Limited english proficiency and concordance of CKD awareness among primary care providers and patients.

BACKGROUND: Patient awareness of CKD and primary care provider (PCP) recognition of CKD are lower than for other chronic conditions. Understanding how patients may become aware of CKD is critical to their participation in healthy behaviors to slow CKD progression. We examined factors associated with the concordance of CKD awareness among patients and providers and hypothesized that concordance of CKD awareness would be influenced by social and demographic factors that impact communication, such as limited English proficiency (LEP) and health literacy. METHODS: Between July 2011 to July 2014, patients with CKD from three primary care clinics in a public healthcare delivery system were surveyed with questions regarding their health, including awareness of their CKD status. Chart review was performed to identify PCP recognition of CKD, defined as CKD listed anywhere in the problem list within nine months before patient enrollment into the study. We used logistic regression to determine the association between provider recognition and patient awareness of kidney disease among those patients with CKD, adjusting for patient demographics, co-morbidities, and provider training. RESULTS: The study population (n = 152) had a mean age of 57.4 (SD 13), was 48.7% male and was racially/ethnically and linguistically diverse: 89.5% self-identified as Black, Hispanic, or Asian and 32.2% had LEP. Most patients had hypertension (89.5%) and diabetes (77.6%); mean eGFR was 66.1 ml/min/1.73m2 (SD 32.8). Positive concordance of CKD awareness was 42% (n = 64). Odds of positive concordance with their providers were much higher among patients with LEP compared to English speaking patients (adjusted odds ratio = 11.07, 95%CI 1.60-76.39). CONCLUSIONS: Concordance of CKD awareness among PCPs and their patients with CKD in one public delivery system was higher among patients with LEP. While speculative, this may be due to greater caution in provider communication about CKD with LEP patients.

County-Level Dialysis Facility Supply and Distance Traveled to Facilities among Incident Kidney Failure Patients.

Background: The availability of dialysis facilities and distance traveled to receive care can impact health outcomes for patients with newly onset kidney failure. We examined recent changes in county-level number of dialysis facilities between 2012 and 2019 and assessed the association between county-level dialysis facility supply and the distance incident kidney failure patients travel to receive care. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 828,427 adult patients initiating in-center hemodialysis for incident kidney failure between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2019. We calculated the annual county-level number of dialysis facilities, and counties were categorized as having zero, one, two, or three or more dialysis facilities at the time of treatment initiation. We then measured the distance traveled between a patient's home address and dialysis facility at treatment initiation (in miles) and evaluated the association between county-level number of dialysis facilities and distance traveled to initiate treatment. Results: The average annual county-level number of facilities increased from 1.8 to 2.3 between 2012 and 2019. In our study period, 5% of incident adult kidney failure patients resided in a county that had zero dialysis facilities between 2012 and 2019. Compared with counties with three or more dialysis facilities, patients living in counties with no facilities in our study period traveled 14.3 miles (95% CI, 13.4 to 15.2) further for treatment. Conclusions: Kidney failure patients in counties that had no dialysis facilities traveled further, limiting their access to dialysis. Counties with no dialysis facilities at the end of the study period were more rural and had higher poverty than other counties.