Balanced crystalloid solution versus saline in deceased donor kidney transplantation (BEST-Fluids): a pragmatic, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Delayed graft function (DGF) is a major adverse complication of deceased donor kidney transplantation. Intravenous fluids are routinely given to patients receiving a transplant to maintain intravascular volume and optimise graft function. Saline (0·9% sodium chloride) is widely used but might increase the risk of DGF due to its high chloride content. We aimed to test our hypothesis that using a balanced low-chloride crystalloid solution (Plasma-Lyte 148) instead of saline would reduce the incidence of DGF. METHODS: BEST-Fluids was a pragmatic, registry-embedded, multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial at 16 hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. Adults and children of any age receiving a deceased donor kidney transplant were eligible; those receiving a multi-organ transplant or weighing less than 20 kg were excluded. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using an adaptive minimisation algorithm to intravenous balanced crystalloid solution (Plasma-Lyte 148) or saline during surgery and up until 48 h after transplantation. Trial fluids were supplied in identical bags and clinicians determined the fluid volume, rate, and time of discontinuation. The primary outcome was DGF, defined as receiving dialysis within 7 days after transplantation. All participants who consented and received a transplant were included in the intention-to-treat analysis of the primary outcome. Safety was analysed in all randomly assigned eligible participants who commenced surgery and received trial fluids, whether or not they received a transplant. This study is registered with Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, (ACTRN12617000358347), and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03829488). FINDINGS: Between Jan 26, 2018, and Aug 10, 2020, 808 participants were randomly assigned to balanced crystalloid (n=404) or saline (n=404) and received a transplant (512 [63%] were male and 296 [37%] were female). One participant in the saline group withdrew before 7 days and was excluded, leaving 404 participants in the balanced crystalloid group and 403 in the saline group that were included in the primary analysis. DGF occurred in 121 (30%) of 404 participants in the balanced crystalloid group versus 160 (40%) of 403 in the saline group (adjusted relative risk 0·74 [95% CI 0·66 to 0·84; p<0·0001]; adjusted risk difference 10·1% [95% CI 3·5 to 16·6]). In the safety analysis, numbers of investigator-reported serious adverse events were similar in both groups, being reported in three (<1%) of 406 participants in the balanced crystalloid group versus five (1%) of 409 participants in the saline group (adjusted risk difference -0·5%, 95% CI -1·8 to 0·9; p=0·48). INTERPRETATION: Among patients receiving a deceased donor kidney transplant, intravenous fluid therapy with balanced crystalloid solution reduced the incidence of DGF compared with saline. Balanced crystalloid solution should be the standard-of-care intravenous fluid used in deceased donor kidney transplantation. FUNDING: Medical Research Future Fund and National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia), Health Research Council (New Zealand), Royal Australasian College of Physicians, and Baxter.

Feasibility of Symptom monitoring WIth Feedback Trial (SWIFT) for adults on hemodialysis: a registry-based cluster randomized pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with kidney failure on hemodialysis (HD) experience considerable symptom burden and poor health-related quality of life (HRQoL). There is limited use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in facility HD units to direct immediate care, with response rates in other studies between 36 to 70%. The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate feasibility of electronic PROMs (e-PROMs) in HD participants, with feedback 3-monthly to the participants' treating team, for severe or worsening symptoms as identified by the Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale (IPOS-Renal), with linkage to the Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) registry, compared with usual care. METHODS: This is a registry-based cluster-randomized controlled pilot trial involving all adults receiving HD in 4 satellite units in Australia over a 6-month period. HD units were cluster randomized 1:1 to the control (HRQoL data collection only) or intervention arm (symptom monitoring with feedback to treating team every 3 months). Feasibility was assessed by participant response rate (percentage of eligible HD participants, including new incident participants, who completed the questionnaire at each time point); retention rate (percentage of participants who completed the baseline questionnaire and all subsequent measures); and completion time. HRQoL and symptom burden scores are described. RESULTS: There were 226 unique participants who completed the e-PROMs (mean age 62 years, 69% males, 78% White-European, median dialysis vintage 1.62 years). At 6 months, response rate and retention rate for the intervention arm were 54% and 68%, respectively, and 89% and 97% in the control arm. Median time to complete IPOS-Renal was 6.6 min (5.3, 10.1) at 3 months, and when combined with the outcome measure (EQ-5D-5L), the median time was 9.4 min (6.9, 13.6) at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic symptom monitoring among HD participants with feedback to clinicians is feasible. Variations in response and retention rates could be potentially explained by the lengthier questionnaire, and higher frequency of data collection time points for participants in the intervention arm. A definitive national RCT is underway. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12618001976279 (07/12/2018).

Hip Arthroplasty Outcomes in the Presence of Kidney Failure: A National Data Linkage Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients who have kidney failure are at higher risk of requiring total hip arthroplasty (THA) and are at higher risk of complications. This study compared the rate of revision surgery and mortality following THA between patients who have kidney failure receiving long term dialysis or who had a kidney transplant and those who did not have kidney failure. METHODS: A data linkage study was performed using data from 2 national registries: a registry of dialysis and kidney transplant patients and a registry of THA procedures. Both registries had coverage of almost all procedures or treatments in Australia. Data from September 1999 to December 2016 were used. Mortality and revision surgery were compared between patients receiving dialysis, those who had a functioning kidney transplant, and patients who did not have kidney failure using Cox and Fine-Gray (competing risk) regression models. A total of 383,478 primary THA procedures were identified as people receiving dialysis (n = 490), who had a functioning kidney transplant (n = 459), or who did not have kidney failure (n = 382,529). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the overall rate of revision surgery between the groups (dialysis versus no kidney failure HR = 1.20; 95% CI 0.76, 1.88, transplant versus no kidney failure (hazard ratio) HR = 1.01; 95% (confidence interval) CI 0.66, 1.53). The risk for death after surgery was significantly higher in the dialysis group compared to both the functioning transplant group (HR = 3.44; 95%CI 1.58, 7.5), and in those without kidney failure (HR = 4.13; 95%CI 3.25, 5.25). CONCLUSION: The rate of mortality after THA in patients on dialysis is higher than in patients who have a functioning transplant or those who do not have kidney failure, but there is no early excess mortality to suggest a difference in this metric due to the surgery.

Perspectives of Patients, Nurses, and Nephrologists About Electronic Symptom Monitoring With Feedback in Hemodialysis Care.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Patients receiving hemodialysis experience high symptom burden and low quality of life (QOL). Electronic patient-reported outcome measures (e-PROMs) monitoring with feedback to clinicians may be an acceptable intervention to improve health-related QOL for patients receiving hemodialysis. This study explored patient and clinician perspectives on e-PROMs monitoring with feedback to clinicians. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 41 participants (12 patients, 13 nephrologists, 16 dialysis nurses) who participated in a 6-month feasibility pilot study of adults receiving facility-based hemodialysis across 4 Australian units. The intervention consisted of electronic symptom monitoring with feedback to clinicians, who also received evidence-based symptom management recommendations to improve health-related QOL. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Semistructured interviews and focus group discussions explored the feasibility and acceptability of e-PROMs monitoring with feedback to clinicians. We conducted a thematic analysis of transcripts. RESULTS: We identified 4 themes: enabling efficient, systematic, and multidisciplinary patient-centered care; experiencing limited data and options for symptom management; requiring familiarity with technology and processes; and identifying barriers and competing priorities. While insufficient patient engagement, logistic/technical challenges, and delayed symptom feedback emerged as barriers to implementation, active engagement by nurses in encouraging and supporting patients during survey completion and clinicians' prompt action after symptom feedback were considered to be facilitators to implementation. LIMITATIONS: Limited generalizability due to inclusion of English-speaking participants only. CONCLUSIONS: Patients, nurses, and nephrologists considered e-PROMs monitoring with feedback to clinicians feasible for symptom management in hemodialysis. Clinician engagement, patient support, reliable technology, timely symptom feedback, and interventions to address symptom burden are likely to improve its implementation within research and clinical settings.

Examining motor evoked potential amplitude and short-interval intracortical inhibition on the up-going and down-going phases of a transcranial alternating current stimulation (tacs) imposed alpha oscillation.

Many brain regions exhibit rhythmical activity thought to reflect the summed behaviour of large populations of neurons. The endogenous alpha rhythm has been associated with phase-dependent modulation of corticospinal excitability. However, whether exogenous alpha rhythm, induced using transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) also has a phase-dependent effect on corticospinal excitability remains unknown. Here, we triggered transcranial magnetic stimuli (TMS) on the up- or down-going phase of a tACS-imposed alpha oscillation and measured motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude and short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI). There was no significant difference in MEP amplitude or SICI when TMS was triggered on the up- or down-going phase of the tACS-imposed alpha oscillation. The current study provides no evidence of differences in corticospinal excitability or GABAergic inhibition when targeting the up-going (peak) and down-going (trough) phase of the tACS-imposed oscillation.

The IDEAL trial in Australia and New Zealand: clinical and economic impact.

BACKGROUND: The impact of research findings on clinical practice usually remains uncertain and unmeasured. To address this problem, we examined the long-term clinical and economic impact of the Initiating Dialysis Early and Late (IDEAL) trial using data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry. METHODS: We performed a registry-based study including all incident adult dialysis patients in Australia and New Zealand from July 2000 to June 2018. A piecewise linear regression model was used to examine differences in mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at dialysis commencement for the years prior to (2000-2010) and following (2010-2018) publication of the IDEAL trial results. The return on investment (ROI) was calculated using the total cost of performing the IDEAL trial and the cost or savings accruing in Australia and New Zealand from changes in dialysis initiation practice. RESULTS: From July 2000 to June 2010, mean eGFR at dialysis commencement increased at a rate of 0.21 mL/min/1.73 m2/year [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19-0.23]. After the IDEAL trial results were published, mean eGFR at dialysis commencement did not show any temporal change [-0.01 mL/min/1.73 m2/year (95% CI -0.03-0.01)]. The ROI of the IDEAL trial was AU$35.70/AU$1 spent, an estimated savings to the Australian and New Zealand health systems of up to AU$84 million/year. CONCLUSIONS: The previous trend to higher eGFR at dialysis commencement changed following publication of the IDEAL trial results to a steady eGFR that has continued for a decade, avoiding unnecessary dialysis treatments and accruing savings to the Australian and New Zealand health systems.

Novel trial strategies to enhance the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, and impact of nephrology research.

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard for evaluating the effectiveness of interventions. However, criticisms of traditional designs are that they can be inefficient, inflexible, expensive, and conducted in a manner disconnected from real-life clinical practice. Novel strategies and approaches are being utilized to overcome these limitations, including comprehensive consumer engagement, core outcome sets, novel trial designs, streamlined data collection, cost-effectiveness and return on investment evaluations, knowledge dissemination plans, and impact evaluation. These strategies can be implemented at the design, conduct, implementation, and dissemination stages of the trial process. This review aims to provide an overview of these strategies and approaches to improve the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, and impact of nephrology research.

Principles and strategies for involving patients in research in chronic kidney disease: report from national workshops.

BACKGROUND: There is widespread recognition that research will be more impactful if it arises from partnerships between patients and researchers, but evidence on best practice for achieving this remains limited. METHODS: We convened workshops in three Australian cities involving 105 patients/caregivers and 43 clinicians/researchers. In facilitated breakout groups, participants discussed principles and strategies for effective patient involvement in chronic kidney disease research. Transcripts were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Five major themes emerged. 'Respecting consumer expertise and commitment' involved valuing unique and diverse experiential knowledge, clarifying expectations and responsibilities, equipping for meaningful involvement and keeping patients 'in the loop'. 'Attuning to individual context' required a preference-based multipronged approach to engagement, reducing the burden of involvement and being sensitive to the patient journey. 'Harnessing existing relationships and infrastructure' meant partnering with trusted clinicians, increasing research exposure in clinical settings, mentoring patient to patient and extending reach through established networks. 'Developing a coordinated approach' enabled power in the collective and united voice, a systematic approach for equitable inclusion and streamlining access to opportunities and trustworthy information. 'Fostering a patient-centred culture' encompassed building a community, facilitating knowledge exchange and translation, empowering health ownership, providing an opportunity to give back and cultivating trust through transparency. CONCLUSIONS: Partnering with patients in research requires respect and recognition of their unique, diverse and complementary experiential expertise. Establishing a supportive, respectful research culture, responding to their individual context, coordinating existing infrastructure and centralizing the flow of information may facilitate patient involvement as active partners in research.

Recruitment and retention in clinical trials in chronic kidney disease: report from national workshops with patients, caregivers and health professionals.

BACKGROUND: Slow recruitment and poor retention jeopardize the reliability and statistical power of clinical trials, delaying access to effective interventions and increasing costs, as commonly observed in nephrology trials. Involving patients in trial design, recruitment and retention is infrequent but potentially transformational. METHODS: We conducted three workshops involving 105 patients/caregivers and 43 health professionals discussing patient recruitment and retention in clinical trials in chronic kidney disease. RESULTS: We identified four themes. 'Navigating the unknown'-patients described being unaware of the research question, confused by technical terms, sceptical about findings and feared the risk of harm. 'Wary of added burden'-patients voiced reluctance to attend additional appointments, were unsure of the commitment required or at times felt too unwell and without capacity to participate. 'Disillusioned and disconnected'-some patients felt they were taken for granted, particularly if they did not receive trial results. Participants believed there was no culture of trial participation in kidney disease and an overall lack of awareness about opportunities to participate. To improve recruitment and retention, participants addressed 'Building motivation and interest'. CONCLUSIONS: Investigators should establish research consciousness from the time of diagnosis, consider optimal timing for approaching patients, provide comprehensive information in an accessible manner, emphasize current and future relevance to them and their illness, involve trusted clinicians in recruitment and minimize the burden of trial participation. Participation in clinical trials was seen as an opportunity for people to give back to the health system and for future people in their predicament.

Use of patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures in renal units in Australia and New Zealand: A cross-sectional survey study.

AIM: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are increasingly used in research to quantify how patients feel and function, and their experiences of care, however, knowledge of their utilization in routine nephrology is limited. METHODS: The Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA) PROMs working group conducted a prospective cross-sectional survey of PROMs/PREMs use among renal 'parent hospitals'. One survey per hospital was completed (August-November 2017). Descriptive statistics reported type and frequency of measures used and purpose of use. RESULTS: Survey response rate was 100%. Fifty-five of 79 hospitals (70%) used at least one PROMs or PREMs for specific patient groups. PROMs were more likely to be collected from patients receiving comprehensive conservative care (45% of hospitals) than dialysis patients (32%, 31% and 28% of hospitals for home haemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis and facility dialysis, respectively). Few renal transplanting hospitals (3%) collected PROMs. The Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale-Renal (IPOS-Renal) (40% of units), and the Euro-Qol (EQ-5D-5 L) (25%), were most frequently used. The main reason for collecting PROMs was to inform clinical care (58%), and for PREMs was to fulfil private dialysis/hospital provider requirements (25%). The most commonly reported reason for not using PROMs in 24 hospitals was insufficient staff resources (79%). Sixty-two hospitals (78%) expressed interest in participating in a registry-based PROMs trial. CONCLUSION: Many renal hospitals in Australia and New Zealand collect PROMs and/or PREMs as part of clinical care with use varying by treatment modality. Resources are a key barrier to PROMs use.

'Knowledge is power': A framework for partnering with consumers in developing and delivering a scientific meeting in nephrology.

Involving consumers (patients, carers and family members) across all stages of research is gaining momentum in the nephrology community. Scientific meetings present a partnership opportunity with consumers for dissemination of research findings. The Better Evidence and Translation in Chronic Kidney Disease (BEAT-CKD) research collaboration, in partnership with Kidney Health Australia, convened two consumer sessions at the 54th Australian and New Zealand Society of Nephrology Annual Scientific Meeting held in September 2018. The educational objectives, topics and session formats were informed by members of the Better Evidence and Translation-Chronic Kidney Disease Consumer Advisory Board (which at the time comprised 36 consumers from around Australia with varied experience of kidney disease). Patients, health professionals and researchers facilitated and presented at the sessions. In-person and live-streaming attendance options were available, with over 400 total participants across the two sessions. Sessions were also video recorded for dissemination and later viewing. Evaluations demonstrated consumers found the presentations informative, relevant and accessible. Attendees indicated strong interest in participating in similar sessions at future scientific meetings. We propose a framework for partnering with consumers as organisers, facilitators, speakers and attendees at scientific meetings in nephrology.

External validation of the US and UK kidney donor risk indices for deceased donor kidney transplant survival in the Australian and New Zealand population.

BACKGROUND: The US Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI) and the UK KDRI were developed to estimate the risk of graft failure following kidney transplantation. Neither score has been validated in the Australian and New Zealand (ANZ) population. METHODS: Using data from the Australia and New Zealand Organ Donor (ANZOD) and Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) Registries, we included all adult deceased donor kidney-only transplants performed in ANZ from 2005 to 2016 (n = 6405). The KDRI was calculated using both the US donor-only and UK formulae. Three Cox models were constructed (Model 1: KDRI only; Model 2: Model 1 + transplant characteristics; Model 3: Model 2 + recipient characteristics) and compared using Harrell's C-statistics for the outcomes of death-censored graft survival and overall graft survival. RESULTS: Both scores were strongly associated with death-censored and overall graft survival (P < 0.0001 in all models). In the KDRI-only models, discrimination of death-censored graft survival was moderately good with C-statistics of 0.63 and 0.59 for the US and UK scores, respectively. Adjusting for transplant characteristics resulted in marginal improvements of the US KDRI to 0.65 and the UK KDRI to 0.63. The addition of recipient characteristics again resulted in marginal improvements of the US KDRI to 0.70 and the UK KDRI to 0.68. Similar trends were seen for the discrimination of overall graft survival. CONCLUSIONS: The US and UK KDRI scores were moderately good at discriminating death-censored and overall graft survival in the ANZ population, with the US score performing slightly better in all models.

Comparison of cause of death between Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry and the Australian National Death Index.

AIM: The aim of the present study was to understand the differences in how cause of death for patients receiving renal replacement therapy in Australia is recorded in The Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA) compared to the National Death Index (NDI). METHODS: Data linkage was performed between ANZDATA and NDI for all deaths in the period 1980-2013. Cause of death was classified according to ICD-10 chapter. Overall and chapter specific agreement were assessed using the Kappa statistic. Descriptive analysis was used to explore differences where there was disagreement on primary cause of death. RESULTS: The analysis cohort included 28 675 patients. Ninety five percent of ANZDATA reported deaths fell within +/- 3 days of the date recorded by NDI. Circulatory death was the most common cause of death in both databases (ANZDATA 48%, NDI 32%). Overall agreement at ICD chapter level of primary cause was poor (36%, kappa 0.22). Agreement was best for malignancy (kappa 0.71). When there was disagreement on primary cause of death these were most commonly coded as genitourinary (35%) and endocrine (25.0%) in NDI, and circulatory (39%) and withdrawal (24%) in ANZDATA. Sixty-nine percent of patients had a renal related cause documented as either primary or a contributing cause of death in the NDI. CONCLUSION: There is poor agreement in primary cause of death between ANZDATA and NDI which is in part explained by the absence of diabetes and renal failure as causes of death in ANZDATA and the absence of 'withdrawal' in NDI. These differences should be appreciated when interpreting epidemiological data on cause of death in the Australian end stage kidney disease population.

The Symptom Monitoring with Feedback Trial (SWIFT): protocol for a registry-based cluster randomised controlled trial in haemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: Kidney failure prevalence is increasing worldwide. Haemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis or kidney transplantation are undertaken to extend life with kidney failure. People receiving haemodialysis commonly experience fatigue, pain, nausea, cramping, itching, sleeping difficulties, anxiety and depression. This symptom burden contributes to poor health-related quality of life (QOL) and is a major reason for treatment withdrawal and death. The Symptom monitoring WIth Feedback Trial (SWIFT) will test the hypothesis that regular symptom monitoring with feedback to people receiving haemodialysis and their treating clinical team can improve QOL. METHODS: We are conducting an Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) registry-based cluster randomised controlled trial to determine the clinical- and cost-effectiveness at 12 months, of 3-monthly symptom monitoring using the Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale-Renal (IPOS-Renal) survey with clinician feedback, compared with usual care among adults treated with haemodialysis. Participants complete symptom scoring using a tablet, which are provided to participants and to clinicians. The trial aims to recruit 143 satellite haemodialysis centres, (up to 2400 participants). The primary outcome is change in health-related QOL, as measured by EuroQol 5-Dimension, 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) instrument. Secondary outcomes include overall survival, symptom severity (including haemodialysis-associated fatigue), healthcare utilisation and cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION: SWIFT is the first registry-based trial in the Australian haemodialysis population to investigate whether regular symptom monitoring with feedback to participants and clinicians improves QOL. SWIFT is embedded in the ANZDATA Registry facilitating pragmatic recruitment from public and private dialysis clinics, throughout Australia. SWIFT will inform future collection, storage and reporting of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) within a clinical quality registry. As the first trial to rigorously estimate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of routine PROMs collection and reporting in haemodialysis units, SWIFT will provide invaluable information to health services, clinicians and researchers working to improve the lives of those with kidney failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12620001061921 . Registered on 16 October 2020.

Baseline Characteristics and Representativeness of Participants in the BEST-Fluids Trial: A Randomized Trial of Balanced Crystalloid Solution Versus Saline in Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation.

Delayed graft function (DGF) is a major complication of deceased donor kidney transplantation. Saline (0.9% sodium chloride) is a commonly used intravenous fluid in transplantation but may increase the risk of DGF because of its high chloride content. Better Evidence for Selecting Transplant Fluids (BEST-Fluids), a pragmatic, registry-based, double-blind, randomized trial, sought to determine whether using a balanced low-chloride crystalloid solution (Plasma-Lyte 148) instead of saline would reduce DGF. We sought to evaluate the generalizability of the trial cohort by reporting the baseline characteristics and representativeness of the trial participants in detail. Methods: We compared the characteristics of BEST-Fluids participants with those of a contemporary cohort of deceased donor kidney transplant recipients in Australia and New Zealand using data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry. To explore potential international differences, we compared trial participants with a cohort of transplant recipients in the United States using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Results: During the trial recruitment period, 2373 deceased donor kidney transplants were performed in Australia and New Zealand; 2178 were eligible' and 808 were enrolled in BEST-Fluids. Overall, trial participants and nonparticipants were similar at baseline. Trial participants had more coronary artery disease (standardized difference [d] = 0.09; P = 0.03), longer dialysis duration (d = 0.18, P < 0.001), and fewer hypertensive (d = -0.11, P = 0.03) and circulatory death (d = -0.14, P < 0.01) donors than nonparticipants. Most key characteristics were similar between trial participants and US recipients, with moderate differences (|d| ≥ 0.2; all P < 0.001) in kidney failure cause, diabetes, dialysis duration, ischemic time, and several donor risk predictors, likely reflecting underlying population differences. Conclusions: BEST-Fluids participants had more comorbidities and received slightly fewer high-risk deceased donor kidneys but were otherwise representative of Australian and New Zealand transplant recipients and were generally similar to US recipients. The trial results should be broadly applicable to deceased donor kidney transplantation practice worldwide.

Feasibility and acceptability of e-PROMs data capture and feedback among patients receiving haemodialysis in the Symptom monitoring WIth Feedback Trial (SWIFT) pilot: protocol for a qualitative study in Australia.

INTRODUCTION: People receiving haemodialysis experience a high symptom burden and impaired quality of life. The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is increasing in nephrology care, however their acceptability, utility and impacts are not well understood. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We describe a protocol for a qualitative study to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of electronic-PROMs (e-PROMs) data capture and feedback in haemodialysis following the pilot Symptom monitoring WIth Feedback Trial (SWIFT). SWIFT involves linkage of e-PROMs data, including symptoms and health-related quality of life, to the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry with feedback to patients' treating nephrologists and nurse unit managers. Focus groups and semistructured interviews will be conducted with nephrologists (n=15), dialysis nurses (n=24) and patients receiving haemodialysis (n=24) from six dialysis units in Australia. Question topics will include the technical and clinical feasibility and acceptability of e-PROMs reporting and feedback (including the barriers and enablers to uptake) and perceived impact on patient care and outcomes. Transcripts will be analysed thematically and guided by Normalisation Process Theory. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the relevant hospital Human Research Ethics Committees (HREC/18/CALHN/481; HREC/MML/54599). The findings from the SWIFT pilot and qualitative evaluation will inform the implementation of the SWIFT main trial, and more broadly, the use of e-PROMs in clinical settings and registries. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ANZCTRN12618001976279.

Study Protocol for Better Evidence for Selecting Transplant Fluids (BEST-Fluids): a pragmatic, registry-based, multi-center, double-blind, randomized controlled trial evaluating the effect of intravenous fluid therapy with Plasma-Lyte 148 versus 0.9% saline on delayed graft function in deceased donor kidney transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Delayed graft function, the requirement for dialysis due to poor kidney function post-transplant, is a frequent complication of deceased donor kidney transplantation and is associated with inferior outcomes and higher costs. Intravenous fluids given during and after transplantation may affect the risk of poor kidney function after transplant. The most commonly used fluid, isotonic sodium chloride (0.9% saline), contains a high chloride concentration, which may be associated with acute kidney injury, and could increase the risk of delayed graft function. Whether using a balanced, low-chloride fluid instead of 0.9% saline is safe and improves kidney function after deceased donor kidney transplantation is unknown. METHODS: BEST-Fluids is an investigator-initiated, pragmatic, registry-based, multi-center, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. The primary objective is to compare the effect of intravenous Plasma-Lyte 148 (Plasmalyte), a balanced, low-chloride solution, with the effect of 0.9% saline on the incidence of delayed graft function in deceased donor kidney transplant recipients. From January 2018 onwards, 800 participants admitted for deceased donor kidney transplantation will be recruited over 3 years in Australia and New Zealand. Participants are randomized 1:1 to either intravenous Plasmalyte or 0.9% saline peri-operatively and until 48 h post-transplant, or until fluid is no longer required; whichever comes first. Follow up is for 1 year. The primary outcome is the incidence of delayed graft function, defined as dialysis in the first 7 days post-transplant. Secondary outcomes include early kidney transplant function (composite of dialysis duration and rate of improvement in graft function when dialysis is not required), hyperkalemia, mortality, graft survival, graft function, quality of life, healthcare resource use, and cost-effectiveness. Participants are enrolled, randomized, and followed up using the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) Registry. DISCUSSION: If using Plasmalyte instead of 0.9% saline is effective at reducing delayed graft function and improves other clinical outcomes in deceased donor kidney transplantation, this simple, inexpensive change to using a balanced low-chloride intravenous fluid at the time of transplantation could be easily implemented in the vast majority of transplant settings worldwide. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12617000358347. Registered on 8 March 2017. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03829488. Registered on 4 February 2019.

Bowel health in chronic kidney disease: Patient perceptions differ from clinical definitions.

BACKGROUND: The bowel health of those with chronic kidney disease (CKD) can be affected by medications, fluid/dietary allowances, reduced activity and pre-existing medical conditions. Patient perceptions of their bowel health can differ from those of health care professionals and the burden of gastrointestinal symptoms could be inaccurately reported. METHODS: Adults with CKD, including those undergoing haemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis and kidney transplant from four South Australian hospitals enrolled in the study. Participants completed a five-item questionnaire, to investigate their perception of bowel health compared with clinical criteria for 'normal and abnormal' bowel health using the Bristol Stool Form Scale, bowel frequency and reported symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 324 individuals completed the questionnaire. Of those with clinically defined 'abnormal' bowel health (n = 180), 50.6% perceived their bowels as 'normal' or 'more normal than abnormal'. Only 6% of this clinically 'abnormal' group perceived their bowel health as abnormal. Of those with clinically defined 'normal' bowel health (n = 144), 16% perceived their bowel health as 'abnormal', 'more abnormal than normal' or 'variable'. Fifty-seven percent of patients with clinically defined 'abnormal' bowel health were not taking any treatments. Peritoneal dialysis recipients were the highest users of treatments to improve bowel function, with 62% using 1 or more treatment. CONCLUSIONS: It is common for patients with CKD to experience signs and symptoms of abnormal bowel health. There is a disconnect between patient perceptions and clinical definitions of normal or abnormal bowel health. Clinical care team members must carefully obtain and clarify patient-reported symptoms related to bowel function in order to help ensure recommendations and use of appropriate treatments.