve access to kidney transplantation.
Asunto(s)
Alfabetización en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Trasplante de Riñón/estadística & datos numéricos , Selección de Paciente , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Diálisis Renal/estadística & datos numéricos , Clase Social , Factores de Tiempo , Listas de EsperaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To understand the patient characteristics associated with treatment choice at the first treatment intensification for type 2 diabetes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a noninterventional study, using UK electronic primary care records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. We included adults treated with metformin monotherapy between January 2000 and July 2017. The outcome of interest was the drug prescribed at first intensification between 2014 and 2017. We used multinomial logistic regression to calculate the ORs for associations between the drugs and patient characteristics. RESULTS: In total, 14,146 people started treatment with an intensification drug. Younger people were substantially more likely to be prescribed sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is), than sulfonylureas (SUs): OR for SGLT2i prescription for those aged <30 years was 2.47 (95% CI 1.39-4.39) compared with those aged 60-70 years. Both overweight and obesity were associated with greater odds of being prescribed dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP4i) or SGLT2i. People of non-white ethnicity were less likely to be prescribed SGLT2i or DPP4i: compared with white patients, the OR of being prescribed SGLT2i among South Asians is 0.60 (95% CI 0.42-0.85), and for black people, the OR is 0.54 (95% CI 0.30-0.97). Lower socioeconomic status was also independently associated with reduced odds of being prescribed SGLT2is. CONCLUSION: Both clinical and demographic factors are associated with prescribing at the first stage of treatment intensification, with older and non-white people less likely to receive new antidiabetic treatments. Our results suggest that the selection of treatment options used at the first stage of treatment intensification for type 2 diabetes is not driven by clinical need alone.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Guidelines for the use of drugs for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have changed since 2000, and new classes of drug have been introduced. Our aim was to describe how drug choice at initiation and first stage of intensification have changed over this period, and to what extent prescribing was in accord with clinical guidelines, including adherence to recommendations regarding kidney function. DESIGN: Repeated cross-sectional study. SETTING: UK electronic primary care health records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. PARTICIPANTS: Adults initiating treatment with a drug for T2DM between January 2000 and July 2017. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were the proportion of each class of T2DM drug prescribed for initiation and first-stage intensification in each year. We also examined drug prescribing by kidney function and country within the UK. RESULTS: Of 280 241 people initiating treatment with T2DM drugs from 2000 to 2017, 73% (204 238/280 241) initiated metformin, 15% (42 288/280 241) a sulfonylurea, 5% (12 956/280 241) with metformin and sulfonylurea dual therapy and 7% (20 759/280 241) started other options. Clinicians have increasingly prescribed metformin at initiation: by 2017 this was 89% (2475/2778) of drug initiations. Among people with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of ≤30 mL/min/1.73 m2, the most common drug at initiation was a sulfonylurea, 58% (659/1135). In 2000, sulfonylureas were the predominant drug at the first stage of drug intensification (87%, 534/615) but by 2017 this fell to 30% (355/1183) as the use of newer drug classes increased. In 2017, new prescriptions for dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) and sodium/glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) accounted for 42% (502/1183) and 22% (256/1183) of intensification drugs, respectively. Uptake of new classes differs by country with DPP4is and SGLT2is prescribed more in Northern Ireland and Wales than England or Scotland. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show markedly changing prescribing patterns for T2DM between 2000 and 2017, largely consistent with clinical guidelines.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipoglucemiantes/uso terapéutico , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/tendencias , Atención Primaria de Salud , Adulto , Anciano , Estudios Transversales , Inhibidores de la Dipeptidil-Peptidasa IV/uso terapéutico , Quimioterapia Combinada , Inglaterra , Femenino , Tasa de Filtración Glomerular , Adhesión a Directriz/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Insulina/uso terapéutico , Masculino , Metformina/uso terapéutico , Persona de Mediana Edad , Irlanda del Norte , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Escocia , Inhibidores del Cotransportador de Sodio-Glucosa 2/uso terapéutico , Compuestos de Sulfonilurea/uso terapéutico , Reino Unido , GalesRESUMEN
CONTEXT: Patients with end-stage kidney disease have a high mortality rate and disease burden. Despite this, many do not speak with health care professionals about end-of-life issues. Advance care planning is recommended in this context but is complex and challenging. We carried out a realist review to identify factors affecting its implementation. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study are 1) to identify implementation theories; 2) to identify factors that help or hinder implementation; and 3) to develop theory on how the intervention may work. METHODS: We carried out a systematic realist review, searching seven electronic databases: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect. RESULTS: Sixty-two papers were included in the review. CONCLUSION: We identified two intervention stages-1) training for health care professionals that addresses concerns, optimizes skills, and clarifies processes and 2) use of documentation and processes that are simple, individually tailored, culturally appropriate, and involve surrogates. These processes work as patients develop trust in professionals, participate in discussions, and clarify values and beliefs about their condition. This leads to greater congruence between patients and surrogates; increased quality of communication between patients and professionals; and increased completion of advance directives. Advance care planning is hindered by lack of training; administrative complexities; pressures of routine care; patients overestimating life expectancy; and when patients, family, and/or clinical staff are reluctant to initiate discussions. It is more likely to succeed where organizations treat it as core business; when the process is culturally appropriate and takes account of patient perceptions; and when patients are willing to consider death and dying with suitably trained staff.
Asunto(s)
Planificación Anticipada de Atención , Fallo Renal Crónico , Humanos , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapiaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: It is well recognized that there is significant variation between centers in access to kidney transplantation. In the absence of high-grade evidence, it is unclear whether variation is due to patient case mix, other center factors, or individual clinician decisions. This study sought consensus between UK clinicians on factors that should influence access to kidney transplantation. METHODS: As part of the Access to Transplantation and Transplant Outcome Measures project, consultant nephrologists and transplant surgeons in 71 centers were invited to participate in a Delphi study involving 2 rounds. During rounds 1 and 2, participants rated their agreement to 29 statements covering 8 topics regarding kidney transplantation. A stakeholder meeting was used to discuss statements of interest after the 2 rounds. RESULTS: In total, 122 nephrologists and 16 transplant surgeons from 45 units participated in rounds 1 and 2. After 2 rounds, 12 of 29 statements reached consensus. Fifty people participated in the stakeholder meeting. After the stakeholder meeting, a further 4 statements reached agreement. Of the 8 topics covered, consensus was reached in 6: use of a transplant protocol, patient age, body mass index, patient compliance with treatment, cardiac workup, and use of multidisciplinary meetings. Consensus was not reached on screening for malignancy and use of peripheral Doppler studies. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi process identified factors upon which clinicians agreed and areas where consensus could not be achieved. The findings should inform national guidelines to support decision making in the absence of high quality evidence and to guide areas that warrant future research.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite the availability of guidelines for the evaluation of candidates for renal transplantation, variation in access to transplantation exists. This national survey investigates whether center variation exists in the assessment of patients for renal transplantation in the United Kingdom. METHODS: An online survey, informed by qualitative interviews, was distributed to all UK renal centers. This survey examined center approaches to chronic kidney disease service provision, transplant recipient assessment, education provision, and waitlisting decision making processes. Center reevaluation policies for patients already listed and priorities for future development were also examined. RESULTS: All 71 renal centers responded. Of these, 83% reviewed predialysis patients in a low clearance clinic. In 26% of the centers, transplantation was not discussed as a treatment option with all patients. Fourteen centers reported having a dedicated transplant assessment clinic, whereas 28% did not have a formal assessment protocol. Age was an exclusion criterion for listing in 3 centers, all of which had a cutoff at 75 years. Eighty-three percent of the centers excluded patients with a high body mass index. Cardiac investigations were risk-stratified in 90% of centers. Surgical involvement varied with 11% of centers listing patients without formal surgical review. There was no formal protocol in place to reevaluate listed patients in 62% of centers. CONCLUSIONS: There is wide variation in UK practice patterns for listing patients for renal transplantation, though its impact on access to transplantation is unclear. The extent to which center-specific and patient-specific factors affect access to transplantation requires further analysis in a prospective cohort of patients.
Asunto(s)
Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/tendencias , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/tendencias , Trasplante de Riñón/tendencias , Nefrólogos/tendencias , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/tendencias , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/cirugía , Cirujanos/tendencias , Listas de Espera , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Femenino , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud , Humanos , Trasplante de Riñón/efectos adversos , Masculino , Educación del Paciente como Asunto/tendencias , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/fisiopatología , Factores de Riesgo , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) provides more timely access to transplantation and better clinical outcomes than deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT). This study investigated disparities in the utilization of LDKT in the UK. METHODS: A total of 2055 adults undergoing kidney transplantation between November 2011 and March 2013 were prospectively recruited from all 23 UK transplant centres as part of the Access to Transplantation and Transplant Outcome Measures (ATTOM) study. Recipient variables independently associated with receipt of LDKT versus DDKT were identified. RESULTS: Of the 2055 patients, 807 (39.3%) received LDKT and 1248 (60.7%) received DDKT. Multivariable modelling demonstrated a significant reduction in the likelihood of LDKT for older age {odds ratio [OR] 0.11 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08-0.17], P < 0.0001 for 65-75 years versus 18-34 years}; Asian ethnicity [OR 0.55 (95% CI 0.39-0.77), P = 0.0006 versus White]; Black ethnicity [OR 0.64 (95% CI 0.42-0.99), P = 0.047 versus White]; divorced, separated or widowed [OR 0.63 (95% CI 0.46-0.88), P = 0.030 versus married]; no qualifications [OR 0.55 (95% CI 0.42-0.74), P < 0.0001 versus higher education qualifications]; no car ownership [OR 0.51 (95% CI 0.37-0.72), P = 0.0001] and no home ownership [OR 0.65 (95% CI 0.85-0.79), P = 0.002]. The odds of LDKT varied significantly between countries in the UK. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing kidney transplantation in the UK, there are significant age, ethnic, socio-economic and geographic disparities in the utilization of LDKT. Further work is needed to explore the potential for targeted interventions to improve equity in living donor transplantation.
Asunto(s)
Selección de Donante , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Trasplante de Riñón , Donadores Vivos , Obtención de Tejidos y Órganos , Adolescente , Adulto , Negro o Afroamericano , Anciano , Barreras de Comunicación , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Reino Unido , Población Blanca , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Pharmacoepidemiology studies are increasingly used for research into safe prescribing in chronic kidney disease (CKD). Typically, patients prescribed a drug are compared with patients who are not on the drug and outcomes are compared to draw conclusions about the drug effects. This review article aims to provide the reader with a framework to critically appraise such research. A key concern in pharmacoepidemiology studies is confounding, in that patients who have worse health status are prescribed more drugs or different agents and their worse outcomes are attributed to the drugs not the health status. It may be challenging to adjust for this using statistical methods unless a comparison group with a similar health status but who are prescribed a different (comparison) drug(s) is identified. Another challenge in pharmacoepidemiology is outcome misclassification, as people who are more ill engage more often with the health service, leading to earlier diagnosis in people who are frequent attenders. Finally, using replication cohorts with the same methodology in the same type of health system does not ensure that findings are more robust. We use two recent papers that investigated the association of proton pump inhibitor drugs with CKD as a device to review the main pitfalls of pharmacoepidemiology studies and how to attempt to mitigate against potential biases that can occur.
Asunto(s)
Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones/uso terapéutico , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/epidemiología , Causalidad , Factores de Confusión Epidemiológicos , Humanos , Nefrología , Farmacoepidemiología , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Proyectos de InvestigaciónRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To explore how patients who are wait-listed for or who have received a kidney transplant understand the current UK kidney allocation system, and their views on ways to allocate kidneys in the future. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semistructured interviews and thematic analysis based on a pragmatic approach. PARTICIPANTS: 10 deceased-donor kidney transplant recipients, 10 live-donor kidney transplant recipients, 12 participants currently wait-listed for a kidney transplant and 4 participants whose kidney transplant failed. SETTING: Semistructured telephone interviews conducted with participants in their own homes across the UK. RESULTS: Three main themes were identified: uncertainty of knowledge of the allocation scheme; evaluation of the system and participant suggestions for future allocation schemes. Most participants identified human leucocyte anitgen matching as a factor in determining kidney allocation, but were often uncertain of the accuracy of their knowledge. In the absence of information that would allow a full assessment, the majority of participants consider that the current system is effective. A minority of participants were concerned about the perceived lack of transparency of the general decision-making processes within the scheme. Most participants felt that people who are younger and those better matched to the donor kidney should be prioritised for kidney allocation, but in contrast to the current scheme, less priority was considered appropriate for longer waiting patients. Some non-medical themes were also discussed, such as whether parents of dependent children should be prioritised for allocation, and whether patients with substance abuse problems be deprioritised. CONCLUSIONS: Our participants held differing views about the most important factors for kidney allocation, some of which were in contrast to the current scheme. Patient participation in reviewing future allocation policies will provide insight as to what is considered acceptable to patients and inform healthcare staff of the kinds of information patients would find most useful.
Asunto(s)
Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Fallo Renal Crónico/cirugía , Trasplante de Riñón , Prioridad del Paciente , Listas de Espera , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Investigación Cualitativa , Asignación de Recursos , Obtención de Tejidos y Órganos , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines support an early invasive approach after NSTE-ACS in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). There is no direct randomised controlled trial evidence in the CKD population, and whether the benefit of an early invasive approach is maintained across the spectrum of severity of CKD remains controversial. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the association between an early invasive approach and all-cause mortality in patients with CKD. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (1990-May 2015) and article reference lists. Data describing study design, participants, invasive management strategies, renal function, all-cause mortality and risk of bias were extracted. RESULTS: 3,861 potentially relevant studies were identified. Ten studies, representing data on 147,908 individuals with NSTE-ACS met the inclusion criteria. Qualitative heterogeneity in the definitions of early invasive approach, comparison groups and renal dysfunction existed. Meta-analysis of the RCT derived and observational data were generally supportive of an early invasive approach in CKD (RR0.76 (95% CI 0.49-1.17) and RR0.50 (95%CI 0.42-0.59) respectively). Meta-analysis of the observational studies demonstrated a large degree of heterogeneity (I2 79%) driven in part by study size and heterogeneity across various kidney function levels. CONCLUSIONS: The observational data support that an early invasive approach after NSTE-ACS confers a survival benefit in those with early-moderate CKD. Local opportunities for quality improvement should be sought. Those with severe CKD and the dialysis population are high risk and under-studied. Novel and inclusive approaches for CKD and dialysis patients in cardiovascular clinical trials are needed.