Context Matters: A Qualitative Synthesis of Adherence Literature for People on Hemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with ESKD treated with hemodialysis in the United States have persistently higher rates of nonadherence compared with patients in other developed countries. Nonadherence is associated with an increased risk of death and higher medical expenditure. There is an urgent need to address it with feasible, effective interventions as the prevalence of patients on hemodialysis in the United States continues to grow. However, published adherence interventions demonstrate limited long-term efficacy. METHODS: We conducted a synthesis of qualitative studies on adherence to hemodialysis treatment, medications, and fluid and dietary restrictions to identify gaps in published adherence interventions, searching PubMed, CINAHL, PsychInfo, Embase, and Web of Science databases. We analyzed qualitative data with a priori codes derived from the World Health Organization's adherence framework and subsequent codes from thematic analysis. RESULTS: We screened 1775 articles and extracted qualitative data from 12. The qualitative data revealed 20 factors unique to hemodialysis across the World Health Organization's five dimensions of adherence. In addition, two overarching themes emerged from the data: (1) adherence in the context of patients' whole lives and (2) dialysis treatment as a double-edged sword. Patient-level factors reflected in the qualitative data extended beyond knowledge about hemodialysis treatment or motivation to adhere to treatment. Patients described a profound grieving process over the loss of their "old self" that impacted adherence. They also navigated complex challenges that could be exacerbated by social determinants of health as they balanced treatment, life tasks, and social roles. CONCLUSIONS: This review adds to the growing evidence that one-size-fits-all approaches to improving adherence among patients on hemodialysis are inadequate. Adherence may improve when routine care incorporates patient context and provides ongoing support to patients and families as they navigate the logistical, physical, and psychological hardships of living with dialysis. New research is urgently needed to guide a change in course.

Effects of antihypertensives, lipid-modifying drugs, glycaemic control drugs and sodium bicarbonate on the progression of stages 3 and 4 chronic kidney disease in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of drug interventions that may modify the progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in adults with CKD stages 3 and 4. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Health Technology Assessment, Science Citation Index, Social Sciences Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index and Clinical Trials Register, from March 1999 to July 2018, we identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of drugs for hypertension, lipid modification, glycaemic control and sodium bicarbonate, compared with placebo, no drug or a drug from another class, in ≥40 adults with CKD stages 3 and/or 4, with at least 2 years of follow-up and reporting renal function (primary outcome), proteinuria, adverse events, maintenance dialysis, transplantation, cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality or all-cause mortality. Two reviewers independently screened citations and extracted data. For continuous outcomes, we used the ratio of means (ROM) at the end of the trial in random-effects meta-analyses. We assessed methodological quality with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and confidence in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. RESULTS: We included 35 RCTs and over 51 000 patients. Data were limited, and heterogeneity varied. Final renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate) was 6% higher in those taking glycaemic control drugs (ROM 1.06, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.10, I2=0%, low GRADE confidence) and 4% higher in those taking lipid-modifying drugs (ROM 1.04, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.08, I2=88%, very low GRADE confidence). For RCTs of antihypertensive drugs, there were no significant differences in renal function. Treatment with lipid-modifying drugs led to a 36% reduction in cardiovascular disease and 26% reduction in all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Glycaemic control and lipid-modifying drugs may slow the progression of CKD, but we found no pooled evidence of benefit nor harm from antihypertensive drugs. However, given the data limitations, further research is needed to confirm these findings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42015017501.

Diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care natriuretic peptide testing for chronic heart failure in ambulatory care: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care natriuretic peptide tests in patients with chronic heart failure, with a focus on the ambulatory care setting. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Ovid Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Embase, Health Technology Assessment Database, Science Citation Index, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index until 31 March 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Eligible studies evaluated point-of-care natriuretic peptide testing (B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) or N terminal fragment pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP)) against any relevant reference standard, including echocardiography, clinical examination, or combinations of these, in humans. Studies were excluded if reported data were insufficient to construct 2×2 tables. No language restrictions were applied. RESULTS: 42 publications of 39 individual studies met the inclusion criteria and 40 publications of 37 studies were included in the analysis. Of the 37 studies, 30 evaluated BNP point-of-care testing and seven evaluated NTproBNP testing. 15 studies were done in ambulatory care settings in populations with a low prevalence of chronic heart failure. Five studies were done in primary care. At thresholds >100 pg/mL, the sensitivity of BNP, measured with the point-of-care index device Triage, was generally high and was 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.90 to 0.98) at 100 pg/mL. At thresholds <100 pg/mL, sensitivity ranged from 0.46 to 0.97 and specificity from 0.31 to 0.98. Primary care studies that used NTproBNP testing reported a sensitivity of 0.99 (0.57 to 1.00) and specificity of 0.60 (0.44 to 0.74) at 135 pg/mL. No statistically significant difference in diagnostic accuracy was found between point-of-care BNP and NTproBNP tests. CONCLUSIONS: Given the lack of studies in primary care, the paucity of NTproBNP data, and potential methodological limitations in these studies, large scale trials in primary care are needed to assess the role of point-of-care natriuretic peptide testing and clarify appropriate thresholds to improve care of patients with suspected or chronic heart failure.