The aim of this study was to investigate 28-day mortality after COVID-19 diagnosis in the European kidney replacement therapy population. In addition, we determined the role of patient ...characteristics, treatment factors, and country on mortality risk with the use of ERA-EDTA Registry data on patients receiving kidney replacement therapy in Europe from February 1, 2020, to April 30, 2020. Additional data on all patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 were collected from 7 European countries encompassing 4298 patients. COVID-19–attributable mortality was calculated using propensity score–matched historic control data and after 28 days of follow-up was 20.0% (95% confidence interval 18.7%–21.4%) in 3285 patients receiving dialysis and 19.9% (17.5%–22.5%) in 1013 recipients of a transplant. We identified differences in COVID-19 mortality across countries, and an increased mortality risk in older patients receiving kidney replacement therapy and male patients receiving dialysis. In recipients of kidney transplants ≥75 years of age, 44.3% (35.7%–53.9%) did not survive COVID-19. Mortality risk was 1.28 (1.02–1.60) times higher in transplant recipients compared with matched dialysis patients. Thus, the pandemic has had a substantial effect on mortality in patients receiving kidney replacement therapy, a highly vulnerable population due to underlying chronic kidney disease and a high prevalence of multimorbidity.
Display omitted
Abstract
Diabetes, hypertension and cardiovascular disease have been listed as risk factors for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) since the first report of the disease in January 2020. ...However, this report did not mention chronic kidney disease (CKD) nor did it provide information on the relevance of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) or albuminuria. As the disease spread across the globe, information on larger populations with greater granularity on risk factors emerged. The recently published OpenSAFELY project analysed factors associated with COVID-19 death in 17 million patients. The picture that arose differs significantly from initial reports. For example, hypertension is not an independent risk factor for COVID-19 death adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.89, but renal disease very much is. Dialysis (aHR 3.69), organ transplantation (aHR 3.53) and CKD (aHR 2.52 for patients with eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2) represent three of the four comorbidities associated with the highest mortality risk from COVID-19. The risk associated with CKD Stages 4 and 5 is higher than the risk associated with diabetes mellitus (aHR range 1.31–1.95, depending upon glycaemic control) or chronic heart disease (aHR 1.17). In another recent publication, the Global Burden of Disease collaboration identified that worldwide, CKD is the most prevalent risk factor for severe COVID-19. Moreover, the distribution of risk factors for COVID-19 mortality appears to be different in patients with CKD when compared with the general population. The high prevalence of CKD in combination with the elevated risk of mortality from COVID-19 in CKD necessitates urgent action for this group of patients. This article defines essential action points (summarized in Box 1), among which is advocating the inclusion of CKD patients in clinical trials testing the efficacy of drugs and vaccines to prevent severe COVID-19.
The aim of this study is to present average annual healthcare costs for Dutch renal replacement therapy (RRT) patients for 7 treatment modalities.
Health insurance claims data from 2012-2014 were ...used. All patients with a 2014 claim for dialysis or kidney transplantation were selected. The RRT related and RRT unrelated average annual healthcare costs were analysed for 5 dialysis modalities (in-centre haemodialysis (CHD), home haemodialysis (HHD), continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) and multiple dialysis modalities in a year (Mix group)) and 2 transplant modalities (kidney from living and deceased donor, respectively).
The total average annual healthcare costs in 2014 ranged from €77,566 (SD = €27,237) for CAPD patients to €105,833 (SD = €30,239) for patients in the Mix group. For all dialysis modalities, the vast majority (72-84%) of costs was RRT related. Patients on haemodialysis ≥4x/week had significantly higher average annual costs compared to those dialyzing 3x/week (Δ€19,122). Costs for kidney transplant recipients were €85,127 (SD = €39,679) in the year of transplantation and rapidly declined in the first and second year after successful transplantation (resp. €29,612 (SD = €34,099) and €15,018 (SD = €16,186)). Transplantation with a deceased donor kidney resulted in higher costs (€99,450, SD = €36,036)) in the year of transplantation compared to a living donor kidney transplantation (€73,376, SD = €38,666).
CAPD patients have the lowest costs compared to other dialysis modalities. Costs in the year of transplantation are 25% lower for patients with kidneys from living vs. deceased donor. After successful transplantation, annual costs decline substantially to a level that is approximately 14-19% of annual dialysis costs.
This study examines the time trends in incidence, prevalence, patient and kidney allograft survival and causes of death (COD) in patients receiving renal replacement therapy (RRT) in Europe.
Eighteen ...national or regional renal registries providing data to the European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association Registry between 1998 and 2011 were included. Incidence and prevalence time trends between 2001 and 2011 were studied with Joinpoint and Poisson regression. Patient and kidney allograft survival and COD between 1998 and 2011 were analysed using Kaplan-Meier and competing risk methods and Cox regression.
From 2001 to 2008, the adjusted incidence of RRT rose by 1.1% (95% CI: 0.6, 1.7) annually to 131 per million population (pmp). During 2008-2011, the adjusted incidence fell by 2.2% (95% CI: -4.2, -0.2) annually to 125 pmp. This decline occurred predominantly in patients aged 45-64 years, 65-74 years and in the primary renal diseases diabetes mellitus type 1 and 2, renovascular disease and glomerulonephritis. Between 2001 and 2011, the overall adjusted prevalence increased from 724 to 1032 pmp (+3.3% annually, 95% CI: 2.8, 3.8). The adjusted 5-year patient survival on RRT improved between 1998-2002 and 2003-2007 adjusted hazard ratio (HRa) 0.85, 95% CI: 0.84, 0.86. Comparing these time periods, the risk of cardiovascular deaths fell by 25% (HRa 0.75, 95% CI: 0.74, 0.77). However the risk of malignant death rose by 9% (HRa 1.09, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.16) in patients ≥65 years.
This European study shows a declining RRT incidence, particularly in patients aged 45-64 years, 65-74 years and secondary to diabetic nephropathy. Encouragingly, the adjusted RRT patient survival continues to improve. The risk of cardiovascular death has decreased, though the risk of death from malignancy has increased in the older population.
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a rising public health problem that may progress to kidney failure, requiring kidney replacement therapy. It is also associated with an increased incidence of ...cardiovascular disease (CVD). Because of its asymptomatic nature, CKD is often detected in a late stage. Population screening for albuminuria could allow early detection of people with CKD who may benefit from preventive treatment. In case such screening is performed in a general practitioner (GP) setting, this will result in relatively high costs. Home-based screening might be an effective and cost-effective alternative.
The THOMAS study (Towards HOMe-based Albuminuria Screening) is designed to prospectively investigate two methods for home-based population screening for increased albuminuria to detect yet undiagnosed CKD and risk factors for progression and CVD.
This investigator initiated, randomized population-based study will include 15.000 individuals aged 45-80 years, who will be randomly assigned to be invited for a home-based screening test for albuminuria with a more conventional urine collection device or an innovative smartphone application. If the test result is positive upon confirmation (i.e., elevated albuminuria), participants are invited to a central screening facility for an elaborate screening for CKD and CVD risk factors. Participants are referred to their GP for appropriate treatment, if abnormalities are found. Primary endpoints are the participation rate, yield, and cost-effectiveness of the home-based screening and elaborate screening.
The THOMAS study will evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of home-based albuminuria screening in the general population for the early detection of CKD and CVD risk factors. It will provide insight into the willingness to participate in population screening for CKD and into the compliance of the general population to a corresponding screening protocol and compliance to participate. Thus, it may help to develop an attractive novel screening strategy for the early detection of CKD.
ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number NCT04295889, registered 05 March 2020. https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=NCT04295889.
Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) are increasingly used in routine clinical practice to facilitate patients in sharing and discussing health-related topics with their clinician. This study ...focuses on the implementation experiences of healthcare professionals and patients during the early implementation phase of the newly developed Dutch set of dialysis PROMs and aims to understand the process of early implementation of PROMs from the users' perspectives.
This is a qualitative study among healthcare professionals (physicians and nursing staff: n = 13) and patients (n = 14) of which 12 were receiving haemodialysis and 2 peritoneal dialysis. Semi-structured interviews were used to understand the barriers and facilitators that both professionals and patients encounter when starting to implement PROMs.
The early PROM implementation process is influenced by a variety of factors that we divided into barriers and facilitators. We identified four barriers: patient´s indifference to PROMs, scepticism on the benefits of aggregated PROM data, the limited treatment options open to doctors and organizational issues such as mergers, organizational problems and renovations. We also describe four facilitators: professional involvement and patient support, a growing understanding of the use of PROMs during the implementation, quick gains from using PROMs such as receiving instant feedback and a clear ambition on patient care such as a shared view on patient involvement and management support.
In this qualitative study carried out during the early implementation phase of the Dutch dialysis PROM set, we found that patients did not yet consider the PROM set to be a useful additional tool to share information with their doctor. This was despite the professionals' primary reason for using PROMs being to improve patient-doctor communication. Furthermore, the perceived lack of intervention options was frustrating for some of the professionals. We found that nurses could be important enablers of further implementation because of their intensive relationship with dialysis patients.
Objective To compare the effects on proteinuria and blood pressure of addition of dietary sodium restriction or angiotensin receptor blockade at maximum dose, or their combination, in patients with ...non-diabetic nephropathy receiving background treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibition at maximum dose.Design Multicentre crossover randomised controlled trial.Setting Outpatient clinics in the Netherlands.Participants 52 patients with non-diabetic nephropathy.Interventions All patients were treated during four 6 week periods, in random order, with angiotensin receptor blockade (valsartan 320 mg/day) or placebo, each combined with, consecutively, a low sodium diet (target 50 mmol Na+/day) and a regular sodium diet (target 200 mmol Na+/day), with a background of ACE inhibition (lisinopril 40 mg/day) during the entire study. The drug interventions were double blind; the dietary interventions were open label.Main outcome measures The primary outcome measure was proteinuria; the secondary outcome measure was blood pressure.Results Mean urinary sodium excretion, a measure of dietary sodium intake, was 106 (SE 5) mmol Na+/day during a low sodium diet and 184 (6) mmol Na+/day during a regular sodium diet (P<0.001). Geometric mean residual proteinuria was 1.68 (95% confidence interval 1.31 to 2.14) g/day during ACE inhibition plus a regular sodium diet. Addition of angiotensin receptor blockade to ACE inhibition reduced proteinuria to 1.44 (1.07 to 1.93) g/day (P=0.003), addition of a low sodium diet reduced it to 0.85 (0.66 to 1.10) g/day (P<0.001), and addition of angiotensin receptor blockade plus a low sodium diet reduced it to 0.67 (0.50 to 0.91) g/day (P<0.001). The reduction of proteinuria by the addition of a low sodium diet to ACE inhibition (51%, 95% confidence interval 43% to 58%) was significantly larger (P<0.001) than the reduction of proteinuria by the addition of angiotensin receptor blockade to ACE inhibition (21%, (8% to 32%) and was comparable (P=0.009, not significant after Bonferroni correction) to the reduction of proteinuria by the addition of both angiotensin receptor blockade and a low sodium diet to ACE inhibition (62%, 53% to 70%). Mean systolic blood pressure was 134 (3) mm Hg during ACE inhibition plus a regular sodium diet. Mean systolic blood pressure was not significantly altered by the addition of angiotensin receptor blockade (131 (3) mm Hg; P=0.12) but was reduced by the addition of a low sodium diet (123 (2) mm Hg; P<0.001) and angiotensin receptor blockade plus a low sodium diet (121 (3) mm Hg; P<0.001) to ACE inhibition. The reduction of systolic blood pressure by the addition of a low sodium diet (7% (SE 1%)) was significantly larger (P=0.003) than the reduction of systolic blood pressure by the addition of angiotensin receptor blockade (2% (1)) and was similar (P=0.14) to the reduction of systolic blood pressure by the addition of both angiotensin receptor blockade and low sodium diet (9% (1)), to ACE inhibition.Conclusions Dietary sodium restriction to a level recommended in guidelines was more effective than dual blockade for reduction of proteinuria and blood pressure in non-diabetic nephropathy. The findings support the combined endeavours of patients and health professionals to reduce sodium intake.Trial registration Netherlands Trial Register NTR675.
Value-based health care is increasingly promoted as a strategy for improving care quality by benchmarking outcomes that matter to patients relative to the cost of obtaining those outcomes. To support ...the shift toward value-based health care in chronic kidney disease (CKD), the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) assembled an international working group of health professionals and patient representatives to develop a standardized minimum set of patient-centered outcomes targeted for clinical use. The considered outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures were generated from systematic literature reviews. Feedback was sought from patients and health professionals. Patients with very high-risk CKD (stages G3a/A3 and G3b/A2-G5, including dialysis, kidney transplantation, and conservative care) were selected as the target population. Using an online modified Delphi process, outcomes important to all patients were selected, such as survival and hospitalization, and to treatment-specific subgroups, such as vascular access survival and kidney allograft survival. Patient-reported outcome measures were included to capture domains of health-related quality of life, which were rated as the most important outcomes by patients. Demographic and clinical variables were identified to be used as case-mix adjusters. Use of these consensus recommendations could enable institutions to monitor, compare, and improve the quality of their CKD care.
Abstract
Background
Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is becoming an increasingly important outcome in kidney transplantation (KT). To describe HRQOL in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs), this ...systematic review summarizes literature that compared HRQOL among KTRs and other relevant populations i.e. patients receiving dialysis, patients on the waiting list (WL) for KT, patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) not receiving renal replacement therapy (RRT), the general population (GP) and healthy controls (HCs) and themselves before KT.
Methods
The literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. Eligible studies published between January 2000 and October 2020 were included.
Results
Forty-four studies comprising 6929 KTRs were included in this systematic review. Despite the study heterogeneity, KTRs reported a higher HRQOL after KT compared with pre-transplantation and compared with patients receiving dialysis with or without being on the WL, especially in disease-specific domains (i.e. burden and effects of kidney disease). Additionally, KTRs had similar to marginally higher HRQOL compared with patients with CKD Stages 3–5 not receiving RRT. When compared with HCs or the GP, KTRs reported similar HRQOL in the first 1 or 2 years after KT and lower physical HRQOL and lower to comparable mental HRQOL in studies with longer post-transplant time.
Conclusions
The available evidence suggests that HRQOL improves after KT and can be restored to but not always maintained at pre-CKD HRQOL levels. Future studies investigating intervention targets to improve or maintain post-transplant HRQOL are needed.
ObjectivesPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide insight into patients’ experienced health and needs, and can improve patient–professional communication. However, little is known about how ...to discuss PROM results. This study aimed to provide in-depth knowledge of patients’ and healthcare professionals’ experiences with and perspectives on discussing PROM results as part of routine dialysis care.DesignA qualitative study was performed using an interpretive description approach. Individual semistructured interviews were conducted with 22 patients and healthcare professionals. Interviews focused on general and specific situations (eg, addressing sensitive topics or when no medical treatment is available). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed inductively using thematic analysis.SettingParticipants were purposively sampled from eight dialysis centres across the Netherlands.ParticipantsInterviews were conducted with 10 patients receiving dialysis treatment and 12 healthcare professionals (nephrologists and nurses).ResultsPatients and healthcare professionals provided practical guidance for optimal discussion about PROM results. First, patients and healthcare professionals emphasised that PROM results should always be discussed and indicated how to create a suitable setting, adequately prepare, deal with time constraints and use PROMs as a tool for personalised holistic consultations. Second, patients should actively participate and healthcare professionals should take a guiding role. A trusting patient–professional relationship was considered a prerequisite and patient–professional interaction was described as a collaboration in which both contribute their knowledge, experiences and ideas. Third, follow-up after discussing PROM results was considered important, including evaluations and actions (eg, symptom management) structurally embedded into the multidisciplinary treatment process. These general themes also applied to the specific situations, for example: results should also be discussed when no medical treatment is available. Though, healthcare professionals were expected to take more initiative and a leading role when discussing sensitive topics.ConclusionsThis study provides insight into how to organise and conduct conversations about PROM results and lays the foundation for training healthcare professionals to optimally discuss PROM results in routine nephrology care. Further research is needed to provide guidance on follow-up actions in response to specific PROM results.
PDF
