Social determinants of health and dialysis modality selection in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Social determinants of health are non-medical factors that impact health. For patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) progressing to kidney failure, the influence of social determinants of health on dialysis modality selection (haemodialysis vs. peritoneal dialysis (PD)) is incompletely understood. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of 981 consecutive patients with advanced CKD referred to the Ottawa Hospital Multi-Care Kidney Clinic (Canada) who progressed to dialysis from 2010 to 2021. Multivariable logistic regression was used to measure odds ratios (OR) for the associations between social determinants of health (education, employment, marital status and residence) and modality of dialysis initiation. RESULTS: The mean age and estimated glomerular filtration rate were 64 and 18 mL/min/1.73 m2, respectively. Not having a high school degree was associated with lower odds of initiating dialysis via PD compared to having a college degree (29% vs. 48%, OR 0.55 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-0.88)). Unemployment was associated with lower odds of initiating dialysis via PD compared to active employment (38% vs. 62%, OR 0.40 (95% CI 0.27-0.60)). Being single was associated with lower odds of initiating dialysis via PD compared to being married (35% vs. 48%, adjusted OR 0.52 (95% CI 0.39-0.70)). Living alone at home was associated with lower odds of initiating dialysis via PD compared to living at home with family (33% vs. 47%, adjusted OR 0.55 (95% CI 0.39-0.78)). CONCLUSIONS: Social determinants of health including education, employment, marital status and residence are associated with dialysis modality selection. Addressing these 'upstream' social factors may allow for more equitable outcomes during the transition from advanced CKD to kidney failure.

Effect and outcome of equity, diversity and inclusion programs in healthcare institutions: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in the healthcare field are crucial in meeting the healthcare needs of a progressively diverse society. In fact, a diverse healthcare workforce enables culturally sensitive care, promotes health equity and enhances the understanding of various needs and patients' viewpoints, potentially resulting in more effective patient treatment and improved patient outcomes. Despite this, information on the effectiveness of policies or programmes promoting EDI in health institutions is scarce. The objective of this systematic review is to assess the effects and outcomes of EDI programmes in healthcare institutions. METHODS: We will conduct Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-compliant systematic review of studies on EDI programmes and describe their effects and outcomes in healthcare institutions. We will search PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases. Selected studies will include randomised control trials (RCTs), non-RCTs and cross-sectional studies published either in English or French. Quality appraisal of studies and a narrative synthesis of extracted data will be conducted as well as a meta-analysis if possible. The quality of evidence in this review will be assessed by the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We anticipate that this systematic review will reveal information on the effect of EDI programmes and their outcomes in healthcare institutions. We expect this information will provide insights that will lead to improvements in designing EDI policies and programmes in healthcare institutions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical clearance is required for this study as no primary data will be collected. The final manuscript will be submitted to a journal for publication. In addition to this, the results of the study will also be disseminated through conference presentations to inform the research and clinical practice. REVIEW REGISTRATION: This protocol has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; registration number CRD42024502781.

Impact of electrolyte abnormalities and adverse outcomes in persons with eating disorders: A systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Electrolytes (sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium, chloride, phosphate) are required in specific amounts for proper functioning of the human body. Although the body has different organ systems, such as the kidneys, that regulate electrolyte levels in the blood, electrolyte abnormalities occur frequently in people with eating disorders. The objective of this review will be to examine the association between electrolyte imbalances and adverse outcomes in people with eating disorders. METHODS: A systematic review of studies on eating and electrolyte disorders shall be conducted. Electronic searches shall be done in the Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases. Selected studies shall include randomized control trials (RCTs), non-randomized controlled trials, and cross-sectional studies published in English or French. Quality appraisal of studies and a narrative synthesis of extracted data shall be conducted. DISCUSSION: This review will synthesize existing evidence on electrolyte abnormalities in people with eating disorders. It will identify the type of electrolyte imbalances, their impact, and outcomes in people with eating disorders. We anticipate that information that will be useful to policy makers and clinicians in designing better policies to prevent eating disorders and or manage people with eating disorders shall be elucidated in this study. DISSEMINATION: The final manuscript will be submitted for publication in a journal. REVIEW REGISTRATION: This protocol has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO); registration number CRD42023477497.

Prediction of Progression in Polycystic Kidney Disease Using the Kidney Failure Risk Equation and Ultrasound Parameters.

BACKGROUND: The kidney failure risk equation (KFRE) is a validated risk algorithm for predicting the risk of kidney failure in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients regardless of etiology. Patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (AD-PCKD) experience long disease trajectories and as such identifying individuals at risk of kidney failure would aid in intervention. OBJECTIVE: To examine the utility of the KFRE in predicting adverse kidney outcomes compared with existing risk factors in a cohort of patients with AD-PCKD. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of AD-PCKD patients referred to a tertiary care center with a baseline kidney ultrasound and a KFRE calculation. Cox proportional hazards were used to examine the association of the KFRE and composite of an eGFR decline of >30% or the need for dialysis/transplantation. Discrimination and calibration of a parsimonious fully adjusted model and a model containing only total kidney volume (TKV) with and without the addition of the KFRE was determined. RESULTS: Of 340 patients with AD-PCKD eligible, 221 (65%) met inclusion criteria. Older age, cardiac disease, cancer, higher systolic blood pressure, albuminuria, lower eGFR and a higher initial TKV were more common in patients with a higher KFRE. A total of 120 events occurred over a median patient follow-up time of 3.2 years. KFRE was independently associated with the composite kidney outcome. Addition of the KFRE significantly improved discrimination and calibration in a TKV only model and a fully adjusted model. CONCLUSIONS: In a diverse, referral population with AD-PCKD, the KFRE was associated with adverse kidney outcomes and improved risk prediction.

CONTEXTE: L'équation KFRE (kidney failure risk equation) est un algorithme validé pour prédire le risque de défaillance rénale chez les patients atteints d'IRC, quelle que soit l'étiologie. Les patients souffrant de polykystose rénale autosomique dominante (ADPKD) connaissent une longue trajectoire de maladie et, à ce titre, le dépistage des individus présentant un risque élevé d'insuffisance rénale pourrait faciliter les interventions. OBJECTIF: Examiner l'efficacité de la KFRE à prédire le risque d'issues rénales défavorables dans une cohorte de patients atteints d'ADPKD comparativement aux facteurs de risque existants. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Cette étude de cohorte rétrospective porte sur des patients atteints d'ADPKD aiguillés vers un centre de soins tertiaires avec une échographie rénale de référence et un calcul de KFRE. Un modèle de risques proportionnels de Cox a été employé pour analyser la relation entre la KFRE et un déclin composite du DFGe supérieur à 30% ou le besoin de dialyse ou de transplantation. La discrimination et la calibration d'un modèle parcimonieux entièrement corrigé et d'un modèle ne tenant compte que du volume rénal total (VRT), avec ou sans l'ajout de la KFRE, ont été déterminées. RÉSULTATS: Des 340 patients atteints d'ADPKD et admissibles à l'étude, 221 (65%) satisfaisaient les critères d'inclusion. Les patients présentant un résultat élevé à la KFRE étaient souvent plus âgés et étaient plus fréquemment atteints des troubles suivants: maladies cardiovasculaires, cancer, pression systolique élevée, albuminurie, faible DFGe et VRT initial plus élevé. Un total de 120 événements sont survenus au cours de la période de suivi médiane (3,2 ans). La KFRE a été associée de façon indépendante à l'issue rénale composite. L'ajout de la valeur de KFRE a considérablement amélioré la discrimination et la calibration des deux modèles employés (VRT seulement et modèle entièrement corrigé). CONCLUSION: L'utilisation de la KFRE a été associée à des issues rénales défavorables et à une meilleure prédiction du risque d'insuffisance rénale dans une population de référence diversifiée composée de patients atteints d'ADPKD.

Performance of the Kidney Failure Risk Equation by Disease Etiology in Advanced CKD.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The kidney failure risk equation is a clinical tool commonly used for prediction of progression from CKD to kidney failure. The kidney failure risk equation's accuracy in advanced CKD and whether this varies by CKD etiology remains unknown. This study examined the kidney failure risk equation's discrimination and calibration at 2 and 5 years among a large tertiary care population with advanced CKD from heterogeneous etiologies. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: This retrospective cohort study included 1293 patients with advanced CKD (median eGFR 15 ml/min per 1.73 m2) referred to the Ottawa Hospital Multi-Care Kidney Clinic between 2010 and 2016, with follow-up clinical data available through 2018. Four-variable kidney failure risk equation scores for 2- and 5-year risks of progression to kidney failure (defined as dialysis or kidney transplantation) were calculated upon initial referral and correlated with the subsequent observed kidney failure incidence within these time frames. Receiver operating characteristic curves and calibration plots were used to measure the discrimination and calibration of the kidney failure risk equation both in the overall advanced CKD population and by CKD etiology: diabetic kidney disease, hypertensive nephrosclerosis, GN, polycystic kidney disease, and other. Pairwise comparisons of the receiver operating characteristic curves by CKD etiology were performed to compare kidney failure risk equation discrimination. RESULTS: The kidney failure risk equation provided adequate to excellent discrimination in identifying patients with CKD likely to progress to kidney failure at the 2- and 5-year time points both overall (2-year area under the curve, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.81 to 0.85; 5-year area under the curve, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.77 to 0.84) and across CKD etiologies. The kidney failure risk equation displayed adequate calibration at the 2- and 5-year time points both overall and across CKD etiologies (Hosmer-Lemeshow P≥0.05); however, the predicted risks of kidney failure were higher than the observed risks across CKD etiologies with the exception of polycystic kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS: The kidney failure risk equation provides adequate discrimination and calibration in advanced CKD and across CKD etiologies.

A Higher Concentration of Dialysate Magnesium to Reduce the Frequency of Muscle Cramps: A Narrative Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Strategies to mitigate muscle cramps are a top research priority for patients receiving hemodialysis. As hypomagnesemia is a possible risk factor for cramping, we reviewed the literature to better understand the physiology of cramping as well as the epidemiology of hypomagnesemia and muscle cramps. We also sought to review the evidence from interventional studies on the effect of oral and dialysate magnesium-based therapies on muscle cramps. SOURCES OF INFORMATION: Peer-reviewed articles. METHODS: We searched for relevant articles in major bibliographic databases including MEDLINE and EMBASE. The methodological quality of interventional studies was assessed using a modified version of the Downs and Blacks criteria checklist. KEY FINDINGS: The etiology of muscle cramps in patients receiving hemodialysis is poorly understood and there are no clear evidence-based prevention or treatment strategies. Several factors may play a role including a low concentration of serum magnesium. The prevalence of hypomagnesemia (concentration of <0.7 mmol/L) in patients receiving hemodialysis ranges from 10% to 20%. Causes of hypomagnesemia include a low dietary intake of magnesium, use of medications that inhibit magnesium absorption (eg, proton pump inhibitors), increased magnesium excretion (eg, high-dose loop diuretics), and a low concentration of dialysate magnesium. Dialysate magnesium concentrations of ≤0.5 mmol/L may be associated with a decrease in serum magnesium concentration over time. Preliminary evidence from observational and interventional studies suggests a higher dialysate magnesium concentration will raise serum magnesium concentrations and may reduce the frequency and severity of muscle cramps. However, the quality of evidence supporting this benefit is limited, and larger, multicenter clinical trials are needed to further determine if magnesium-based therapy can reduce muscle cramps in patients receiving hemodialysis. In studies conducted to date, increasing the concentration of dialysate magnesium appears to be well-tolerated and is associated with a low risk of symptomatic hypermagnesemia. LIMITATIONS: Few interventional studies have examined the effect of magnesium-based therapy on muscle cramps in patients receiving hemodialysis and most were nonrandomized, pre-post study designs.

CONTEXTE MOTIVANT LA REVUE: Les stratégies visant à atténuer les crampes musculaires sont parmi les principales priorités de recherche des patients hémodialysés. L'hypomagnésémie étant un possible facteur de risque, nous avons procédé à une revue de la littérature afin de mieux en comprendre l'épidémiologie, et d'examiner la physiologie et l'épidémiologie des crampes musculaires. Nous souhaitions également examiner les données probantes issues d'études interventionnelles portant sur l'effet des thérapies à base de dialysat de magnésium et de magnésium oral sur les crampes musculaires. SOURCES: Articles examinés par les pairs. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Nous avons cherché les articles pertinents dans les principales bases de données bibliographiques, notamment MEDLINE et EMBASE. La qualité méthodologique a été évaluée à l'aide d'une version modifiée des critères de contrôle de la qualité des études de Downs et Black. PRINCIPAUX RÉSULTATS: L'étiologie des crampes musculaires chez les patients hémodialysés est mal comprise et il n'existe aucune stratégie de prévention ou traitement clairement fondé sur des données probantes. Plusieurs facteurs pourraient jouer un rôle, notamment de faibles concentrations sériques de magnésium. La prévalence de l'hypomagnésémie (concentration inférieure à 0,7 mmol/L) chez les patients hémodialysés variait de 10 à 20 %. Une faible consommation de magnésium dans l'alimentation, la prise de médicaments inhibant l'absorption du magnésium (ex. les inhibiteurs de la pompe à protons), l'excrétion accrue du magnésium (ex. dose élevée de diurétiques de l'anse) et une faible concentration de dialysat de magnésium figuraient parmi les causes d'hypomagnésémie. Un taux de dialysat de magnésium inférieur ou égal à 0,5 mmol/L pourrait être associé à une diminution de la concentration sérique de magnésium au fil du temps. Les résultats préliminaires de certaines études observationnelles et interventionnelles suggèrent qu'une concentration sérique plus élevée de magnésium dans le dialysat augmenterait les concentrations sériques de magnésium et pourrait réduire la fréquence et la sévérité des épisodes de crampes musculaires. La qualité des preuves appuyant ce bienfait est cependant limitée. Des essais multicentriques et à plus vaste échelle sont nécessaires pour juger si un traitement à base de magnésium peut véritablement réduire les crampes musculaires chez les patients hémodialysés. Dans les études menées jusqu'à maintenant, l'augmentation de la concentration de dialysat de magnésium semblait bien tolérée et a été associée à un faible risque d'hypermagnésémie symptomatique. LIMITES: Peu d'études interventionnelles ont examiné l'effet de la prise de magnésium sur les crampes musculaires des patients hémodialysés, et la plupart de celles-ci constituaient des plans pré- ou post-études non randomisées.

Risk Factors for Unplanned Dialysis Initiation: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: Unplanned dialysis initiation is common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). OBJECTIVE: To determine common definitions and patient risk factors for unplanned dialysis. DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to February 2018. PATIENTS: Studies that included incident chronic dialysis patients or patients with CKD that cited a definition or examined risk factors for unplanned dialysis were included. MEASUREMENTS: Definitions and criteria for unplanned dialysis reported across studies. Patient characteristics associated with unplanned dialysis. METHODS: Two reviewers independently extracted data using a standardized data abstraction form and assessed study quality using a modified New Castle Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: From 2797 citations, 48 met eligibility criteria. Reported definitions for unplanned dialysis were variable. Most publications cited dialysis initiation under emergency conditions and/or with a central venous catheter. The association of patient characteristics with unplanned dialysis was reported in 26 studies, 18 were retrospective and 21 included incident dialysis patients. The most common risk factors in univariate analyses were (number of studies) increased age (n = 7), cause of kidney disease (n = 6), presence of cardiovascular disease (n = 7), lower serum hemoglobin (n = 9), lower serum albumin (n = 10), higher serum phosphate (n = 6), higher serum creatinine or lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at dialysis initiation (n = 7), late referral (n = 5), lack of dialysis education (n = 6), and lack of follow-up in a predialysis clinic prior to dialysis initiation (n = 5). A minority of studies performed multivariable analyses (n = 10); the most common risk factors were increased age (n = 4), increased comorbidity score (n = 3), late referral (n = 5), and lower eGFR at dialysis initiation (n = 3). LIMITATIONS: Comparison of results across studies was limited by inconsistent definitions for unplanned dialysis. High-quality data on patient risk factors for unplanned dialysis are lacking. CONCLUSIONS: Well-designed prospective studies to determine modifiable risk factors are needed. The lack of a consensus definition for unplanned dialysis makes research and quality improvement initiatives in this area more challenging.

CONTEXTE: L'initiation non planifiée d'un traitement de dialyse est fréquente chez les patients atteints d'insuffisance rénale chronique (IRC). OBJECTIFS: L'étude visait à définir la dialyse non planifiée et à définir ses facteurs de risques chez les patients. TYPE D'ÉTUDE: Une revue systématique. SOURCES: Les bases de données MEDLINE et EMBASE, de même que la bibliothèque Cochrane ont été consultées, de leur création à février 2018. SUJETS: Les études traitant de patients atteints d'IRC ou dialysés de façon chronique, et qui citaient une définition ou examinaient les facteurs de risques associés à une dialyse non planifiée. MESURES: On a colligé les différentes définitions d'une dialyse non planifiée rapportées dans l'ensemble des études, ainsi que les critères la définissant et les caractéristiques des patients qui y étaient associées. MÉTHODOLOGIE: À l'aide d'un formulaire normalisé d'extraction des données, deux examinateurs ont compilé les données de façon indépendante. La qualité des études a été évaluée avec une échelle de Newcastle-Ottawa modifiée. RÉSULTATS: Des 2 797 études répertoriées, 48 satisfaisaient les critères d'admissibilité. Les définitions d'une dialyse non planifiée variaient d'une étude à l'autre. La plupart des publications mentionnaient une dialyse débutée en situation d'urgence et/ou avec un cathéter veineux central. L'association des caractéristiques des patients à une dialyse non planifiée a été signalée dans 26 études, desquelles 18 constituaient des études rétrospectives et 21 incluaient des patients dialysés incidents. Les facteurs de risque les plus souvent cités dans les analyses univariées étaient (en nombre d'études) : l'âge avancé du patient (n=7), la cause de la néphropathie (n=6), la présence d'une cardiopathie (n=7), de faibles taux d'hémoglobine (n=9) et d'albumine (n=10), un taux élevé de phosphate sérique (n=6), un taux élevé de créatinine sérique ou un faible DFGe à l'amorce de la dialyse (n=7), un aiguillage tardif (n=5), le manque d'information sur la dialyse (n=6), et l'absence de suivi dans une clinique de prédialyse avant l'initiation du traitement (n=5). Seules quelques études avaient procédé à des analyses multivariées (n=10). Dans ces dernières, les facteurs de risques les plus fréquemment cités étaient : l'âge avancé du patient (n=4), un score de comorbidité élevé (n=3), un aiguillage tardif (n=5), et un faible DFGe au moment de l'initiation de la dialyse (n=3). LIMITES: La comparaison des résultats d'une étude à l'autre était difficile en raison d'un manque d'uniformité dans les définitions d'une dialyse non planifiée. On manque de données robustes sur les facteurs de risque menant à une dialyse non planifiée chez les patients. CONCLUSION: On constate un besoin pour des études prospectives bien conçues examinant les facteurs de risque modifiables. L'absence d'une définition consensuelle pour la dialyse non planifiée rend plus difficiles les initiatives de recherche et d'amélioration de la qualité dans ce domaine.

Risk factors for unplanned and crash dialysis starts: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with kidney failure "crash" onto dialysis or initiate dialysis in an unplanned fashion. There are varying definitions, but essentially, a patient is labeled as having a crash dialysis start if he or she has little to no care by a nephrologist prior to starting dialysis. A patient is labeled as having an unplanned dialysis start when he or she starts dialysis with a catheter or during a hospitalization. Given the high prevalence and poor outcomes associated with crash and unplanned dialysis starts, it is important to establish a better understanding of patient risk factors. METHODS: We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis with a focus on both crash and unplanned dialysis starts. The first objective will be to determine patient risk factors for crash and unplanned dialysis starts. Secondary objectives will be to determine the most common criteria used to define both crash and unplanned dialysis starts and to determine outcomes associated with crash and unplanned dialysis starts. We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library from inception to the present date for all studies that report the characteristics and outcomes of patients who have crash vs. non-crash dialysis starts or unplanned vs. planned dialysis starts. We will also extract from included studies the criteria used to define crash and unplanned dialysis starts. If there are any eligible randomized controlled trials, quality assessment will be performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Observational studies will be evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data will be pooled in meta-analysis if deemed appropriate. DISCUSSION: The results of this review will inform the design of strategies to help reduce the incidence of crash and unplanned dialysis starts. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Prospero CRD42016032916.