Inequities in kidney health and kidney care.

Health inequity refers to the existence of unnecessary and unfair differences in the ability of an individual or community to achieve optimal health and access appropriate care. Kidney diseases, including acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease, are the epitome of health inequity. Kidney disease risk and outcomes are strongly associated with inequities that occur across the entire clinical course of disease. Insufficient investment across the spectrum of kidney health and kidney care is a fundamental source of inequity. In addition, social and structural inequities, including inequities in access to primary health care, education and preventative strategies, are major risk factors for, and contribute to, poorer outcomes for individuals living with kidney diseases. Access to affordable kidney care is also highly inequitable, resulting in financial hardship and catastrophic health expenditure for the most vulnerable. Solutions to these injustices require leadership and political will. The nephrology community has an important role in advocacy and in identifying and implementing solutions to dismantle inequities that affect kidney health.

The European Green Deal and nephrology: a call for action by the European Kidney Health Alliance.

The world faces a dramatic man-made ecologic disaster and healthcare is a crucial part of this problem. Compared with other therapeutic areas, nephrology care, and especially dialysis, creates an excessive burden via water consumption, greenhouse gas emission and waste production. In this advocacy article from the European Kidney Health Alliance we describe the mutual impact of climate change on kidney health and kidney care on ecology. We propose an array of measures as potential solutions related to the prevention of kidney disease, kidney transplantation and green dialysis. For dialysis, several proactive suggestions are made, especially by lowering water consumption, implementing energy-neutral policies, waste triage and recycling of materials. These include original proposals such as dialysate regeneration, dialysate flow reduction, water distillation systems for dialysate production, heat pumps for unit climatization, heat exchangers for dialysate warming, biodegradable and bio-based polymers, alternative power sources, repurposing of plastic waste (e.g. incorporation in concrete), registration systems of ecologic burden and platforms to exchange ecologic best practices. We also discuss how the European Green Deal offers real potential for supporting and galvanizing these urgent environmental changes. Finally, we formulate recommendations to professionals, manufacturers, providers and policymakers on how this correction can be achieved.

The European Kidney Health Alliance (EKHA) and the Decade of the KidneyTM.

The European Kidney Health Alliance (EKHA) is an advocacy organization that defends the case of the kidney patients and the nephrological community at the level of the European Union (EU), and from there, top to bottom, also at the national level of the EU member states and the EU-associated countries. The Decade of the KidneyTM is a global initiative launched by the American Association of Kidney Patients (AAKP) to create greater awareness and organize patient demands for long overdue innovation in kidney care. This article describes the medical and patient burden of kidney disease, the history of EKHA, its major activities and tools for policy action, and the need for innovation of kidney care. We then describe the Decade of the KidneyTM initiative, the rationale behind why EKHA joined this activity to emanate parallel action at the European side, the novel professionalized structure of EKHA, and its immediate targets. The final aim is to align all major stakeholders for an action plan on kidney disease comparable to Europe's successful Beating Cancer Plan, with the additional intent that the EKHA model is applied also by the respective national kidney-related societies to create a broad mobilization at all levels. The ultimate aims are that the EU considers chronic kidney disease (CKD) as a major health and health-economic problem, to consequently have CKD included as a key health research target by the European Commission, and to improve quality of life and outcomes for all kidney patients.

The current and future landscape of dialysis.

The development of dialysis by early pioneers such as Willem Kolff and Belding Scribner set in motion several dramatic changes in the epidemiology, economics and ethical frameworks for the treatment of kidney failure. However, despite a rapid expansion in the provision of dialysis - particularly haemodialysis and most notably in high-income countries (HICs) - the rate of true patient-centred innovation has slowed. Current trends are particularly concerning from a global perspective: current costs are not sustainable, even for HICs, and globally, most people who develop kidney failure forego treatment, resulting in millions of deaths every year. Thus, there is an urgent need to develop new approaches and dialysis modalities that are cost-effective, accessible and offer improved patient outcomes. Nephrology researchers are increasingly engaging with patients to determine their priorities for meaningful outcomes that should be used to measure progress. The overarching message from this engagement is that while patients value longevity, reducing symptom burden and achieving maximal functional and social rehabilitation are prioritized more highly. In response, patients, payors, regulators and health-care systems are increasingly demanding improved value, which can only come about through true patient-centred innovation that supports high-quality, high-value care. Substantial efforts are now underway to support requisite transformative changes. These efforts need to be catalysed, promoted and fostered through international collaboration and harmonization.

Health Policy for Dialysis Care in Canada and the United States.

Contemporary dialysis treatment for chronic kidney failure is complex, is associated with poor clinical outcomes, and leads to high health costs, all of which pose substantial policy challenges. Despite similar policy goals and universal access for their kidney failure programs, the United States and Canada have taken very different approaches to dealing with these challenges. While US dialysis care is primarily government funded and delivered predominantly by private for-profit providers, Canadian dialysis care is also government funded but delivered almost exclusively in public facilities. Differences also exist for regulatory mechanisms and the policy incentives that may influence the behavior of providers and facilities. These differences in health policy are associated with significant variation in clinical outcomes: mortality among patients on dialysis is consistently lower in Canada than in the United States, although the gap has narrowed in recent years. The observed heterogeneity in policy and outcomes offers important potential opportunities for each health system to learn from the other. This article compares and contrasts transnational dialysis-related health policies, focusing on key levers including payment, finance, regulation, and organization. We also describe how policy levers can incentivize favorable practice patterns to support high-quality/high-value, person-centered care and to catalyze the emergence of transformative technologies for alternative kidney replacement strategies.

Ethical challenges in nephrology: a call for action.

The American Society of Nephrology, the European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association and the International Society of Nephrology Joint Working Group on Ethical Issues in Nephrology have identified ten broad areas of ethical concern as priority challenges that require collaborative action. Here, we describe these challenges - equity in access to kidney failure care, avoiding futile dialysis, reducing dialysis costs, shared decision-making in kidney failure care, living donor risk evaluation and decision-making, priority setting in kidney disease prevention and care, the ethical implications of genetic kidney diseases, responsible advocacy for kidney health and management of conflicts of interest - with the aim of highlighting the need for ethical analysis of specific issues, as well as for the development of tools and training to support clinicians who treat patients with kidney disease in practising ethically and contributing to ethical policy-making.

A call for harmonization of European kidney care: dialysis reimbursement and distribution of kidney replacement therapies.

BACKGROUND: We compare reimbursement for haemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) in European countries to assess the impact on government healthcare budgets. We discuss strategies to reduce costs by promoting sustainable dialysis and kidney transplantation. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional survey among nephrologists conducted online July-December 2016. European countries were categorized by tertiles of gross domestic product per capita (GDP). Reimbursement data were matched to kidney replacement therapy (KRT) data. RESULTS: The prevalence per million population of patients being treated with long-term dialysis was not significantly different across tertiles of GDP (P = 0.22). The percentage of PD increased with GDP across tertiles (4.9, 8.2, 13.4%; P < 0.001). The HD-to-PD reimbursement ratio was higher in countries with the highest tertile of GDP (0.7, 1.0 versus 1.7; P = 0.007). Home HD was mainly reimbursed in countries with the highest tertile of GDP (15, 15 versus 69%; P = 0.005). The percentage of public health expenditure for reimbursement of dialysis decreased across tertiles of GDP (3.3, 1.5, 0.7%; P < 0.001). Transplantation as a proportion of all KRT increased across tertiles of GDP (18.5, 39.5, 56.0%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In Europe, dialysis has a disproportionately high impact on public health expenditure, especially in countries with a lower GDP. In these countries, the cost difference between PD and HD is smaller, and home dialysis and transplantation are less frequently provided than in countries with a higher GDP. In-depth evaluation and analysis of influential economic and political measures are needed to steer optimized reimbursement strategies for KRT.

An International Analysis of Dialysis Services Reimbursement.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The prevalence of patients with ESKD who receive extracorporeal kidney replacement therapy is rising worldwide. We compared government reimbursement for hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis worldwide, assessed the effect on the government health care budget, and discussed strategies to reduce the cost of kidney replacement therapy. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Cross-sectional global survey of nephrologists in 90 countries to assess reimbursement for dialysis, number of patients receiving hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, and measures to prevent development or progression of CKD, conducted online July to December of 2016. RESULTS: Of the 90 survey respondents, governments from 81 countries (90%) provided reimbursement for maintenance dialysis. The prevalence of patients per million population being treated with long-term dialysis in low- and middle-income countries increased linearly with Gross Domestic Product per capita (GDP per capita), but was substantially lower in these countries compared with high-income countries where we did not observe an higher prevalence with higher GDP per capita. The absolute expenditure for dialysis by national governments showed a positive association with GDP per capita, but the percent of total health care budget spent on dialysis showed a negative association. The percentage of patients on peritoneal dialysis was low, even in countries where peritoneal dialysis is better reimbursed than hemodialysis. The so-called peritoneal dialysis-first policy without financial incentive seems to be effective in increasing the utilization of peritoneal dialysis. Few countries actively provide CKD prevention. CONCLUSIONS: In low- and middle-income countries, reimbursement of dialysis is insufficient to treat all patients with ESKD and has a disproportionately high effect on public health expenditure. Current reimbursement policies favor conventional in-center hemodialysis.

Caring for Migrants and Refugees With End-Stage Kidney Disease in Europe.

With the number of migrants and refugees increasing globally, the nephrology community is increasingly confronted with issues relating to the management of end-stage kidney disease in this population, including medical, logistical, financial, and moral-ethical questions. Beginning with data for the state of affairs regarding refugees in Europe and grounded in moral reasoning theory, this Policy Forum Perspective contends that to improve care for this specific population, there is a need for: (1) clear demarcations of responsibilities across the societal (macro), local (meso), and individual (micro) levels, such that individual providers are aware of available resources and able to provide essential medical care while societies and local communities determine the general approach to dialysis care for refugees; (2) additional data and evidence to facilitate decision making based on facts rather than emotions; and (3) better information and education in a broad sense (cultural sensitivity, legal rights and obligations, and medical knowledge) to address specific needs in this population. Although the nephrology community cannot leverage a change in the geopolitical framework, we are in a position to generate accurate data describing the dimensions of care of refugee or migrant patients with end-stage kidney disease to advocate for a holistic approach to treatment for this unique patient population.

Reducing the costs of chronic kidney disease while delivering quality health care: a call to action.

The treatment of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) imposes substantial societal costs. Expenditure is highest for renal replacement therapy (RRT), especially in-hospital haemodialysis. Redirection towards less expensive forms of RRT (peritoneal dialysis, home haemodialysis) or kidney transplantation should decrease financial pressure. However, costs for CKD are not limited to RRT, but also include nonrenal health-care costs, costs not related to health care, and costs for patients with CKD who are not yet receiving RRT. Even if patients with CKD or ESRD could be given the least expensive therapies, costs would decrease only marginally. We therefore propose a consistent and sustainable approach focusing on prevention. Before a preventive strategy is favoured, however, authorities should carefully analyse the cost to benefit ratio of each strategy. Primary prevention of CKD is more important than secondary prevention, as many other related chronic diseases, such as diabetes mellitus, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, liver disease, cancer, and pulmonary disorders could also be prevented. Primary prevention largely consists of lifestyle changes that will reduce global societal costs and, more importantly, result in a healthy, active, and long-lived population. Nephrologists need to collaborate closely with other sectors and governments, to reach these aims.

Cost of renal replacement: how to help as many as possible while keeping expenses reasonable?

The treatment of kidney diseases consumes a substantial amount of the health budget for a relatively small fraction of the overall population. If the nephrological community and society do not develop mechanisms to contain those costs, it will become impossible to continue assuring optimal outcomes and quality of life while treating all patients who need it. In this article, we describe several mechanisms to maintain sustainability of renal replacement therapy. These include (i) encouragement of transplantation after both living and deceased donation; (ii) stimulation of alternative dialysis strategies besides classical hospital haemodialysis, such as home haemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis or self-care and necessitating less reimbursement; (iii) promotion of educational activities guiding the patients towards therapies that are most suited for them; (iv) consideration of one or more of cost containment incentives such as bundling of reimbursement (if not affecting quality of the treatment), timely patient referral, green dialysis, start of dialysis based on clinical necessity rather than renal function parameters and/or prevention of CKD or its progression; (v) strategically planned adaptations to the expected growth of the ageing population in need of renal replacement; (vi) the necessity for support of research in the direction of helping as large as possible patient populations for acceptable costs; and (vii) the need for more patient-centred approaches. We also extend the discussion to the specific situation of kidney diseases in low- and middle-income countries. Finally, we point to the dramatic differences in accessibility and reimbursement of different modalities throughout Europe. We hope that this text will offer a framework for the nephrological community, including patients and nurses, and the concerned policy makers and caregivers on how to continue reaching all patients in need of renal replacement for affordable expenses.

Diagnosis and Prediction of CKD Progression by Assessment of Urinary Peptides.

Progressive CKD is generally detected at a late stage by a sustained decline in eGFR and/or the presence of significant albuminuria. With the aim of early and improved risk stratification of patients with CKD, we studied urinary peptides in a large cross-sectional multicenter cohort of 1990 individuals, including 522 with follow-up data, using proteome analysis. We validated that a previously established multipeptide urinary biomarker classifier performed significantly better in detecting and predicting progression of CKD than the current clinical standard, urinary albumin. The classifier was also more sensitive for identifying patients with rapidly progressing CKD. Compared with the combination of baseline eGFR and albuminuria (area under the curve [AUC]=0.758), the addition of the multipeptide biomarker classifier significantly improved CKD risk prediction (AUC=0.831) as assessed by the net reclassification index (0.303±-0.065; P<0.001) and integrated discrimination improvement (0.058±0.014; P<0.001). Correlation of individual urinary peptides with CKD stage and progression showed that the peptides that associated with CKD, irrespective of CKD stage or CKD progression, were either fragments of the major circulating proteins, suggesting failure of the glomerular filtration barrier sieving properties, or different collagen fragments, suggesting accumulation of intrarenal extracellular matrix. Furthermore, protein fragments associated with progression of CKD originated mostly from proteins related to inflammation and tissue repair. Results of this study suggest that urinary proteome analysis might significantly improve the current state of the art of CKD detection and outcome prediction and that identification of the urinary peptides allows insight into various ongoing pathophysiologic processes in CKD.

A survey on the methodological processes and policies of renal guideline groups as a first step to harmonize renal guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, several bodies produce renal guidelines, potentially leading to duplication of effort while other topics may remain uncovered. A collaborative work plan could improve efficiency and impact, but requires a common approved methodology. The aim of this study was to identify organizational and methodological similarities and differences among seven major renal guideline bodies to identify methodological barriers to a collaborative effort. METHODS: An electronic 62-item survey with questions based on the Institute of Medicine standards for guidelines was completed by representatives of seven major organizations producing renal guidelines: the Canadian Society of Nephrology (CSN), European Renal Best Practice (ERBP), Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcome (KDIGO), Kidney Health Australia-Caring for Australians with Renal Insufficiency (KHA-CARI), Kidney Disease Outcome Quality Initiative (KDOQI), Sociedad Latino-Americano de Nefrologia e Hipertension (SLANH) and United Kingdom Renal Association (UK-RA). RESULTS: Five of the seven groups conduct systematic searches for evidence, two include detailed critical appraisal and all use the GRADE framework. Five have public review of the guideline draft. Guidelines are updated as new evidence comes up in all, and/or after a specified time frame has passed (N = 3). Commentaries or position statements on guidelines published by other groups are produced by five, with the ADAPTE framework (N = 1) and the AGREEII (N = 2) used by some. Funding is from their parent organizations (N = 5) or directly from industry (N = 2). None allow funders to influence topic selection or guideline content. The budgets to develop a full guideline vary from $2000 to $500 000. Guideline development groups vary in size from <5 (N = 1) to 13-20 persons (N = 3). Three explicitly seek patient perspectives, for example, by involving patients in the scoping process, and four incorporate health economic considerations. All provide training in methodology for guideline development groups and six make their methods public. All try to avoid overlapping topics already planned or published by others. There is no common conflict of interest policy. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there is considerable commonality in methods and approaches in renal guideline development by the different organizations, although some procedural differences remain. As the financial and human resource costs of guideline production are high, a collaborative approach is required to maximize impact and develop a sustainable work plan. Coming to consensus on methods and procedures is the first step and appears feasible.

Disaster nephrology: crush injury and beyond.

Disasters result in a substantial number of renal challenges, either by the creation of crush injury in victims trapped in collapsed buildings or by the destruction of existing dialysis facilities, leaving chronic dialysis patients without access to their dialysis units, medications, or medical care. Over the past two decades, lessons have been learned from the response to a number of major natural disasters that have impacted significantly on crush-related acute kidney injury and chronic dialysis patients. In this paper we review the pathophysiology and treatment of the crush syndrome, as summarized in recent clinical recommendations for the management of crush syndrome. The importance of early fluid resuscitation in preventing acute kidney injury is stressed, logistic difficulties in disaster conditions are described, and the need for an implementation of a renal disaster relief preparedness program is underlined. The role of the Renal Disaster Relief Task Force in providing emergency disaster relief and the logistical support required is outlined. In addition, the importance of detailed education of chronic dialysis patients and renal unit staff in the advance planning for such disasters and the impact of displacement by disasters of chronic dialysis patients are discussed.

Health economics and European Renal Best Practice--is it time to bring health economics into evidence-based guideline production in Europe?

Medical management of patients with kidney disease is complex and resource intensive. In times of limited health care budgets, economic evaluations have become more important over the past few years in identifying interventions with a beneficial cost-effectiveness to maximize the benefits served from the available resources. However, integrating evidence from health-economic evaluations into clinical practice guidelines remains a challenge. European Renal Best Practice (ERBP), the official guideline body of the European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) herewith presents some lines of thought that need consideration in the discussion on incorporating health-economic considerations into clinical guideline development.

Acute kidney injury: an increasing global concern.

Despite an increasing incidence of acute kidney injury in both high-income and low-income countries and growing insight into the causes and mechanisms of disease, few preventive and therapeutic options exist. Even small acute changes in kidney function can result in short-term and long-term complications, including chronic kidney disease, end-stage renal disease, and death. Presence of more than one comorbidity results in high severity of illness scores in all medical settings. Development or progression of chronic kidney disease after one or more episode of acute kidney injury could have striking socioeconomic and public health outcomes for all countries. Concerted international action encompassing many medical disciplines is needed to aid early recognition and management of acute kidney injury.