Identification and Prioritization of Quality Indicators for Conservative Kidney Management.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Conservative kidney management is holistic patient-centered care for patients with kidney failure that focuses on delaying the progression of kidney disease and symptom management, without the provision of renal replacement therapy. Currently there is no consensus as to what constitutes high-quality conservative kidney management. We aimed to develop a set of quality indicators for the conservative management of kidney failure. STUDY DESIGN: Nominal group technique and Delphi survey process. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 16 patients and caregivers from Calgary, Canada, participated in 2 nominal group meetings. 91 multidisciplinary health care professionals from 10 countries took part in a Delphi process. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Nominal group technique study of patients and caregivers was used to identify and prioritize a list of quality indicators. A 4-round Delphi process with health care professionals was used to rate the quality indicators until consensus was reached (defined as a mean rating on the Likert scale ≥7.0 and percent agreement >75%). Quality indicators that met criteria for consensus inclusion in the Delphi survey were ranked, and comparisons were made with nominal group priorities. RESULTS: 99 quality indicators met consensus criteria for inclusion. The most highly rated quality indicator in the Delphi process was the "percentage of patients that die in the place they desire." There was significant discordance between priorities of the nominal groups with that of the Delphi survey, with only 1 quality indicator being shared on each groups' top 10 list of quality indicators. LIMITATIONS: Participants were largely from high-income English-speaking countries, and most already had structured conservative kidney management programs in place, all potentially limiting generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: Quality of conservative kidney management care is important to patients, caregivers, and health care professionals. However, discordant quality indicator priorities between groups suggested that care providers delivering conservative kidney management may not prioritize what is most important to those receiving this care. Conservative kidney management programs and health care providers can improve the applicability of this consensus-based quality indicator list to their program by further developing and evaluating it for use in their program.

Identifying Needs for Self-management Interventions for Adults With CKD and Their Caregivers: A Qualitative Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Fostering the ability of patients to self-manage their chronic kidney disease (CKD), with support from caregivers and providers, may slow disease progression and improve health outcomes. However, little is known about such patients' needs for self-management interventions. We aimed to identify and describe the needs of adults with CKD and informal caregivers for CKD self-management support. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive qualitative study using semi-structured interviews and focus groups. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 6 focus groups (37 participants) and 11 telephone interviews with adults with CKD (stages 1-5, not on renal replacement therapy) and informal caregivers from across Canada. ANALYTIC APPROACH: Thematic analysis. RESULTS: 3 major themes were identified: (1) empowerment through knowledge (awareness and understanding of CKD, diet challenges, medication and alternative treatments, attuning to the body, financial implications, mental and physical health consequences, travel and transportation restrictions, and maintaining work and education), (2) activation through information sharing (access, meaningful and relevant, timing, and amount), and (3) tangible supports for the health journey (family, community, and professionals). LIMITATIONS: Participants were primarily white, educated, married, and English speaking, which limits generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: There are opportunities to enhance CKD self-management support by addressing knowledge pertinent to living well with CKD and priority areas for sharing information and providing tangible support. Future efforts may consider the development of innovative CKD self-management support interventions based on the diverse patient and caregiver needs identified in this study.

A Cost Analysis and Cost-Utility Analysis of a Community Pharmacist-Led Intervention on Reducing Cardiovascular Risk: The Alberta Vascular Risk Reduction Community Pharmacy Project (RxEACH).

BACKGROUND: A randomized trial (the Alberta Vascular Risk Reduction Community Pharmacy Project) showed that a community pharmacist-led intervention was efficacious for reducing cardiovascular (CV) risk. However, the cost of this strategy is unknown. OBJECTIVES: We examined the short- and long-term cost of a pharmacist-led intervention to reduce CV risk compared to usual care. METHODS: We conducted a trial-based cost analysis from the perspective of a publicly funded healthcare system. Over 3 and 12 months of follow-up, we examined specific intervention costs (pharmacy claims), related intervention costs (laboratory tests and medications), and ongoing healthcare costs (physician claims, emergency department visits, and hospital admissions). We also used the validated CV Disease Policy Model-Canada to estimate the long-term effects. RESULTS: A total of 684 participants (mean age 62, 57% male) were included. Overall, there were no significant differences in healthcare costs at 3 or 12 months between the usual care and intervention groups (P = .127). The CV disease-related healthcare cost of managing a patient over a lifetime was estimated to be Can$45 530 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 45 460-45 580) and Can$40 750 (95% UI, 37 780-43 620) in usual care and intervention groups, respectively, an incremental cost savings of Can$4770 per patient (95% UI, 1900-7760). The intervention dominated usual care (better outcomes and lower costs) across 3-year, 5-year, 10-year, and lifetime horizons. CONCLUSION: This economic analysis suggests that a clinical pathway-driven pharmacist-led intervention (previously shown to reduce CV risk) was associated with similar measured healthcare costs over 1 year, and lower extrapolated healthcare costs over a patient lifetime. This strategy could be broadly implemented to realize its benefits.

Nephrology consultation and mortality in people with stage 4 chronic kidney disease: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend nephrology referral for people with advanced non-dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease, based mostly on survival benefits seen in retrospective studies of dialysis patients, which may not be generalizable to the broader population with chronic kidney disease. We aimed to examine the association between outpatient nephrology consultation and survival in adults with stage 4 chronic kidney disease. METHODS: We linked population-based laboratory and administrative data from 2002 to 2014 in Alberta, Canada, on adults with stage 4 chronic kidney disease (sustained estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥ 15 to < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 for > 90 d), who had never had kidney failure and had had no outpatient nephrology encounter in the 2 years preceding study entry. Participants who had never had an outpatient nephrology visit before renal replacement treatment were considered "unexposed." Participants who saw a nephrologist during follow-up were considered "unexposed" before the first outpatient nephrology visit and "exposed" thereafter. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Of the 14 382 study participants (median follow-up 2.7 yr), 64% were aged ≥ 80 years, 35% saw a nephrologist and 66% died during follow-up. Nephrology consultation was associated with lower mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82-0.93). The association was strongest in people < 70 years (HR 0.78, 95% CI, 0.65-0.92), progressively weaker with increasing age, and absent in people ≥ 90 years (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.88-1.25). INTERPRETATION: The survival benefit of nephrology consultation in adults with stage 4 chronic kidney disease may be smaller than expected and appears to attenuate with increasing age. These findings should inform recommendations for nephrology referral considering the advanced age of the patient population meeting current referral criteria.

Patient and provider experience and perspectives of a risk-based approach to multidisciplinary chronic kidney disease care: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: The Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE) predicts risk of progression to kidney failure and is used to guide clinical decisions for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: The KFRE was implemented to guide access to multidisciplinary care for CKD patients in Alberta, Canada, based on their 2-year risk of kidney failure. We used a mixed methods approach to investigate patients' and providers' perspectives and experiences 1 year following KFRE implementation. We conducted post-implementation interviews with multidisciplinary clinic providers and with low-risk patients who transitioned from multidisciplinary to general nephrology care. We also administered pre- and post-implementation patient care experience surveys, targeting both low-risk patients discharged to general nephrology and high-risk patients who remained in the multidisciplinary clinic, and provider job satisfaction surveys. RESULTS: Twenty-seven interviews were conducted (9 patients, 1 family member, 17 providers). Five categories were identified among patients and providers: targeted care; access to resources outside the multidisciplinary clinics; self-efficacy; patient reassurance and reduced stress; and transition process for low-risk patients Two additional categories were identified among providers only: anticipated concerns and job satisfaction. Patients and providers reported that the risk-based approach allowed the clinic to target care to those most likely to experience kidney failure and most likely to benefit from multidisciplinary care. While some participants indicated the risk-based model enhanced the sustainability of the clinics, others expressed concern that care for low-risk patients discharged from multidisciplinary care, or those now considered ineligible, may be inadequate. Overall, 413 patients completed the care experience survey and 73 providers completed the workplace satisfaction survey. The majority of patients were satisfied with their care in both periods with no overall differences. When considering the responses "Always" and "Often" together versus not, there were statistically significant improvements in domains of access to care, caring staff, and safety of care. There were no differences in healthcare providers' job satisfaction following KFRE implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and healthcare providers reported that the risk-based approach improved the focus of the multidisciplinary CKD clinics by targeting patients at highest risk, with survey results suggesting no difference in patient care experience or healthcare provider job satisfaction.

Survival among older adults with kidney failure is better in the first three years with chronic dialysis treatment than not.

Comparisons of survival between dialysis and nondialysis care for older adults with kidney failure have been limited to those managed by nephrologists, and are vulnerable to lead and immortal time biases. So we compared time to all-cause mortality among older adults with kidney failure treated vs. not treated with chronic dialysis. Our retrospective cohort study used linked administrative and laboratory data to identify adults aged 65 or more years of age in Alberta, Canada, with kidney failure (2002-2012), defined by two or more consecutive outpatient estimated glomerular filtration rates less than 10 mL/min/1.73m2, spanning 90 or more days. We used marginal structural Cox models to assess the association between receipt of dialysis and all-cause mortality by allowing control for both time-varying and baseline confounders. Overall, 838 patients met inclusion criteria (mean age 79.1; 48.6% male; mean estimated glomerular filtration rate 7.8 mL/min/1.73m2). Dialysis treatment (vs. no dialysis) was associated with a significantly lower risk of death for the first three years of follow-up (hazard ratio 0.59 [95% confidence interval 0.46-0.77]), but not thereafter (1.22 [0.69-2.17]). However, dialysis was associated with a significantly higher risk of hospitalization (1.40 [1.16-1.69]). Thus, among older adults with kidney failure, treatment with dialysis was associated with longer survival up to three years after reaching kidney failure, though with a higher risk of hospital admissions. These findings may assist shared decision-making about treatment of kidney failure.

Establishing Core Outcome Domains in Hemodialysis: Report of the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) Consensus Workshop.

Evidence-informed decision making in clinical care and policy in nephrology is undermined by trials that selectively report a large number of heterogeneous outcomes, many of which are not patient centered. The Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) Initiative convened an international consensus workshop on November 7, 2015, to discuss the identification and implementation of a potential core outcome set for all trials in hemodialysis. The purpose of this article is to report qualitative analyses of the workshop discussions, describing the key aspects to consider when establishing core outcomes in trials involving patients on hemodialysis therapy. Key stakeholders including 8 patients/caregivers and 47 health professionals (nephrologists, policymakers, industry, and researchers) attended the workshop. Attendees suggested that identifying core outcomes required equitable stakeholder engagement to ensure relevance across patient populations, flexibility to consider evolving priorities over time, deconstruction of language and meaning for conceptual consistency and clarity, understanding of potential overlap and associations between outcomes, and an assessment of applicability to the range of interventions in hemodialysis. For implementation, they proposed that core outcomes must have simple, inexpensive, and validated outcome measures that could be used in clinical care (quality indicators) and trials (including pragmatic trials) and endorsement by regulatory agencies. Integrating these recommendations may foster acceptance and optimize the uptake and translation of core outcomes in hemodialysis, leading to more informative research, for better treatment and improved patient outcomes.

Developing a Set of Core Outcomes for Trials in Hemodialysis: An International Delphi Survey.

BACKGROUND: Survival and quality of life for patients on hemodialysis therapy remain poor despite substantial research efforts. Existing trials often report surrogate outcomes that may not be relevant to patients and clinicians. The aim of this project was to generate a consensus-based prioritized list of core outcomes for trials in hemodialysis. STUDY DESIGN: In a Delphi survey, participants rated the importance of outcomes using a 9-point Likert scale in round 1 and then re-rated outcomes in rounds 2 and 3 after reviewing other respondents' scores. For each outcome, the median, mean, and proportion rating as 7 to 9 (critically important) were calculated. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 1,181 participants (202 [17%] patients/caregivers, 979 health professionals) from 73 countries completed round 1, with 838 (71%) completing round 3. OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS: Outcomes included in the potential core outcome set met the following criteria for both patients/caregivers and health professionals: median score ≥ 8, mean score ≥ 7.5, proportion rating the outcome as critically important ≥ 75%, and median score in the forced ranking question < 10. RESULTS: Patients/caregivers rated 4 outcomes higher than health professionals: ability to travel, dialysis-free time, dialysis adequacy, and washed out after dialysis (mean differences of 0.9, 0.5, 0.3, and 0.2, respectively). Health professionals gave a higher rating for mortality, hospitalization, decrease in blood pressure, vascular access complications, depression, cardiovascular disease, target weight, infection, and potassium (mean differences of 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.9, 0.9, 0.8, 0.7, 0.4, and 0.4, respectively). LIMITATIONS: The Delphi survey was conducted online in English and excludes participants without access to a computer and internet connection. CONCLUSIONS: Patients/caregivers gave higher priority to lifestyle-related outcomes than health professionals. The prioritized outcomes for both groups were vascular access problems, dialysis adequacy, fatigue, cardiovascular disease, and mortality. This process will inform a core outcome set that in turn will improve the relevance, efficiency, and comparability of trial evidence to facilitate treatment decisions.

Determining the research priorities for patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis.

BACKGROUND: The importance of engaging key stakeholders, and patients in particular, in determining research priorities has been recognized. We sought to identify the top 10 research priorities for patients with non-dialysis chronic kidney disease (CKD), their caregivers, and the clinicians and policy-makers involved in their care. METHODS: We used the four-step James Lind Alliance process to establish the top 10 research priorities. A national survey of patients with non-dialysis CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate <45 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ), their caregivers, and the clinicians and policy-makers involved in their care was conducted to identify research uncertainties. A Steering Group of patients, caregivers, clinicians and researchers combined and reduced these uncertainties to 30 through a series of iterations. Finally, a workshop with participants from across Canada (12 patients, 6 caregivers, 3 physicians, 2 nurses, 1 pharmacist and 1 policy-maker) was held to determine the top 10 research priorities, using a nominal group technique. RESULTS: Overall, 439 individuals responded to the survey and identified 1811 uncertainties, from which the steering group determined the top 30 uncertainties to be considered at the workshop. The top 10 research uncertainties prioritized at the workshop included questions about treatments to prevent progression of kidney disease (including diet) and to treat symptoms of CKD, provider- and patient-targeted strategies for managing CKD, the impact of lifestyle on disease progression, harmful effects of medications on disease progression, optimal strategies for treatment of cardiovascular disease in CKD and for early identification of kidney disease, and strategies for equitable access to care for patients with CKD. CONCLUSIONS: We identified the top 10 research priorities for patients with CKD that can be used to guide researchers, as well as inform funders of health-care research.

User-driven conversations about dialysis through Facebook: A qualitative thematic analysis.

AIM: As one of the most popular social networking sites in the world, Facebook has strong potential to enable peer support and the user-driven sharing of health information. We carried out a qualitative thematic analysis of the wall posts of a public Facebook group focused on dialysis to identify some of the major themes discussed. METHODS: We searched Facebook using the word 'dialysis'. A Facebook group (Dialysis Discussion Uncensored) with the highest number of members was selected amongst publicly available forums related to dialysis and operated in English (http://www.facebook.com/groups/DialysisUncensored). Two researchers independently extracted information on features of the group including purpose, group members and the user-generated posts on the group wall. Posts were further analysed to develop major themes. RESULTS: Characteristics of a Facebook group based on its participants and activities are presented. Three themes are described with representative quotations. In a period of 2 weeks, we found 1257 wall posts with total of 31 636 likes and 15 972 comments. All messages were in English, and the majority of the participants were dialysis patients. However, we observed the participation of family members and care providers as well. Posts were categorized into three major themes: sharing information, seeking and providing emotional and social support and sharing experience. CONCLUSION: Findings of this study provide an example of how a social networking platform can enable patients and their families to share information and to encourage peer-based support for managing dialysis-related experiences.

Patient and Caregiver Priorities for Outcomes in Hemodialysis: An International Nominal Group Technique Study.

BACKGROUND: In the context of clinical research, investigators have historically selected the outcomes that they consider to be important, but these are often discordant with patients' priorities. Efforts to define and report patient-centered outcomes are gaining momentum, though little work has been done in nephrology. We aimed to identify patient and caregiver priorities for outcomes in hemodialysis. STUDY DESIGN: Nominal group technique. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Patients on hemodialysis therapy and their caregivers were purposively sampled from 4 dialysis units in Australia (Sydney and Melbourne) and 7 dialysis units in Canada (Calgary). METHODOLOGY: Identification and ranking of outcomes. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Mean rank score (of 10) for top 10 outcomes and thematic analysis. RESULTS: 82 participants (58 patients, 24 caregivers) aged 24 to 87 (mean, 58.4) years in 12 nominal groups identified 68 outcomes. The 10 top-ranked outcomes were fatigue/energy (mean rank score, 4.5), survival (defined by patients as resilience and coping; 3.7), ability to travel (3.6), dialysis-free time (3.3), impact on family (3.2), ability to work (2.5), sleep (2.3), anxiety/stress (2.1), decrease in blood pressure (2.0), and lack of appetite/taste (1.9). Mortality ranked only 14th and was not regarded as the complement of survival. Caregivers ranked mortality, anxiety, and depression higher than patients, whereas patients ranked ability to work higher. Four themes underpinned their rankings: living well, ability to control outcomes, tangible and experiential relevance, and severity and intrusiveness. LIMITATIONS: Only English-speaking participants were eligible. CONCLUSIONS: Although trials in hemodialysis have typically focused on outcomes such as death, adverse events, and biological markers, patients tend to prioritize outcomes that are more relevant to their daily living and well-being. Researchers need to consider interventions that are likely to improve these outcomes and measure and report patient-relevant outcomes in trials, and clinicians may become more patient-orientated by using these outcomes in their clinical encounters.

Primary care physicians' perceived barriers, facilitators and strategies to enhance conservative care for older adults with chronic kidney disease: a qualitative descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Although primary care physicians (PCPs) are often responsible for the routine care of older adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD), there is a paucity of evidence regarding their perspectives and practice of conservative (non-dialysis) care. We undertook a qualitative study to describe barriers, facilitators and strategies to enhance conservative, non-dialysis, CKD care by PCPs in the community. METHODS: Semi-structured telephone and face-to-face interviews were conducted with PCPs from Alberta, Canada. Participants were identified using a snowball sampling strategy and purposively sampled based on sex, age and rural/urban location of clinical practice. Eligible participants had managed at least one patient ≥75 years with Stage 5 CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate <15 mL/min/1.73 m2, not on dialysis) in the prior year. Participant recruitment ceased when data saturation was reached. Transcripts were analyzed thematically using conventional content analysis. RESULTS: In total, 27 PCPs were interviewed. The majority were male (15/27), were aged 40-60 years (15/27) and had practiced in primary care for >20 years (14/27). Perceived barriers to conservative CKD care included: managing expectations of kidney failure for patients and their families; dealing with the complexity of medical management of patients requiring conservative care; and challenges associated with managing patients jointly with specialists. Factors that facilitated conservative CKD care included: establishing patient/family expectations early; preserving continuity of care; and utilizing a multidisciplinary team approach. Suggested strategies for improving conservative care included having: direct telephone access to clinicians familiar with conservative care; treatment decision aids for patients and their families; and a conservative care clinical pathway to guide management. CONCLUSIONS: PCPs identified important barriers and facilitators to conservative care for their older patients with Stage 5 CKD. Further investigation of potential strategies that address barriers and enable facilitators is required to improve the quality of conservative care for older adults in the community.

Predictors of long-term care placement in persons with dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to summarize the effects of various individual, caregiver, and system-related factors on the risk of long-term care (LTC) placement for persons with dementia. METHODS: We searched electronic databases for longitudinal studies reporting on predictors of LTC placement for persons with dementia residing in the community or supportive care settings. We performed meta-analyses with hazard ratios (HRs) of various predictors using random effects models and stratified the HRs with several study variables. Data on predictors not included in the meta-analyses were summarized descriptively. RESULTS: Full-text reviews of 360 papers were performed with data from 37 papers used to calculate pooled HRs for LTC placement of select person with dementia (age, sex, race, marital status, type of dementia, living arrangement, and relationship to caregiver) and caregiver (age, sex, and depressive symptoms) characteristics. White race [HR = 1.67, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.41-1.99], greater dementia severity (HR = 1.05, 95% CI: 1.03-1.06), and older age (HR = 1.02, 95% CI: 1.01-1.03) increased the risk of LTC placement. Married persons with dementia (HR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.16-0.86) and living with their caregiver (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.56-0.92) had a lower risk. Behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia, the degree of functional impairment, and caregiver burden had a consistent effect on the risk of LTC placement in our descriptive review. CONCLUSION: We quantified the predictive effect of several risk factors for LTC placement. These estimates could be used to more precisely categorize the risk of institutionalization and potentially link those at higher risk to appropriate services. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Provision of dementia-related services in Canada: a comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Dementia is common, particularly among older adults, and is one of the major causes of dependency later in life. We sought to provide an overview and comparison of key services related to dementia care as the disease progresses in three large Canadian healthcare centres. METHODS: We identified family physicians, geriatric specialists, and dementia case managers from three major population centres in Canada with universal healthcare coverage. Using a standardized longitudinal dementia case vignette, participants were interviewed on services they would provide at each stage of the disease. We used principles of content analysis to generate codes and identify themes; appropriate time frames from the vignette fitting the necessary provision of services were derived from the Canadian consensus statement and determined in consultation with clinical experts. Proportions of participants that identified dementia-related care services were analyzed at each time point of the vignette using chi-square tests. RESULTS: Thirty-four healthcare providers from Calgary (Alberta), Edmonton (Alberta), and Ottawa (Ontario) participated. Review of our data identified seven overarching themes of dementia-related care services. Services provided in the community setting include future planning and related services, educational and social support services, and home care and respite services. Although all providers consistently identified educational and social support services (e.g. the Alzheimer Society) within the appropriate time frame, the provision of other services was variable. The proportion of providers reporting potential access of future planning services was significantly different across the three sites (Calgary, 91.7 %; Edmonton; 58.3 %; and Ottawa, 30.0 %), p = 0.012. Also, the proportion of providers that identified day program services were significantly different across the three sites (Calgary, 100.0 %; Edmonton, 91.7 %; and Ottawa, 60.0 %), p = 0.023 according to a chi-square test. CONCLUSIONS: We found important types of variability in service delivery among different regions in Canada for a typical patient with dementia and their family caregiver. Health systems can be calibrated by aligning services from different settings to appropriate time points in the vignette, which illustrates the dynamic course of service delivery and opportunities for improvement throughout the disease trajectory.

A randomized controlled trial comparing in-person and wiki-inspired nominal group techniques for engaging stakeholders in chronic kidney disease research prioritization.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have evaluated stakeholder engagement in chronic kidney disease (CKD) research prioritization. In this two-arm, parallel group randomized controlled trial, we sought to compare an in-person nominal group technique (NGT) approach with an online wiki-inspired alternative to determining the top 10 CKD research priorities, and to evaluate stakeholder engagement and satisfaction with each process. METHODS: Eligible participants included adults ≥18 years with access to a computer and Internet, high health literacy, and from one of the following stakeholder groups: patients with CKD not on dialysis, their caregivers, health care providers who care for patients with CKD, or CKD-related health policymakers. Fifty-six participants were randomized to a wiki-inspired modified NGT that occurred over 3 weeks vs. a 1-day in-person NGT workshop, informed by James Lind Alliance methodology, to determine the top 10 CKD-related research priorities. The primary outcome was the pairwise agreement between the two groups' final top 10 ranked priorities, evaluated using Spearman's correlation coefficient. Secondary outcomes included participant engagement and satisfaction and wiki tool usability. RESULTS: Spearman's rho for correlation between the two lists was 0.139 (95 % confidence interval -0.543 to 0.703, p = 0.71), suggesting low correlation between the top 10 lists across the two groups. Both groups ranked the same item as the top research priority, with 5 of the top 10 priorities ranked by the wiki group within the top 10 for the in-person group. In comparison to the in-person group, participants from the wiki group were less likely to report: satisfaction with the format (73.7 vs.100 %, p = 0.011); ability to express their views (57.9 vs 96.0 %, p = 0.0003); and perception that they contributed meaningfully to the process (68.4 vs 84.0 %, p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: A CKD research prioritization approach using an online wiki-like tool identified low correlation in rankings compared with an in-person approach, with less satisfaction and perceptions of active engagement. Modifications to the wiki-inspired tool are required before it can be considered a potential alternative to an in-person workshop for engaging patients in determining research priorities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ( ISRCTN18248625 ).

Age and treatment of kidney failure.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review discusses issues related to treatment of chronic kidney disease, and kidney failure in particular, among older adults. RECENT FINDINGS: A substantial proportion of older adults have chronic kidney disease and progress to kidney failure. There is considerable variability in treatment practices for advanced kidney disease among older adults, and evidence that treatment decisions such as dialysis initiation may be made without adequate preparation. When initiated, survival among older adults on chronic dialysis remains poor, and is associated with a significant decline in functional status. There is also evidence to suggest that dialysis initiation may not reflect overall treatment goals of elderly patients, but rather a lack of clear communication between patients and health practitioners, and underdeveloped conservative care programs in many centers. SUMMARY: Kidney failure is common among older adults. When considering treatment options for kidney failure, patient priorities, preferences, and symptoms should be taken into account, using a shared decision-making approach.

Dementia case management and risk of long-term care placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of our study is to evaluate the effectiveness of dementia case management compared with usual care on reducing long-term care placement, hospitalization, and emergency department visits for adult patients with dementia. We also sought to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention on delaying time to long-term care placement and hospitalization. METHODS: We searched electronic databases supplemented by bibliographies and conference proceedings for randomized controlled trials testing the effectiveness of dementia case management in reducing resource utilization in a population of caregiver-care recipient dyads living in the community. We meta-analyzed the risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean differences of long-term care placement and the RR of hospital admissions. Pooled estimates were further stratified by study characteristics and measures of study quality. RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included in the meta-analysis. The overall pooled RR of long-term care placement was 0.94 (95% confidence interval [0.85, 1.03]; p = 0.227) for dementia case management compared with usual care. Stratification by follow-up duration indicated a statistically significant reduction in risk of long-term care placement when follow-up duration was less than 18 months (RR 0.61, 95% confidence interval [0.41, 0.91], p = 0.015). There was no effect of dementia case management compared with usual care for the other outcomes. CONCLUSION: Dementia case management demonstrated a short-term positive effect on reducing the risk of long-term care placement among older people with dementia residing in the community. However, other sources of resource utilization and more extended effects of dementia case management on risk of long-term care placement warrant further investigation.

Association of Initiation of Dialysis With Hospital Length of Stay and Intensity of Care in Older Adults With Kidney Failure.

Importance: Comparative outcome data examining the association of dialysis initiation with hospital length of stay and intensity of care in older adults with kidney failure are scarce, and prior studies are limited to patients treated by nephrology teams. Objective: To compare in-hospital days and intensity of care among older adults with kidney failure who were treated vs not treated with maintenance dialysis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based, retrospective cohort study included adults in Alberta, Canada, 65 years or older with kidney failure, defined by at least 2 consecutive outpatient estimated glomerular filtration rate values of less than 10 mL/min/1.73 m2 spanning a period of at least 90 days from May 15, 2002, to March 31, 2014. Data were analyzed from August 1, 2017, to August 29, 2019. Exposures: Time-varying exposure to maintenance dialysis for treatment of kidney failure. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was rate of in-hospital days. Secondary outcomes included rates of hospital admissions, intensive care unit admissions, cardiopulmonary resuscitations, inpatient palliative care, and emergency department visits; risk of in-hospital death; and time to admission to long-term care. Results: A total of 968 patients (median age, 78.5 [interquartile range, 72.4-84.7] years; 489 men [50.5%]; median follow-up, 2.0 [interquartile range, 0.8-3.9] years) were included in the analysis. Patients who underwent dialysis spent more adjusted in-hospital days per person-year (36.25 [95% CI, 30.72-41.77] vs 14.65 [95% CI, 12.28-17.02]; incidence rate ratio [IRR], 2.47 [95% CI, 1.99-3.08]). However, the dialysis group did not have a higher rate of hospital admissions (1.18 [95% CI 1.07-1.29] vs 1.32 [95% CI 1.17-1.48] per year; IRR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.77-1.03]). Patients in the dialysis group had a higher rate of intensive care unit admissions per 1000 hospitalizations (98.37 [95% CI, 81.09-115.65] vs 54.51 [95% CI, 37.76-71.26]; IRR, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.28-2.54]) and lower rates of inpatient palliative care per 1000 in-hospital days (3.92 [95% CI, 3.13-4.72] vs 8.60 [95% CI, 6.3-11.0]; IRR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.32-0.64]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, compared with nondialysis care, patients who received maintenance dialysis spent more time in the hospital and were more likely to be admitted to intensive care units. This finding suggests trade-offs between longer survival and higher intensity of use of health care services as a function of dialysis initiation. Maintenance dialysis may be a proxy for the type of philosophy of care driving increased in-hospital time and intensive care and less use of palliative care.

Availability, Accessibility, and Quality of Conservative Kidney Management Worldwide.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: People with kidney failure typically receive KRT in the form of dialysis or transplantation. However, studies have suggested that not all patients with kidney failure are best suited for KRT. Additionally, KRT is costly and not always accessible in resource-restricted settings. Conservative kidney management is an alternate kidney failure therapy that focuses on symptom management, psychologic health, spiritual care, and family and social support. Despite the importance of conservative kidney management in kidney failure care, several barriers exist that affect its uptake and quality. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: The Global Kidney Health Atlas is an ongoing initiative of the International Society of Nephrology that aims to monitor and evaluate the status of global kidney care worldwide. This study reports on findings from the 2018 Global Kidney Health Atlas survey, specifically addressing the availability, accessibility, and quality of conservative kidney management. RESULTS: Respondents from 160 countries completed the survey, and 154 answered questions pertaining to conservative kidney management. Of these, 124 (81%) stated that conservative kidney management was available. Accessibility was low worldwide, particularly in low-income countries. Less than half of countries utilized multidisciplinary teams (46%); utilized shared decision making (32%); or provided psychologic, cultural, or spiritual support (36%). One-quarter provided relevant health care providers with training on conservative kidney management delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, conservative kidney management is available in most countries; however, it is not optimally accessible or of the highest quality.