Emergency Department Use Among Adults Receiving Dialysis.

Importance: People with kidney failure receiving maintenance dialysis visit the emergency department (ED) 3 times per year on average, which is 3- to 8-fold more often than the general population. Little is known about the factors that contribute to potentially preventable ED use in this population. Objective: To identify the clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with potentially preventable ED use among patients receiving maintenance dialysis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used linked administrative health data within the Alberta Kidney Disease Network to identify adults aged 18 years or older receiving maintenance dialysis (ie, hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis) between April 1, 2010, and March 31, 2019. Patients who had been receiving dialysis for more than 90 days were followed up from cohort entry (defined as dialysis start date plus 90 days) until death, outmigration from the province, receipt of a kidney transplant, or end of study follow-up. The Andersen behavioral model of health services was used as a conceptual framework to identify variables related to health care need, predisposing factors, and enabling factors. Data were analyzed in March 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rates of all-cause ED encounters and potentially preventable ED use associated with 4 kidney disease-specific ambulatory care-sensitive conditions (hyperkalemia, heart failure, volume overload, and malignant hypertension) were calculated. Multivariable negative binomial regression models were used to examine the association between clinical and sociodemographic factors and rates of potentially preventable ED use. Results: The cohort included 4925 adults (mean [SD] age, 60.8 [15.5] years; 3071 males [62.4%]) with kidney failure receiving maintenance hemodialysis (3183 patients) or peritoneal dialysis (1742 patients) who were followed up for a mean (SD) of 2.5 (2.0) years. In all, 3877 patients had 34 029 all-cause ED encounters (3100 [95% CI, 2996-3206] encounters per 1000 person-years). Of these, 755 patients (19.5%) had 1351 potentially preventable ED encounters (114 [95% CI, 105-124] encounters per 1000 person-years). Compared with patients with a nonpreventable ED encounter, patients with a potentially preventable ED encounter were more likely to be in the lowest income quintile (38.8% vs 30.9%; P < .001); to experience heart failure (46.8% vs 39.9%; P = .001), depression (36.6% vs 32.5%; P = .03), and chronic pain (60.1% vs 54.9%; P = .01); and to have a longer duration of dialysis (3.6 vs 2.6 years; P < .001). In multivariable regression analyses, potentially preventable ED use was higher for younger adults (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.69 [95% CI, 1.33-2.15] for those aged 18 to 44 years) and patients with chronic pain (IRR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.14-1.61]), greater material deprivation (IRR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.16-2.12]), a history of hyperkalemia (IRR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.09-1.58]), and historically high ED use (ie, ≥3 ED encounters in the prior year; IRR, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.23-1.73). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of adults receiving maintenance dialysis in Alberta, Canada, among those with ED use, 1 in 5 had a potentially preventable ED encounter; reasons for such encounters were associated with both psychosocial and medical factors. The findings underscore the need for strategies that address social determinants of health to avert potentially preventable ED use in this population.

Ten-Year Trends in Lithium Prescribing in Alberta, Canada.

AIMS: Despite lithium's clinical efficacy, it is commonly thought that its use is declining. The objective of this study is to describe the new and prevalent lithium users as well as rates of discontinuation of lithium use over a 10-year period. METHODS: This study used provincial administrative health data from Alberta, Canada between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2018. Lithium prescriptions were identified within the Pharmaceutical Information Network database. Total and subgroup specific frequencies of new and prevalent lithium use were determined over the 10-year study period. Lithium discontinuation was also estimated through survival analysis. RESULTS: Between the calendar years of 2009 and 2018, 580,873 lithium prescriptions were dispensed in Alberta to 14,008 patients. The total number of new and prevalent lithium users appears to be decreasing over the 10-year timeframe, although the decline may have stopped or reversed in the latter years of the study period. Prevalent use of lithium was lowest among individuals between the ages of 18-24 years while the highest number of prevalent users were in the 50-64 age group, particularly among females. New lithium use was lowest amongst those 65 years and older. More than 60% (8,636) of patients prescribed lithium, discontinued use during the study timeframe. Lithium users between ages of 18-24 years were at the highest risk of discontinuations. CONCLUSIONS: Rather than a general decline in prescribing, trends in lithium use are dependent on age and sex. Further, the period soon after lithium initiation appears to be a key time period in which many lithium trials are abandoned. Detailed studies using primary data collection are needed to confirm and further explore these findings. These population-based results not only confirm a decline in lithium use, but also suggest that this may have stopped or even reversed. Population-based data on discontinuation pinpoint the period soon after initiation as the time when trials are most often discontinued.

Lessons learned from the Alberta Border Testing Pilot Program.

Background: During the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, countries implemented border control and quarantine measures to reduce transmission. The Alberta Border Testing Pilot Program (ABTPP) allowed international travellers entering Alberta to reduce their quarantine period following two negative COVID-19 tests. We evaluated participant experiences with the ABTPP and implementation. Method: We used a parallel convergent mixed-methods design to explore participant experiences through electronic web-based questionnaires (n = 21,089; n = 13,839) and semi-structured telephone interviews (n = 30). We evaluated implementation through three staff focus groups (n = 11). We analysed questionnaires using descriptive statistics and analysed interviews using inductive and deductive thematic analysis. We deductively coded focus group data using the 2009 Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results: Questionnaires indicated minimal issues with registration forms (91.7%), symptom reports (95.5%), and COVID-19 testing (95.7%). Most respondents (95.1%) expressed willingness to participate in the ABTPP again. Interviews revealed three themes related to participant experience: program efficiency, clarity of information, and requisite effort. Focus groups identified key implementation facilitators including the single health information system, strong stakeholder partnerships, and good communication across partnerships. Barriers included program complexity, implementation timeline, and evolving external context. Discussion: Participants reported high satisfaction with the ABTPP. Border testing programs should have high efficiency, require low effort, and use messaging that is clear and consistent. The effective implementation of border testing programs may be facilitated by strong leadership, adaptability, automated components, good communication, and simple technology. Learnings from participants and staff may help improve the implementation of border control programs for future pandemics or other emergencies. Conclusions: The ABTTP was a novel border control measure during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our evaluation of both participant and staff experiences demonstrated high levels of traveller satisfaction and identified areas for improvement that can inform the development of future border control measures.

Nurse Practitioner Care Compared with Primary Care or Nephrologist Care in Early CKD.

BACKGROUND: Early interventions in CKD have been shown to improve health outcomes; however, gaps in access to nephrology care remain common. Nurse practitioners can improve access to care; however, the quality and outcomes of nurse practitioner care for CKD are uncertain. METHODS: In this propensity score-matched cohort study, patients with CKD meeting criteria for nurse practitioner care were matched 1:1 on their propensity scores for ( 1 ) nurse practitioner care versus primary care alone and ( 2 ) nurse practitioner versus nephrologist care. Processes of care were measured within 1 year after cohort entry, and clinical outcomes were measured over 5 years of follow-up and compared between propensity score-matched groups. RESULTS: A total of 961 (99%) patients from the nurse practitioner clinic were matched on their propensity score to 961 (1%) patients receiving primary care only while 969 (100%) patients from the nurse practitioner clinic were matched to 969 (7%) patients receiving nephrologist care. After matching to patients receiving primary care alone, those receiving nurse practitioner care had greater use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blocker (82% versus 79%; absolute differences [ADs] 3.4% [95% confidence interval, 0.0% to 6.9%]) and statins (75% versus 66%; AD 9.7% [5.8% to 13.6%]), fewer prescriptions of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (10% versus 17%; AD -7.2% [-10.4% to -4.2%]), greater eGFR and albuminuria monitoring, and lower rates of all-cause hospitalization (34.1 versus 43.3; rate difference -9.2 [-14.7 to -3.8] per 100 person-years) and all-cause mortality (3.3 versus 6.0; rate difference -2.7 [-3.6 to -1.7] per 100 person-years). When matched to patients receiving nephrologist care, those receiving nurse practitioner care were also more likely to be prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers and statins, with no difference in the risks of experiencing adverse clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse practitioner care for patients with CKD was associated with better guideline-concordant care than primary care alone or nephrologist care, with clinical outcomes that were better than or equivalent to primary care alone and similar to those with care by nephrologists. PODCAST: This article contains a podcast at https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2023_12_08_CJN0000000000000305.mp3.

Laboratory testing and antihypertensive medication adherence following initial treatment of incident, uncomplicated hypertension: A real-world data analysis.

In this study on medication adherence among newly diagnosed patients with uncomplicated, incident hypertension, we conducted a retrospective cohort study using available administrative and laboratory data from April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2017 in Alberta, Canada to understand the extent to which baseline laboratory assessment and/or subsequent follow-up was associated with persistence with antihypertensive therapy. We determined the frequency of baseline and follow-up testing and compared the rates of medication persistence by patient-, neighbourhood-, and treatment-related factors. Of 103 232 patients with newly diagnosed, uncomplicated hypertension who filled their first prescription within our study timeframe, 52.5% were non-persistent within 6 months. Persistent patients were more often female and residing in neighbourhoods with higher social status (with exception to rurality). Aside from older age, the strongest predictor of persistence was performance of laboratory testing related to hypertension with an apparent effect in which higher levels of medication persistence were seen with more frequent laboratory testing. We concluded that medication persistence was far from optimal, dropping off considerably after 6 months for more than half of patients. Medication persistence is a substantial barrier to realizing the full societal benefits of antihypertensive treatment. Ongoing follow up with patients, including laboratory testing, may be a critical component of better long term treatment persistence.

The impact of vaccination status on importation of COVID-19 among international travellers.

Governments worldwide are looking for ways to safely enable international travel while mitigating the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and the associated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, few data describe the impact of vaccination on importation of COVID-19. We took advantage of the sequential introduction of two government policies in Canada to evaluate the real-world evidence of vaccine effectiveness among 30,361 international travellers arriving by air in Alberta, Canada. The proportion of COVID-19-positive results for travellers who were either fully vaccinated or partially vaccinated was 0.02% (95% CI: 0.00-0.10) (i.e. one positive case among 5,817 travellers). In contrast, 1.42% (95% CI: 1.27-1.58) of unvaccinated travellers tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (341 cases among 24,034 travellers). These findings suggest that COVID-19 vaccinations approved in Canada, substantially reduced the risk of travel-related importation of COVID-19 when combined with other public health measures. The low absolute rate of infection among fully vaccinated or partially vaccinated international travellers may inform quarantine requirements in this population.

COVID-19 infection among international travellers: a prospective analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This report estimates the risk of COVID-19 importation and secondary transmission associated with a modified quarantine programme in Canada. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective analysis of international asymptomatic travellers entering Alberta, Canada. INTERVENTIONS: All participants were required to receive a PCR COVID-19 test on arrival. If negative, participants could leave quarantine but were required to have a second test 6 or 7 days after arrival. If the arrival test was positive, participants were required to remain in quarantine for 14 days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion and rate of participants testing positive for COVID-19; number of cases of secondary transmission. RESULTS: The analysis included 9535 international travellers entering Alberta by air (N=8398) or land (N=1137) that voluntarily enrolled in the Alberta Border Testing Pilot Programme (a subset of all travellers); most (83.1%) were Canadian citizens. Among the 9310 participants who received at least one test, 200 (21.5 per 1000, 95% CI 18.6 to 24.6) tested positive. Sixty-nine per cent (138/200) of positive tests were detected on arrival (14.8 per 1000 travellers, 95% CI 12.5 to 17.5). 62 cases (6.7 per 1000 travellers, 95% CI 5.1 to 8.5; 31.0% of positive cases) were identified among participants that had been released from quarantine following a negative test result on arrival. Of 192 participants who developed symptoms, 51 (26.6%) tested positive after arrival. Among participants with positive tests, four (2.0%) were hospitalised for COVID-19; none required critical care or died. Contact tracing among participants who tested positive identified 200 contacts; of 88 contacts tested, 22 were cases of secondary transmission (14 from those testing positive on arrival and 8 from those testing positive thereafter). SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 lineage was not detected in any of the 200 positive cases. CONCLUSIONS: 21.5 per 1000 international travellers tested positive for COVID-19. Most (69%) tested positive on arrival and 31% tested positive during follow-up. These findings suggest the need for ongoing vigilance in travellers testing negative on arrival and highlight the value of follow-up testing and contact tracing to monitor and limit secondary transmission where possible.

Indirect analysis of first-line therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with activating mutations in a Japanese population.

Background: Five EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKIs) are currently available in the first-line setting for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in Japan. The aim here was to compare the relative efficacy of EGFR TKIs in the Japanese population. Materials & methods: A systematic review identified randomized controlled trials examining the efficacy of first-line EGFR TKIs. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to assess these EGFR TKI comparisons for progression-free survival (PFS). Results: A total of seven randomized controlled trials were identified and considered for network meta-analysis. Dacomitinib showed a trend toward improved PFS versus all comparators. Conclusion: Dacomitinib demonstrated a trend toward improved PFS and therefore, should be considered one of the standard first-line therapies for Japanese patients diagnosed with EGFR+ non-small-cell lung cancer.

Network meta analysis of first-line therapy for advanced EGFR mutation positive non-small-cell lung cancer: updated overall survival.

Aim: To update overall survival (OS) results from a previous network meta analysis comparing the relative clinical efficacy of epidermal growth factor receptor-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKIs) for EGFR mutation positive (EGFR+) advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Materials & methods: A Bayesian network meta analysis was conducted using updated/mature randomized controlled trial OS results in response to first-line EGFR TKI therapies. Results: Dacomitinib showed a numerical improvement of OS relative to other EGFR TKIs: afatinib (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.87; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.61-1.24), erlotinib (HR: 0.79; 95% CrI: 0.44-1.42), gefitinib (HR: 0.75; 95% CrI: 0.59-0.95) and osimertinib (HR: 0.94; 95% CrI: 0.68-1.29). Conclusion: Dacomitinib should be considered as a first-line treatment option for patients diagnosed with advanced EGFR+ NSCLC.