Project description:This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To assess the effectiveness of any intervention in preventing or reducing kidney complications or CKD in people with SCD (including red blood cell transfusions, hydroxyurea and ACEI (either alone or in combination with each other)).
Project description:BackgroundPrimary care providers manage the majority of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), although the most effective chronic disease management (CDM) strategies for these patients are unknown. We assessed the efficacy of CDM interventions used by primary care providers managing patients with CKD.MethodsThe Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central databases were systematically searched (inception to November 2014) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing education-based and computer-assisted CDM interventions targeting primary care providers managing patients with CKD in the community. The efficacy of CDM interventions was assessed using quality indicators [use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), proteinuria measurement and achievement of blood pressure (BP) targets] and clinical outcomes (change in BP and glomerular filtration rate). Two independent reviewers evaluated studies for inclusion, quality and extracted data. Random effects models were used to estimate pooled odds ratios (ORs) and weighted mean differences for outcomes of interest.ResultsFive studies (188 clinics; 494 physicians; 42 852 patients with CKD) were included. Two studies compared computer-assisted intervention strategies with usual care, two studies compared education-based intervention strategies with computer-assisted intervention strategies and one study compared both these intervention strategies with usual care. Compared with usual care, computer-assisted CDM interventions did not increase the likelihood of ACEI/ARB use among patients with CKD {pooled OR 1.00 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83-1.21]; I2 = 0.0%}. Similarly, education-related CDM interventions did not increase the likelihood of ACEI/ARB use compared with computer-assisted CDM interventions [pooled OR 1.12 (95% CI 0.77-1.64); I2 = 0.0%]. Inconsistencies in reporting methods limited further pooling of data.ConclusionsTo date, there have been very few randomized trials testing CDM interventions targeting primary care providers with the goal of improving care of people with CKD. Those conducted to date have shown minimal impact, suggesting that other strategies, or multifaceted interventions, may be required to enhance care for patients with CKD in the community.
Project description:Background: Improving diet quality in chronic kidney disease (CKD) is challenging due to a myriad of competing recommendations. Patient-centered goal setting can facilitate dietary behavior change; however, its role in improving diet quality in CKD has not been investigated. Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate the effects of goal setting on improving diet quality in stages 3-4 CKD. Methods: Forty-one participants completed a 6-month dietitian-led telehealth (combined coaching calls and text messages) intervention as part of a larger RCT. Participants set one to two diet-related SMART goals and received weekly goal tracking text messages. Dietary intake was assessed using the Australian Eating Survey at baseline, 3, and 6 months, with diet quality determined using the Alternate Healthy Eating Index (AHEI). Results: Significant improvements in AHEI (+6.9 points; 95% CI 1.2-12.7), vegetable (+1.1 serves; 95% CI 0.0-2.3) and fiber intake (+4.2 g; 95% CI 0.2-8.2) were observed at 3 months in participants setting a fruit and/or vegetable goal, compared with those who did not. However, no significant or meaningful changes were observed at 6 months. No other goal setting strategy appeared in effect on diet intake behavior or clinical outcomes in this group of CKD participants. Conclusions: Patient-centered goal setting, particularly in relation to fruit and vegetable intake, as part of a telehealth coaching program, significantly improved diet quality (AHEI), vegetable and fiber intake over 3 months. More support may be required to achieve longer-term behavior change in stages 3-4 CKD patients.
Project description:Study objectivesPatients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) often report poor sleep quality, but they commonly exhibit OSA. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of OSA severity and of estimated glomerular filtration rate impairment on objective sleep quality in nondialyzed patients with CKD, defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73m².MethodsPolysomnographic sleep characteristics were compared between patients with (n = 430) and without CKD (n = 6,639) in the European Sleep Apnea Database cohort. Comparisons were repeated in 375 patients with CKD and 375 control patients without CKD matched for sleep center, age, sex, and AHI, and in 310 matched CKD and non-CKD patients without psychiatric disturbances.ResultsAmong all patients with and without CKD, total sleep time was similar but sleep stage N1 (median 8.7% [IQR 4.8-18.0] vs 6.7% [3.6-12.7], respectively) and sleep stage R (12.6% [6.8-17.7] vs 14.2% [8.8-19.8], respectively) significantly differed (P < .0001). No difference in sleep characteristics was observed between matched patients either with or without psychiatric disturbances. After subdividing the matched patients according to AHI tertile (<25, ≥25 to <49, and ≥49 events/h) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (≥60, 45 to <60, <45 mL/min/1.73m²), we found a significant effect of AHI on sleep stages N2, N3, and R (P < .001), but there was no effect of CKD.ConclusionsIn nondialyzed patients with CKD, objective sleep quality is influenced similarly by AHI as in patients without CKD but is not affected by CKD severity. Previously reported poor sleep quality in CKD may partly result from the high prevalence of OSA in CKD.
Project description:IntroductionChronic kidney disease (CKD) patients are vulnerable to hepatitis B, and immunization prior to end stage kidney disease is recommended to optimize seroconversion. Our institution undertook a process improvement approach to increase hepatitis B vaccination in stage 4 and 5 CKD patients.MethodsFour strategies were utilized such as: (1) Electronic health record (EHR)-based CKD registry to identify patients, (2) EHR-based physician/nurse reminders, (3) a co-located nurse appointment for vaccine administration, and (4) information sharing and provider awareness effort. The CKD registry was utilized to identify patients with stage 4 or 5 CKD, with at least two clinic visits in the prior 2 years, who had not received the hepatitis B vaccine or did not have serologic evidence of immunity. Target monthly vaccination rate was set at 75%, based on clinic leadership, nephrologist, and nurse consensus.ResultsA total of 239 patients were included in the study period, from November 2018 to January 2019 (observation period) and from February 2019 to September 2019 (intervention period). Monthly vaccination rate improved from 48% in November 2018 to the target rate of 75% by the end of the intervention (August and September 2019). There was a statistically significant increase from the rate of vaccination at a unique patient level in the first month of the baseline period, compared to the last month of the intervention period (51 vs. 75% p = 0.03).ConclusionsUtilizing a nurse-led approach to hepatitis B vaccination, coupled with EHR-based tools, along with continuous monitoring of performance, helped to improve hepatitis B vaccination among CKD stage 4 and 5 patients.
Project description:Interventions: All eligible participants will receive an imunochemical faecal occult blood test (IFOBT) kit (EIKEN brand) containing the test and instructions, with additional explanation provided by study staff, as required. A sample is then collected from two separate bowel motions. All samples will be self-collected.
All completed kits will be sent and processed in a designated central laboratory and analysed according to the company’s standardised specifications. The results of this test can be positive, negative or inconclusive. All results will be sent via mail to the corresponding treating physicians, the participants and the research assistants at the Centre for Kidney Research. The screen is considered positive when one of the samples contains at least 50ng/ml of haemoglobin. Negative results are not followed up in the study but these patients are advised to continue with annual screening with their health practitioner. If the results are inconclusive, the participants will be contacted by phone and asked to repeat the test.
Only participants with positive IFOBT findings will be referred for a diagnostic colonoscopy at a designated colonoscopic service. Study staff will track participants with positive IFOBT results and will ensure the referral process is scheduled effectively and efficiently for a colonoscopy. The participants will not be required to pay for the IFOBT kit or the diagnostic colonoscopy. Other clinical significant pathologies such as polyps, adenomas, vascular lesions will be documented and recorded. Wherever possible, they will be resected and sent for pathology. Depending upon the stage of initial diagnosis, further treatment may be required for participants with malignant polyps and cancers. All cancer diagnoses, including stage, histologica
Primary outcome(s): Prevalence of a positive screening result (defined as positive IFOBT with at least one of the two stool samples containing at least 50ng/ml of haemoglobin) in people with chronic kidney disease in stages 3-5, dialysis and kidney transplant populations using the immunochemical faecal occult blood test. [Five years];Prevalence of colorectal cancer as determined with diagnostic colonoscopy, in people with chronic kidney disease in stages 3-5, dialysis and kidney transplant populations.[Five years];Test performance characteristics of immunochemical faecal occult blood screening, including: test specificity, positive predictive values and negative predictive value for colorectal cancers. [Five years]
Study Design: Purpose: Diagnosis; Allocation: Non-randomised trial; Masking: Open (masking not used);Assignment: Single group;Type of endpoint: Safety/efficacy