Pill-burden and its association with treatment burden among patients with advanced stages of chronic kidney disease.

Introduction: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with multimorbidity and high treatment burden. Pill-burden is one component of the overall treatment burden. However, little is known about its magnitude and contribution to the overall treatment burden among patients with advanced stages of CKD. This study aimed to quantify the magnitude of pill-burden in dialysis-dependent vs. non-dialysis-dependent advanced-stage CKD patients and its association with treatment burden. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study for the assessment of pill-burden and treatment burden among non-dialysis and hemodialysis (HD)-dependent CKD patients. Pill-burden was quantified as "number of pills/patient/week" through electronic medical record, while treatment burden was assessed using the "Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ)". Furthermore, oral and parenteral medication burden was also quantified. Data were analyzed using both descriptive and inferential analysis, including Mann - Whitney U test and two-way between groups analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results: Among the 280 patients included in the analysis, the median (IQR) number of prescribed chronic medications was 12 (5.7) oral and 3 (2) parenteral medications. The median (IQR) pill-burden was 112 (55) pills/week. HD patients experienced higher pill-burden than non-dialysis patients [122 (61) vs. 109 (33) pills/week]; however, this difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.81). The most commonly prescribed oral medications were vitamin D (90.4%), sevelamer carbonate (65%), cinacalcet (67.5%), and statins (67.1%). Overall, patients who had high pill-burden (≥112 pills/week) had significantly higher perceived treatment burden compared to low pill-burden patients (<112 pills/week) [47(36.2) vs. 38.5(36.7); p = 0.0085]. However, two-way ANOVA showed that dialysis status is the significant contributor to the treatment-burden in the high overall pill-burden group (p < 0.01), the high oral-medication-burden group (p < 0.01), and the high parenteral-medication-burden group (p = 0.004). Conclusions: Patients with advanced CKD experienced a high pill-burden, which increases the treatment burden; however, the dialysis status of the patient is the main factor affecting the overall treatment burden. Future intervention studies should target this population with an aim to reduce polypharmacy, pill-burden, and treatment burden, which may ultimately improve CKD patients' quality of life.

Assessment of treatment burden and its impact on quality of life in dialysis-dependent and pre-dialysis chronic kidney disease patients.

BACKGROUND: The management of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and its complications places a significant burden on patients, resulting in impairment of their health-related quality of life (HR-QOL). Little is known about treatment-related burden in pre-dialysis and hemodialysis (HD) CKD patients. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the magnitude of treatment-related burden and its impact on HR-QOL among patients with CKD. METHODS: This was a prospective, cross-sectional study to assess treatment-related burden and HR-QOL among patients with CKD in Qatar. Treatment-related burden and HR-QOL were assessed quantitatively using the Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ) and the Kidney Disease Quality of Life (KDQOL™) questionnaire, respectively. The total TBQ score ranges from 0 to 150, with a higher score indicating higher treatment burden, while the range of total possible scores for the KDQOL™ are from 0 to 3600 with higher transformed score indicating better QOL. Pre-dialysis and hemodialysis (HD) CKD patients who had regular follow-up appointments at Fahad Bin Jassim Kidney Center in Qatar were enrolled. Data were analyzed descriptively and inferentially using SPSS version-24. RESULTS: Two hundred-eighty CKD patients (HD = 223 and pre-dialysis = 57) were included in the analyses (response rate 60.9%). Approximately 35% of the participants reported moderate to high treatment-related burden (TBQ global score 51-150). HD patients experienced significantly higher treatment burden compared to pre-dialysis patients with a median (IQR) score of 45 (36) versus 25 (33), respectively (p < 0.001). Medication burden and lifestyle changes burden were the highest perceived treatment-related burden. Overall, the perceived median (IQR) HR-QOL measured using the KDQOL-36™ among the participants was 2280.6 (1096.2) compared to the maximum global score of 3600. Similarly, the HD patients demonstrated significantly lower HR-QOL compared to the pre-dialysis patients [median (IQR) score of 2140 (1100) vs. 2930 (995), respectively; p < 0.001). There was a strong negative correlation between TBQ score and KDQOL-36™ score [rs (251) = -0.616, p < 0.001], signifying that HR-QOL decreases as treatment burden increases. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that a considerable proportion of CKD patients suffered from treatment-related burden and deterioration in HR-QOL at a varying degree of seriousness. HD patients experienced significantly higher burden of treatment and lower HR-QOL compared to pre-dialysis patients and that HR-QOL declines as treatment burden increases. Therefore, treatment-related burden should be considered in CKD management and factors that increase it should be considered when designing healthcare interventions directed to CKD patients.

Successful use of a bivalirudin treatment protocol to prevent extracorporeal thrombosis in ambulatory hemodialysis patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an uncommon problem in hemodialysis (HD) patients. There have been a few reports on the use of lepirudin, argatroban, or danaparoid in the management of extracorporeal thrombosis (ECT) during dialysis in these patients, because heparin is contraindicated. Here, we report the first long-term use of bivalirudin to prevent ECT. Our study was conducted at Fahd Bin Jassim Kidney Center in Doha, Qatar. All patients diagnosed with HIT were included. A bivalirudin treatment protocol was developed with the initial dosage and dosage adjustments based on the value of activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), the risk of bleeding, and the recurrence of ECT. Eight patients were positive for HIT AB. Among them, three were excluded: two due to the use of warfarin for atrial fibrillation and one due to a negative repeat HIT AB test with no ECT. Five patients who were positive for HIT AB and experienced recurrent ECT events during dialysis were included. These patients were monitored while on bivalirudin protocol for a mean of 4.6 ± 2 months, during which they received a mean number of HD treatments of 66 ± 24. There were no bleeding events or adverse reactions related to bivalirudin during the study. Here, we report the first long-term successful use of a bivalirudin protocol to prevent ECT in ambulatory HD patients with HIT. This protocol allowed for a simple dosing initiation with easy adjustment based on weight, aPTT, and recurrence of ECT events. The protocol provided excellent safety.

Erythropoietin-stimulating agents in the management of anemia of end-stage renal disease patients on regular hemodialysis: a prospective randomized comparative study from Qatar.

Despite extensive use, to the best of our knowledge, no trial has simultaneously compared the three currently used erythropoietin-stimulating agents (ESAs) in a prospective manner in the treatment of anemia of end-stage renal disease patients. All hemodialysis patients in Qatar who were treated with short-acting epoetin alfa or beta have been screened. Eligible patients had been prospectively randomized, either to continue on the previous regimen of epoetin or to receive darbepoetin alfa or continuous erythropoietin receptor activator (CERA) for a total period of 40 weeks. All groups were assessed at the end of the study for safety and efficacy parameters. A total of 327 eligible patients were randomized. Mean hemoglobin concentration remained constant within the recommended target range (11-12 g/dL) throughout the study in the three studied groups. The percentage of patients who reached the target range was constantly above 50% in the second half of the study among CERA group patients who also had significantly lower mean number of dose adjustments as compared with the other two groups (P = 0.001). Similarly, the number of discontinuations of ESA among epoetin, darbepoetin, and CERA groups was 17, 19, and 9, respectively (P = 0.042). The frequencies of adverse events were similar in all groups. This study has specifically compared the effect of ESA type on the variability of serum hemoglobin levels in hemodialysis patients. Furthermore, it confirmed the efficacy and safety of once monthly CERA for maintaining tight hemoglobin control within recommended target ranges.