Adherence to transition guidelines in European paediatric nephrology units.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing focus on the problems involved in the transition and transfer of young adult patients from paediatric to adult renal units. This situation was addressed by the 2011 International Pediatric Nephrology Association/International Society of Nephrology (IPNA/ISN) Consensus Statement on transition. METHODS: We performed a survey of transition practices of 15 paediatric nephrology units across Europe 2 years after publication of the consensus statement. RESULTS: Two thirds of units were aware of the guidelines, and one third had integrated them into their transition practice. Forty-seven per cent of units transfer five or fewer patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 5 per year to a median of five adult centres, with higher numbers of CKD stages 2-4 patients. Seventy-three per cent of units were required by the hospital or government to transfer patients by a certain age. Eighty per cent of units commenced transition planning after the patient turned 15 years of age and usually within 1-2 years of the compulsory transfer age. Forty-seven per cent of units used a transition or transfer clinic. Prominent barriers to effective transition were patient and parent attachment to the paediatric unit and difficulty in allowing the young person to perform self-care. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas awareness of the consensus statement is suboptimal, it has had some impact on practice. Adult nephrologists receive transferred patients infrequently, and the process of transition is introduced too late by paediatricians. Government- and hospital-driven age-based transfer policies distract focus from the achievement of competencies in self care. Variable use of transition clinics, written patient information and support groups is probably due to economic and human-resource limitations. The consensus statement provides a standard for evolving and evaluating transition policies jointly agreed upon by paediatric and adult units.

Factors influencing choice of renal replacement therapy in European paediatric nephrology units.

BACKGROUND: Many factors may impact upon choice of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for children and adolescents, including patient and family choice, patient size and distance from the renal centre as well as logistic issues such as facilities and staffing at the unit. We report a survey of factors influencing treatment choice in 14 European paediatric nephrology units. METHODS: A questionnaire was developed by consensus and completed by 14 members of the European Paediatric Dialysis Working Group on facilities, staffing and family assessments impacting on choice of therapy as well as choice of therapy for 97 patients commencing initial RRT in 2011. RESULTS: All units offered all modalities of RRT, but there were limitations for pre-emptive transplantation (PET) and largely adult surgical dependence for creation of arteriovenous fistulae and transplantation. The average waiting time for a deceased donor kidney was 18.5 (range 3-36) months. Full time dietetic support was available in six of the 14 units. There was no social worker, psychology, play therapy or teaching support in three, two, seven and four units, respectively. Assessment by other members of the multidisciplinary team and home visits before choice of therapy was carried out in 50 % of units, and although all patients were discussed at team meetings, the medical opinion predominated. In terms of types of RRT, 50 % of patients were commenced on chronic peritoneal dialysis (PD), 34 % on haemodialysis (HD) and 16 % underwent pre-emptive transplantation (PET). Chronic PD predominated in patients aged <5 years and HD predominated in those aged >10 years. Patient and family choice and age or size of patient were predominant factors in choice of therapy with a predictable decline in renal function favouring PET and social factors HD. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic peritoneal dialysis predominated as primary choice of RRT, especially in younger children. The PET rates remain low. The influence of surgeons predominanted, and national transplant rules may be significant. Most units had insufficient multiprofessional support, which may impact upon initial choice of therapy as well as sustaining families through RRT.