Dataset Information

Follow-up Care of Living Kidney Donors in Alberta, Canada.

ABSTRACT: Background:Previous guidelines recommend that living kidney donors receive lifelong annual follow-up care to assess renal health. Objective:To determine whether these best practice recommendations are currently being followed. Design:Retrospective cohort study using linked health care databases. Setting:Alberta, Canada (2002-2014). Patients:Living kidney donors. Measurements:We determined the proportion of donors who had annual outpatient physician visits and laboratory measurements for serum creatinine and albuminuria. Results:There were 534 living kidney donors with a median follow-up of 7 years (maximum 13 years). The median age at the time of donation was 41 years and 62% were women. Overall, 25% of donors had all 3 markers of care (physician visit, serum creatinine, albuminuria measurement) in each year of follow-up. Adherence to physician visits was higher than serum creatinine or albuminuria measurements (67% vs 31% vs 28% of donors, respectively). Donors with guideline-concordant care were more likely to be older, reside closer to the transplant center, and receive their nephrectomy in more recent years. Limitations:Our results may not be generalizable to other countries that do not have a similar universal health care system. Conclusions:These findings suggest significant evidence-practice gaps, in that the majority of donors saw a physician, but the minority had measurements of kidney function or albuminuria. Future interventions should target improving follow-up care for all donors.

SUBMITTER: Lam NN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6073841 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Follow-up Care of Living Kidney Donors in Alberta, Canada.

Lam Ngan N NN Lentine Krista L KL Hemmelgarn Brenda B Klarenbach Scott S Quinn Robert R RR Lloyd Anita A Gourishankar Sita S Garg Amit X AX

Canadian journal of kidney health and disease 20180726

<h4>Background</h4>Previous guidelines recommend that living kidney donors receive lifelong annual follow-up care to assess renal health.<h4>Objective</h4>To determine whether these best practice recommendations are currently being followed.<h4>Design</h4>Retrospective cohort study using linked health care databases.<h4>Setting</h4>Alberta, Canada (2002-2014).<h4>Patients</h4>Living kidney donors.<h4>Measurements</h4>We determined the proportion of donors who had annual outpatient physician visi ...[more]

PMID: 30083366

Similar Datasets

Project description:There have been few prospective controlled studies of kidney donors. Understanding the pathophysiologic effects of kidney donation is important for judging donor safety and improving our understanding of the consequences of reduced kidney function in chronic kidney disease.Prospective, controlled, observational cohort study.3-year follow-up of kidney donors and paired controls suitable for donation at their donor's center.Kidney donation.Medical history, vital signs, glomerular filtration rate, and other measurements at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months after donation.At 36 months, 182 of 203 (89.7%) original donors and 173 of 201 (86.1%) original controls continue to participate in follow-up visits. The linear slope of the glomerular filtration rate measured by plasma iohexol clearance declined 0.36±7.55mL/min per year in 194 controls, but increased 1.47±5.02mL/min per year in 198 donors (P=0.005) between 6 and 36 months. Blood pressure was not different between donors and controls at any visit, and at 36 months, all 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure parameters were similar in 126 controls and 135 donors (mean systolic blood pressure, 120.0±11.2 [SD] vs 120.7±9.7mmHg [P=0.6]; mean diastolic blood pressure, 73.4±7.0 vs 74.5±6.5mmHg [P=0.2]). Mean arterial pressure nocturnal dipping was manifest in 11.2% ± 6.6% of controls and 11.3% ± 6.1% of donors (P=0.9). Urinary protein-creatinine and albumin-creatinine ratios were not increased in donors compared with controls. From 6 to 36 months postdonation, serum parathyroid hormone, uric acid, homocysteine, and potassium levels were higher, whereas hemoglobin levels were lower, in donors compared with controls.Possible bias resulting from an inability to select controls screened to be as healthy as donors, short follow-up duration, and dropouts.Kidney donors manifest several of the findings of mild chronic kidney disease. However, at 36 months after donation, kidney function continues to improve in donors, whereas controls have expected age-related declines in function.

Project description:The 2017 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors is intended to assist medical professionals who evaluate living kidney donor candidates and provide care before, during and after donation. The guideline development process followed the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and guideline recommendations are based on systematic reviews of relevant studies that included critical appraisal of the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations. However, many recommendations, for which there was no evidence or no systematic search for evidence was undertaken by the Evidence Review Team, were issued as ungraded expert opinion recommendations. The guideline work group concluded that a comprehensive approach to risk assessment should replace decisions based on assessments of single risk factors in isolation. Original data analyses were undertaken to produce a "proof-in-concept" risk-prediction model for kidney failure to support a framework for quantitative risk assessment in the donor candidate evaluation and defensible shared decision making. This framework is grounded in the simultaneous consideration of each candidate's profile of demographic and health characteristics. The processes and framework for the donor candidate evaluation are presented, along with recommendations for optimal care before, during, and after donation. Limitations of the evidence are discussed, especially regarding the lack of definitive prospective studies and clinical outcome trials. Suggestions for future research, including the need for continued refinement of long-term risk prediction and novel approaches to estimating donation-attributable risks, are also provided.In citing this document, the following format should be used: Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Living Kidney Donor Work Group. KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors. Transplantation. 2017;101(Suppl 8S):S1-S109.

Project description:BackgroundSimultaneous kidney-pancreas transplantation (SPK) has benefits for patients with kidney failure and type I diabetes mellitus, but is associated with greater perioperative risk compared with kidney-alone transplantation. Postoperative care settings for SPK recipients vary across Canada and may have implications for patient outcomes and hospital resource use.ObjectiveTo compare outcomes following SPK transplantation between patients receiving postoperative care in the intensive care unit (ICU) compared with the ward.DesignRetrospective cohort study using administrative health data.SettingIn Alberta, the 2 transplant centers (Calgary and Edmonton) have different protocols for routine postoperative care of SPK recipients. In Edmonton, SPK recipients are routinely transferred to the ICU, whereas in Calgary, SPK recipients are transferred to the ward.Patients129 adult SPK recipients (2002-2019).MeasurementsData from the Canadian Institute for Health Information Discharge Abstract Database (CIHI-DAD) were used to identify SPK recipients (procedure codes) and the outcomes of inpatient mortality, length of initial hospital stay (LOS), and the occurrence of 16 different patient safety indicators (PSIs).MethodsWe followed SPK recipients from the admission date of their transplant hospitalization until the first of hospital discharge or death. Unadjusted quantile regression was used to determine differences in LOS, and age- and sex-adjusted marginal probabilities were used to determine differences in PSIs between centers.ResultsThere were no perioperative deaths and no major differences in the demographic characteristics between the centers. The majority of the SPK transplants were performed in Edmonton (n = 82, 64%). All SPK recipients in Edmonton were admitted to the ICU postoperatively, compared with only 11% in Calgary. There was no statistically significant difference in the LOS or probability of a PSI between the 2 centers (LOS for Edmonton vs Calgary:16 vs 13 days, P = .12; PSIs for Edmonton vs Calgary: 60%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.50-0.71 vs 44%, 95% CI = 0.29-0.59, P = .08).LimitationsThis study was conducted using administrative data and is limited by variable availability. The small sample size limited precision of estimated differences between type of postoperative care.ConclusionsFollowing SPK transplantation, we found no difference in inpatient outcomes for recipients who received routine postoperative ICU care compared with ward care. Further research using larger data sets and interventional study designs is needed to better understand the implications of postoperative care settings on patient outcomes and health care resource utilization.

Project description:Data regarding health outcomes among living kidney donors are lacking, especially among nonwhite persons.We linked identifiers from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) with administrative data of a private U.S. health insurer and performed a retrospective study of 4650 persons who had been living kidney donors from October 1987 through July 2007 and who had post-donation nephrectomy benefits with this insurer at some point from 2000 through 2007. We ascertained post-nephrectomy medical diagnoses and conditions requiring medical treatment from billing claims. Cox regression analyses with left and right censoring to account for observed periods of insurance benefits were used to estimate absolute prevalence and prevalence ratios for diagnoses after nephrectomy. We then compared prevalence patterns with those in the 2005-2006 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) for the general population.Among the donors, 76.3% were white, 13.1% black, 8.2% Hispanic, and 2.4% another race or ethnic group. The median time from donation to the end of insurance benefits was 7.7 years. After kidney donation, black donors, as compared with white donors, had an increased risk of hypertension (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23 to 1.88), diabetes mellitus requiring drug therapy (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.33 to 3.98), and chronic kidney disease (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.48 to 3.62); findings were similar for Hispanic donors. The absolute prevalence of diabetes among all donors did not exceed that in the general population, but the prevalence of hypertension exceeded NHANES estimates in some subgroups. End-stage renal disease was identified in less than 1% of donors but was more common among black donors than among white donors.As in the general U.S. population, racial disparities in medical conditions occur among living kidney donors. Increased attention to health outcomes among demographically diverse kidney donors is needed. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others.)

Dataset Information

Follow-up Care of Living Kidney Donors in Alberta, Canada.

Publications

Follow-up Care of Living Kidney Donors in Alberta, Canada.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets