Radiopharmaceutical chemistry for positron emission tomography.

Zibo Li,P. Conti

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2010.09.007

IF: 16.1

2010-08-30

Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

"You need a team": perspectives on interdisciplinary symptom management using patient-reported outcome measures in hemodialysis care-a qualitative study

Brigitte Baragar,Kara Schick-Makaroff,Braden Manns,Shannan Love,Maoliosa Donald,Maria Santana,Bonnie Corradetti,Juli Finlay,Jeffrey A Johnson,Michael Walsh,Meghan J Elliott

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-022-00538-8

2023-01-20

Abstract:Background: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are standardized instruments used for assessing patients' perspectives on their health status at a point in time, including their health-related quality of life, symptoms, functionality, and physical, mental, and social wellbeing. For people with kidney failure receiving hemodialysis, addressing high symptom burden and complexity relies on care team members integrating their expertise to achieve common management goals. In the context of a program-wide initiative integrating PROMs into routine hemodialysis care, we aimed to explore patients' and clinicians' perspectives on the role of PROMs in supporting interdisciplinary symptom management. Methods: We employed a qualitative descriptive approach using semi-structured interviews and observations. Eligible participants included adult patients receiving intermittent, outpatient hemodialysis for > 3 months, their informal caregivers, and hemodialysis clinicians (i.e., nurses, nephrologists, and allied health professionals) in Southern Alberta, Canada. Guided by thematic analysis, team members coded transcripts in duplicate and developed themes iteratively through review, refinement, and discussion. Results: Thirty-three clinicians (22 nurses, 6 nephrologists, 5 allied health professionals), 20 patients, and one caregiver participated in this study. Clinicians described using PROMs to coordinate care across provider types using the resources available in their units, whereas patients tended to focus on the perceived impact of this concerted care on symptom trajectory and care experience. We identified 3 overarching themes with subthemes related to the role of PROMs in interdisciplinary symptom management in this setting: (1) Integrating care for interrelated symptoms ("You need a team", conducive setting, role clarity and collaboration); (2) Streamlining information sharing and access (symptom data repository, common language for coordinated care); (3) Reshaping expectations (expectations for follow-up, managing symptom persistence). Conclusions: We found that use of PROMs in routine hemodialysis care highlighted symptom interrelatedness and complexity and helped to streamline involvement of the interdisciplinary care team. Issues such as role flexibility and resource constraints may influence sustainability of routine PROM use in the outpatient hemodialysis setting.
The WISHED Randomized Controlled Trial: Impact of an Interactive Health Communication Application on Home Dialysis Use in People With Chronic Kidney Disease

Amber O. Molnar,Andrea Harvey,Michael Walsh,Arsh K. Jain,Eric Bosch,K. Scott Brimble

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20543581211019631

2021-01-01

Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease

Abstract:Background: While home dialysis therapies are more cost effective and may offer improved health-related quality of life, uptake compared to in-center hemodialysis remains low. Objective: To test whether a web-based interactive health communication application (IHCA) compared to usual care would increase home dialysis use. Design: Randomized control trial Setting: Patients were recruited from 3 multidisciplinary kidney clinics across Ontario, Canada (Hamilton, Kingston, London). Patients: We included adults with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) followed in multidisciplinary kidney clinics. Patients who had not completed dialysis modality education, who did not have access to a home computer or the internet, who had significant hearing or vision impairment, who could not read/write/speak English, who had a medical contraindication for home dialysis, or who had selected conservative kidney care were excluded. Measurements: The primary outcome was any use of home dialysis (peritoneal dialysis or home hemodialysis) within 90 days of dialysis initiation. Secondary outcomes were social support, decision conflict and dialysis knowledge measured at baseline, 6 months and 1 year. Methods: Eligible patients were randomized to either usual care or the IHCA in addition to usual care in a 1:1 ratio. As part of usual care, all patients received education about dialysis modalities and kidney transplantation delivered by clinic nurses according to local practices. Randomization was performed using a computer-generated sequence in randomly permuted block sizes, stratified by site, and allocation occurred using sequentially numbered sealed, opaque envelopes. Participants, care providers, and outcome assessors were not blinded to the intervention. All analyses were performed blinded using an intention to treat approach. We estimated the effect of the ICHA on the odds of the primary outcome using unadjusted logistic regression models. Linear mixed models for repeated measures over time were used to analyze the impact of the IHCA on the secondary outcomes of interest. Results: We randomized 140 (usual care, n = 71; IHCA, n = 69) out of a planned 264 patients (mean [SD] age 61 [14.5] years, 65% men). Among patients randomized to the IHCA group that completed 6-month and 1-year follow-up visits, 56.8% and 71.4%, respectively, had not accessed the IHCA website within the past month. There were 23 (32.4%) and 26 (37.7%) patients in the usual care and IHCA groups who received a home dialysis therapy within 90 days of dialysis initiation (odds ratio, OR = 1.3, 95% CI = [0.6-2.5], P = .5). Among the 78 patients who initiated dialysis (n = 38 usual care, n = 40 IHCA), 60.5% and 65% in the usual care and IHCA groups received a home therapy within 90 days of dialysis initiation (OR = 1.2, 95% CI = [0.5-3.0], P = .7). Secondary outcomes did not differ by intervention group over time. Limitations: The trial was underpowered due to poor recruitment and use of the IHCA was low. Conclusions: We did not find evidence of a difference in home dialysis uptake with IHCA use, but our analyses were notably underpowered. The incorporation of greater patient engagement, qualitative research and design research, and pilot implementation may help future evaluations of strategies to improve home dialysis uptake. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT01403454, registration date: Jul 21, 2011
Scope and Heterogeneity of Outcomes Reported in Randomized Trials in Patients Receiving Peritoneal Dialysis

Karine E. Manera,David W. Johnson,Yeoungjee Cho,Benedicte Sautenet,Jenny Shen,Ayano Kelly,Angela Yee-Moon Wang,Edwina A. Brown,Gillian Brunier,Jeffrey Perl,Jie Dong,Martin Wilkie,Rajnish Mehrotra,Roberto Pecoits-Filho,Saraladevi Naicker,Tony Dunning,Jonathan C. Craig,Allison Tong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ckj/sfaa224

2020-01-01

Clinical Kidney Journal

Abstract:Background. Randomized trials can provide evidence to inform decision-making but this may be limited if the outcomes of importance to patients and clinicians are omitted or reported inconsistently. We aimed to assess the scope and heterogeneity of outcomes reported in trials in peritoneal dialysis (PD). Methods. We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialized Register for randomized trials in PD. We extracted all reported outcome domains and measurements and analyzed their frequency and characteristics. Results. From 128 reports of 120 included trials, 80 different outcome domains were reported. Overall, 39 (49%) domains were surrogate, 23 (29%) patient-reported and 18 (22%) clinical. The five most commonly reported domains were PD-related infection [59 (49%) trials], dialysis solute clearance [51 (42%)], kidney function [45 (38%)], protein metabolism [44 (37%)] and inflammatory markers/oxidative stress [42 (35%)]. Quality of life was reported infrequently (4% of trials). Only 14 (12%) trials included a patient-reported outcome as a primary outcome. The median number of outcome measures (defined as a different measurement, aggregation and metric) was 22 (interquartile range 13-37) per trial. PD-related infection was the most frequently reported clinical outcome as well as the most frequently stated primary outcome. A total of 383 different measures for infection were used, with 66 used more than once. Conclusions. Trials in PD include important clinical outcomes such as infection, but these are measured and reported inconsistently. Patient-reported outcomes are infrequently reported and nearly half of the domains were surrogate. Standardized outcomes for PD trials are required to improve efficiency and relevance.
Clinical Impact of Routine Assessment of Patient-Reported Health Status in Heart Failure Clinic

Alexander T. Sandhu,Jamie Calma,Megan Skye,Neil M Kalwani,Jimmy Zheng,Jessica Schirmer,Natasha Din,Cati Brown Johnson,Anshal Gupta,Roy Lan,Brian Yu,John A. Spertus,Paul A. Heidenreich

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.124.069624

IF: 37.8

2024-04-07

Circulation

Abstract:Background: The impact of routine clinic use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures on clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) has not been well-characterized. We tested if clinic-based use of a disease-specific PRO improves patient-reported quality of life at 1 year. Methods: PRO-HF was an open-label, parallel, patient-level randomized clinical trial of routine PRO assessment or usual care at an academic HF clinic between August 30, 2021, and June 30, 2022, with 1 year of follow-up. In the PRO assessment arm, participants completed the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 (KCCQ-12) at each HF clinic visit and results were shared with their treating clinician. The usual care arm completed the KCCQ-12 at randomization and 1 year later, which was not shared with the treating clinician. The primary outcome was the KCCQ-12 Overall Summary Score (OSS) between 12-15 months post-randomization. Secondary outcomes included domains of the KCCQ-12, hospitalization and emergency department visit rates, HF medication therapy, clinic visit frequency, and testing rates. Results: Across 17 clinicians, 1,248 participants were enrolled and randomized to PRO assessment (n=624) or usual care (n=624). The median age was 63.9 (interquartile range [IQR] 51.8-72.8), 38.9% were women, and the median baseline KCCQ-12 OSS was 82.3 (IQR 58.3-94.8). Final KCCQ-12 (available in 87.9% of the PRO arm and 85.1% in usual care [p=0.16]) median OSS scores were 87.5 (IQR 68.8-96.9) in the PRO arm and 87.6 (IQR 69.7-96.9) in the usual care arm with a baseline-adjusted mean difference of 0.2 (95% CI: -1.7 to 2.0; p=0.85). The results were consistent across pre-specified subgroups. A post hoc analysis demonstrated a significant interaction with greater benefit among participants with baseline KCCQ-12 OSS scores of 60-80 but not in less or more symptomatic participants. No significant differences were found in 1-year mortality, hospitalizations, ED visits, medication therapy, clinic follow-up, or testing rates between arms. Conclusions: Routine PRO assessment in HF clinic visits did not impact patient-reported quality of life or other clinical outcomes. Alternate strategies and settings for embedding PROs into routine clinical care should be tested.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems,peripheral vascular disease
An International Delphi Survey Helped Develop Consensus-Based Core Outcome Domains for Trials in Peritoneal Dialysis

Karine E. Manera,Allison Tong,Jonathan C. Craig,Jenny Shen,Shilpa Jesudason,Yeoungjee Cho,Benedicte Sautenet,Armando Teixeira-Pinto,Martin Howell,Angela Yee-Moon Wang,Edwina A. Brown,Gillian Brunier,Jeffrey Perl,Jie Dong,Martin Wilkie,Rajnish Mehrotra,Roberto Pecoits-Filho,Saraladevi Naicker,Tony Dunning,Nicole Scholes-Robertson,David W. Johnson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kint.2019.03.015

IF: 19.6

2019-01-01

Kidney International

Abstract:Shared decision-making about clinical care options in end-stage kidney disease is limited by inconsistencies in the reporting of outcomes and the omission of patient-important outcomes in trials. Here we generated a consensus-based prioritized list of outcomes to be reported during trials in peritoneal dialysis (PD). In an international, online, three-round Delphi survey, patients/caregivers and health professionals rated the importance of outcomes using a 9-point Likert scale (with 7-9 indicating critical importance) and provided comments. Using a Best-Worst Scale (BWS), the relative importance of outcomes was estimated. Comments were analyzed thematically. In total, 873 participants (207 patients/caregivers and 666 health professionals) from 68 countries completed round one, 629 completed round two and 530 completed round three. The top outcomes were PDrelated infection, membrane function, peritoneal dialysis failure, cardiovascular disease, death, catheter complications, and the ability to do usual activities. Compared with health professionals, patients/caregivers gave higher priority to six outcomes: blood pressure (mean difference, 0.4), fatigue (0.3), membrane function (0.3), impact on family/friends (0.1), peritoneal thickening (0.1) and usual activities (0.1). Four themes were identified that underpinned the reasons for ratings: contributing to treatment longevity, preserving quality of life, escalating morbidity, and irrelevant and futile information and treatment. Patients/caregivers and health professionals gave highest priority to clinical outcomes. In contrast to health professionals, patients/caregivers gave higher priority to lifestyle-related outcomes including the impact on family/friends and usual activities. Thus, prioritization will inform a core outcome set to improve the consistency and relevance of outcomes for trials in PD.
Patient and Caregiver Priorities for Outcomes in Peritoneal Dialysis: Multinational Nominal Group Technique Study

Karine E Manera,David W Johnson,Jonathan C Craig,Jenny I Shen,Lorena Ruiz,Angela Yee-Moon Wang,Terence Yip,Samuel K S Fung,Matthew Tong,Achilles Lee,Yeoungjee Cho,Andrea K Viecelli,Benedicte Sautenet,Armando Teixeira-Pinto,Edwina Anne Brown,Gillian Brunier,Jie Dong,Tony Dunning,Rajnish Mehrotra,Saraladevi Naicker,Roberto Pecoits-Filho,Jeffrey Perl,Martin Wilkie,Allison Tong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.05380518

2019-01-07

Abstract:Background and objectives: The absence of accepted patient-centered outcomes in research can limit shared decision-making in peritoneal dialysis (PD), particularly because PD-related treatments can be associated with mortality, technique failure, and complications that can impair quality of life. We aimed to identify patient and caregiver priorities for outcomes in PD, and to describe the reasons for their choices. Design, setting, participants, & measurements: Patients on PD and their caregivers were purposively sampled from nine dialysis units across Australia, the United States, and Hong Kong. Using nominal group technique, participants identified and ranked outcomes, and discussed the reasons for their choices. An importance score (scale 0-1) was calculated for each outcome. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically. Results: Across 14 groups, 126 participants (81 patients, 45 caregivers), aged 18-84 (mean 54, SD 15) years, identified 56 outcomes. The ten highest ranked outcomes were PD infection (importance score, 0.27), mortality (0.25), fatigue (0.25), flexibility with time (0.18), BP (0.17), PD failure (0.16), ability to travel (0.15), sleep (0.14), ability to work (0.14), and effect on family (0.12). Mortality was ranked first in Australia, second in Hong Kong, and 15th in the United States. The five themes were serious and cascading consequences on health, current and impending relevance, maintaining role and social functioning, requiring constant vigilance, and beyond control and responsibility. Conclusions: For patients on PD and their caregivers, PD-related infection, mortality, and fatigue were of highest priority, and were focused on health, maintaining lifestyle, and self-management. Reporting these patient-centered outcomes may enhance the relevance of research to inform shared decision-making.
Molecular characterization of HPH-1: a mouse mutant deficient in GTP cyclohydrolase I activity.

M. Gütlich,I. Ziegler,K. Witter,B. Hemmens,L. Hültner,J. McDonald,T. Werner,W. Rödl,A. Bacher

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/BBRC.1994.2379

1994-09-30

Abstract:GTP cyclohydrolase I catalyzes the initial and rate limiting step of the biosynthesis of tetrahydrobiopterin, the cofactor for aromatic amino acid hydroxylation. The mouse mutant HPH-1, previously generated by chemical mutagenesis, shows a phenylketonuria due to decreased hepatic GTP cyclohydrolase I activity. We show that both parameters GTP cyclohydrolase I activity and tetrahydrobiopterin synthesis significantly increase after weaning, but remain reduced during the lifetime. In the wild type mouse (C57BL/6), interferon-gamma and kit ligand induce GTP cyclohydrolase I activity in primed T-cells and in bone marrow-derived mast cells, respectively. The same is true for the HPH-1 mutant, but the absolute values remain lower throughout. The open reading frame of GTP cyclohydrolase I is not affected by the hph-1 mutation as shown by sequencing. Northern blot analysis demonstrates a marked decrease in the steady state mRNA level specific for GTP cyclohydrolase I.
Evaluation and Measurement Properties of a Patient-Reported Experience Measure for Home Dialysis

Matthew B Rivara,David K Prince,Kerstin K Leuther,Wael F Hussein,Rajnish Mehrotra,Todd Edwards,Brigitte Schiller,Donald L Patrick,Matthew B. Rivara,David K. Prince,Kerstin K. Leuther,Wael F. Hussein,Donald L. Patrick

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2215/cjn.0000000000000429

IF: 10.6233

2024-01-23

Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology

Abstract:Background No previously validated patient-reported experience measures exist for use among patients undergoing home dialysis. We tested the Home Dialysis Care Experience survey, a newly developed 26-item experience measure, among patients from 30 dialysis facilities in the United States. Methods Using mail and telephone survey modalities, we approached 1372 patients treated with peritoneal dialysis or home hemodialysis for participation. Using the results from completed surveys, we evaluated item calibration by assessing item floor and ceiling effects. We tested three sets of composite scores and used factor analysis to assess model fit for each. We evaluated associations of composite scores with global ratings and separately with patient and dialysis facility characteristics. Finally, we measured test–retest reliability in patients who completed the survey at two separate time points. Results Overall, 495 eligible patients completed at least one survey (response rate 36%). Of these, 49 completed the survey in Spanish and 61 completed a second survey within 30 days. We did not detect significant floor or ceiling effects, except for one item that demonstrated >90% responses at the top response option. Analyses supported one 12-item composite scale with high internal consistency reliability: Quality of Home Dialysis Care and Operations (Cronbach alpha=0.85). This scale strongly correlated with overall staff rating ( r =0.73) and overall center rating ( r =0.70). Patient demographic and dialysis facility characteristics were not consistently associated with composite scale scores or overall staff or center ratings. Intraclass correlation coefficients in the test–retest population were 0.74 for the Quality scale, 0.88 for overall staff rating, and 0.90 for overall center rating. Conclusions The Home Dialysis Care Experience survey is a 26-item measure that includes one composite scale and two global rating scores and is an informative tool to evaluate patient experience of care for home dialysis.

urology & nephrology
Psychosocial Determinants for Self-Reported Health Status in Hemodialysis Patients: A Cohort Analysis of the CONVINCE Randomized Trial

Krister Cromm,Le Hong Ngoc Pham,Hanna Jaha,Kathrin I Fischer,Gregor Liegl,Anna Schappert,Andrew Davenport,Claudia Barth,Peter J Blankestijn,Jörgen Hegbrant,Felix H Fischer,Giovanni F M Strippoli,Matthias Rose,CONVINCE Scientific Committee and Investigators

DOI: https://doi.org/10.34067/KID.0000000599

2024-10-02

Kidney360

Abstract:Background: We investigated whether psychosocial determinants self-efficacy and social support are associated with Health-Related Quality of Life in hemodialysis patients enrolled in the CONVINCE trial. Methods: We used baseline data from the cohort of patients involved in the CONVINCE randomized trial of hemodiafiltration versus hemodialysis. Measures included age, gender, relationship status, children, housing, education, employment, comorbidities, dialysis schedules, time of first dialysis, residual kidney function, general self-efficacy and social support scores, and PROMIS measurements for health-related quality of life. Associations were analyzed using hierarchical regression. Results: One thousand three hundred and sixty patients from CONVINCE were the cohort of interest. Mean age was 62±13.5 years (range 20-92), and 66.9% were men. Self-efficacy was a significant predictor for all health-related quality of life domains: depression (β = -0.36, p < 0.001), anxiety (β = -0.35, p < 0.001), social participation (β = 0.32, p < 0.001), cognition (β = 0.29, p < 0.001), fatigue (β = -0.29, p < 0.001), physical function (β = 0.27, p < 0.001), sleep disturbance (β = -0.23, p < 0.001), pain interference (β = 0.21, p < 0.001), pain intensity (β = -0.17, p < 0.001), interdialytic symptoms (β = -0.14, p = 0.002) and intradialytic symptoms (β = -0.14, p = 0.002). Social support was a significant predictor for cognition (β = 0.21, p < 0.001), sleep disturbance (β = -0.11, p = 0.017) and intradialytic symptoms (β =- 0.11, p = 0.02). Conclusions: Higher general self-efficacy scale scores are associated with improvements in cognition, depression, anxiety, social participation, fatigue, physical function, sleep disturbance, pain interference, interdialytic symptoms, pain intensity and intradialytic symptoms. Associations for self-efficacy are larger than those for social support and stronger than previously reported. It is plausible that targeted psychosocial interventions may improve health outcomes in people on hemodialysis.
Ethnic Differences in Health Literacy, Self-Efficacy, and Self-Management in Patients Treated With Maintenance Hemodialysis

Uchenna Ibelo,Theresa Green,Bejoy Thomas,Sandra Reilly,Kathryn King-Shier

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20543581221086685

2022-03-26

Abstract:Background: There is a gap in research investigating the potential impact of ethnicity on health literacy, self-efficacy, and self-management in patients treated with maintenance hemodialysis (MHD). Objective: To explore (1) the associations between health literacy, self-efficacy, and self-management among outpatients with kidney failure receiving treatment with MHD, and (2) the differences in health literacy and self-efficacy based on characteristics of ethnicity (ie, physical resemblance and proficiency in the language of the host population), known to be associated with health care access and health outcomes. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: Outpatients receiving MHD at 7 adult hemodialysis centers in Calgary, Alberta from September 2014 to December 2014. Patients: Participants were grouped into 2 groups based on a proposed 4-quadrant framework of a multicultural society. Quadrant 1 comprised outpatients with physical resemblance and first language of the host population (ie, white and English as a first language), whereas quadrant 4 participants comprised outpatients with physical resemblance and first language not of the host population (ie, non-white and first language other than English). A total of 78 patients (nQ1 = 44, nQ4 = 34) were included. Measurements: Heath literacy, self-efficacy, and self-management were measured using the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ), Strategies Used by People to Promote Health (SUPPH), and Patient Activation Measure-13 (PAM-13), respectively. Methods: Convenience sampling was used to recruit participants at each of the 7 adult hemodialysis centers. All participants completed a study package, which included a demographic questionnaire, HLQ, SUPPH, and PAM-13. Spearman rho was calculated to identify correlations between patient activation level and HLQ and SUPPH scores. Independent t tests were performed to identify differences in HLQ and SUPPH scores between Q1 and Q4 participants. Stepwise regression was performed in other analyses to identify predictor variables of patient activation level. Results: Statistically significant correlations were identified between patient activation level and the health literacy domains of "ability to actively engage with health care providers" (rHLQ6= .535, P < .001), "ability to find good health information" (rHLQ8 = .611, P < .001), and "understanding health information well enough to know what to do" (rHLQ9 = .712, P < .001). There was a statistically significant difference between Q1 and Q4 participants in the health literacy domain of "ability to find good health information" (P = .048). "Understanding health information well enough to know what to do" and "actively managing health" were included in the final stepwise regression model, F(2, 72) = 32.232, P < .001. Limitations: The cross-sectional design limits the generalizability of the results. The small sample size limits the power to identify significant associations and differences. Although English was not the first language of Q4 participants, all were proficient in English, meaning potential differences of a key subgroup of Q4 (ie, those who did not speak any English) were not captured. Conclusion: The HLQ allowed for the creation of a health literacy profile of patients with end-stage kidney disease receiving treatment with MHD. The findings suggest possible associations between specific domains of health literacy and patient activation. Outpatients' representative of Q4 receiving treatment with MHD appear to struggle more with finding good health information, which may leave them at a disadvantage in the early phases of their self-management efforts. The findings highlight potential opportunities to better tailor patient care to support patients in their self-management, particularly for patients from ethnic minority backgrounds.
Patient Perspectives of Center-Specific Reporting in Kidney Failure Care: An Australian Qualitative Study

Emily Duncanson,Christopher E. Davies,Shyamsundar Muthuramalingam,Effie Johns,Kate McColm,Matty Hempstalk,Zoran Tasevski,Nicholas A. Gray,Stephen P. McDonald

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ekir.2024.01.001

IF: 6.234

2024-01-27

Kidney International Reports

Abstract:Introduction Public reporting of quality of care indicators in healthcare is intended to inform consumer decision-making; however, people may be unaware that such information exists, or it may not capture their priorities. The aim of this study was to understand the views of people with kidney disease about public reporting of dialysis and transplant center outcomes. Methods This qualitative study involved 27 patients with lived experience of kidney disease in Australia who participated in 11 online focus groups between August and December 2022. Transcripts were analyzed thematically. Results Patients from all Australian states and territories participated, with 22 (81%) having a functioning kidney transplant and 22 (81%) having current or previous experience of dialysis. Five themes were identified as follows: (i) surrendering to the health system, (ii) the complexity of quality, (iii) benefits for patient care and experience, (iv) concerned about risks and unintended consequences, and (v) optimizing the impact of data. Conclusion Patients desire choice among kidney services but perceive this as rarely possible in the Australian context. Health professionals are trusted to make decisions about appropriate centers. Public reporting of center outcomes may induce fear and a loss of balanced perspective; however, it was supported by all participants and represents an opportunity for self-advocacy and informed decision-making. Strategies to mitigate potential risks include availability of trusted clinicians and community members to aid in data interpretation, providing context about centers and patients, and framing statistics to promote positivity and hope.

urology & nephrology
FC004: Improved Prediction of Hospitalization and Mortality Risk by Addition of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROM) into Risk Algorithms among Dialysis Patients

Jasmine Ion Titapiccolo,Abraham Rincon Bello,Francesco Bellocchio,Ana Lopez Herradon,Cristina Cerezo,Isabel Berdud-Godoy,Clarencio Cebrián Andrada,Maria Eva Baró Salvador,Federica Gervasoni,Rosa Ramos Sanchez,Stefano Stuard,Luca Neri

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfac094.001

IF: 7.1857

2022-05-01

Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation

Abstract:Abstract BACKGROUND AND AIMS Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) is a key outcome in dialysis as it stands at the vertex of the outcomes pyramid. The Kidney Disease Quality of Life (KDQOLTM-36) questionnaire has been specifically developed for patients affected by kidney disease and it combines both generic and disease-specific scales capturing unique facets of patients’ adaptation to the physical and mental burden of renal disease and dialysis treatment. We sought to evaluate the association between HRQOL scores and the prevalence of adverse outcomes such as mortality and hospitalization events among prevalent dialysis patients. METHOD This is a retrospective, observational analysis of patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) collected in NephroCare clinics in Spain in 2019. Clinical and socio-demographic patients’ information were abstracted from EuCliD® (the European Clinical Database) and merged to PROMs HRQOL was assessed by KDQOLTM-36 questionnaire and its scores for physical and mental composite (PCS and MCS) as well as for specific-disease dimensions (effects, burden and symptoms) were computed. A renal factor score (RFS) was calculated through principal component analysis to summarize the score of these latter. Mortality and hospitalizations events in the year following the survey administration date were collected and the possible association of these events with HRQOL scores was then explored. Cox and logistic regression models evaluated the relationship between KDQOLTM-36 scores and survival and hospitalization events, respectively. A hierarchical model building strategy was adopted to test the incremental discrimination provided by HRQOL scores. First, two outcome risk scores (ORS) were constructed to predict the likelihood of hospitalization and mortality within 12 months given traditional clinical and socio-demographic confounders. Second, KDQOLTM-36 scores were added to ORS in the fully adjusted model. We assessed both individual ORS-adjusted coefficient estimates for the KDQOL-36 scales and the KDQOL-36 associated increment in model ROC-AUC. RESULTS We enrolled 1838 prevalent dialysis patients in the present analysis with a response rate of 80.6% (study flowchart is reported in Figure 1). Mean age was 68.8 ± 14.4, 60% were men, 65% presented arteriovenous fistula as vascular access and 66% were on HDF modality. We observed a graded relationship between almost all KDQOLTM-36 scores and adverse patient-centred outcomes (average KDQOL-36TM scores are reported in Figure 2). These associations were robust to adjustment for potential confounders. ROC-AUC describe the discrimination accuracy of models predicting hospitalization and mortality events, where both improved after including KDQOL-36TM scores beyond traditional clinical and socio-demographic factors. CONCLUSION We observed a monotonic, clinically important association denoting increased hospitalization and mortality risk among patients with worse KDQOL-36TM scores. The association was robust to adjustment for potential confounders. The KDQOL-36TM score captures unique facets of health, which are not sufficiently accounted for by traditional clinical and socio-demographic correlates of hospitalization and survival. Careful assessment of HRQOL in routine practice can uncover important health trajectories otherwise overlooked by standard clinical care.

urology & nephrology,transplantation
Varying Association of Extended Hours Dialysis with Quality of Life.

Brendan Smyth,Oliver van den Broek-Best,Daqing Hong,Kirsten Howard,Kris Rogers,Li Zuo,Nicholas A Gray,Janak R de Zoysa,Christopher T Chan,Hongli Lin,Ling Zhang,Jinsheng Xu,Alan Cass,Martin Gallagher,Vlado Perkovic,Meg Jardine

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2215/cjn.06800619

IF: 10.6233

2019-01-01

Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology

Abstract:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Little is known about the effect of changes in dialysis hours on patient-reported outcome measures. We report the effect of doubling dialysis hours on a range of patient-reported outcome measures in a randomized trial, overall and separately for important subgroups. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS The A Clinical Trial of IntensiVE Dialysis trial randomized 200 participants to extended or standard weekly hours hemodialysis for 12 months. Patient-reported outcome measures included two health utility scores (EuroQOL-5 Dimensions-3 Level, Short Form-6 Dimension) and their derived quality-adjusted life year estimates, two generic health scores (Short Form-36 Physical Component Summary, Mental Component Summary), and a disease-specific score (Kidney Disease Component Score). Outcomes were assessed as the mean difference from baseline using linear mixed effects models adjusted for time point and baseline score, with interaction terms added for subgroup analyses. Prespecified subgroups were dialysis location (home- versus institution-based), dialysis vintage (≤6 months versus >6 months), region (China versus Australia, New Zealand, Canada), and baseline score (lowest, middle, highest tertile). Multiplicity-adjusted P values (Holm-Bonferroni) were calculated for the main analyses. RESULTS Extended dialysis hours was associated with improvement in Short Form-6 Dimension (mean difference, 0.027; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.00 to 0.05; P=0.03) which was not significant after adjustment for multiple comparisons (Padjusted =0.05). There were no significant differences in EuroQOL-5 Dimensions-3 Level health utility (mean difference, 0.036; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.09; P=0.2; Padjusted =0.2) or in quality-adjusted life years. There were small positive differences in generic and disease-specific quality of life: Physical Component Summary (mean difference, 2.3; 95% CI, 0.6 to 4.1; P=0.01; Padjusted =0.04), Mental Component Summary (mean difference, 2.5; 95% CI, 0.5 to 4.6; P=0.02; Padjusted =0.05) and Kidney Disease Component Score (mean difference, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.5 to 5.5; P=0.001; Padjusted =0.005). The results did not differ among predefined subgroups or by baseline score. CONCLUSIONS The effect of extended hours hemodialysis on patient-reported outcome measures reached statistical significance in some but not all measures. Within each measure the effect was consistent across predefined subgroups. The clinical importance of these differences is unclear.
Variations in provider practices in remote patient monitoring on peritoneal dialysis in the USA and Canada

O El Shamy,R Fadel,E D Weinhandl,G Abra,M Salani,J I Shen,J Perl,T S Malavade,D Chatoth,M V Naljayan,K B Meyer,S Q Lew,M J Oliver,T A Golper,J Uribarri,R R Quinn

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/08968608241270294

2024-08-06

Abstract:Automation has allowed clinicians to program PD treatment parameters, all while obtaining extensive individual treatment data. This data populates in a centralized online platform shortly after PD treatment completion. Individual treatment data available to providers includes patients' vital signs, alarms, bypasses, prescribed PD treatment, actual treatment length, individual cycle fill volumes, ultrafiltration volumes, as well as fill, dwell, and drain times. However, there is no guidance about how often or if this data should be assessed by the clinical team members. We set out to determine current practice patterns by surveying members of the home dialysis team managing PD patients across the United States and Canada. A total of 127 providers completed the survey. While 91% of respondents reported having access to a remote monitoring platform, only 31% reported having a standardized protocol for data monitoring. Rating their perceived importance of having a standard protocol for remote data monitoring, on a scale of 0 (not important at all) to 10 (extremely important), the average response was 8 (physicians 7; nurses 9). Most nurses reported reviewing the data multiple times per week, whereas most physicians reported viewing the data only during regular/monthly visits. Although most of the providers who responded have access to remote monitoring data and feel that regular review is important, the degree of its utilization is variable, and the way in which the information is used is not commonly protocolized. Working to standardize data interpretation, testing algorithms, and educating providers to help process and present the data are important next steps.
Outcomes of Remote Patient Monitoring for Automated Peritoneal Dialysis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Hee-Yeon Jung,Yena Jeon,Yon Su Kim,Dong Ki Kim,Jung Pyo Lee,Chul Woo Yang,Eun Jeong Ko,Dong-Ryeol Ryu,Shin-Wook Kang,Jung Tak Park,Jeong-Hoon Lim,Ji-Young Choi,Jang-Hee Cho,Chan-Duck Kim,Yong-Lim Kim,Sun-Hee Park

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000518364

2021-01-01

Nephron

Abstract:Introduction: We hypothesize that remote patient monitoring (RPM) for automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) and feedback could enhance patient self-management and improve outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of RPM-APD compared to traditional APD (T-APD) without RPM. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized controlled trial, patients on APD were randomized to T-APD ( n = 29) or RPM-APD ( n = 28) at 12 weeks and followed until 25 weeks. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL), patient and medical staff satisfaction with RPM-APD, and dialysis-related outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. Results: We found no significant differences in HRQOL scores at the time of enrollment and randomization between RPM-APD and T-APD. At the end of the study, the RPM-APD group showed better HRQOL for the sleep domain ( p = 0.049) than the T-APD group and the T-APD group showed better HRQOL for the sexual function domain ( p = 0.030) than the RPM-APD group. However, we found no significant interactions between the time and groups in terms of HRQOL. Different HRQOL domains significantly improved over time in patients undergoing RPM-APD (effects of kidney disease, p = 0.025) and T-APD (burden of kidney disease, p = 0.029; physical component summary, p = 0.048). Though medical staff satisfaction with RPM-APD was neutral, most patients were quite satisfied with RPM-APD (median score 82; possible total score 105 on 21 5-item scales) and the rating scores were maintained during the study period. We found no significant differences in dialysis adherence, accuracy, adequacy, overhydration status, blood pressure, or the number of unplanned visits between the 2 groups. Discussion/Conclusion: Although HRQOL and dialysis-related outcomes were comparable between RPM-APD and T-APD, RPM-APD was positive in terms of patient satisfaction. Further long-term and large-scale studies will be required to determine the efficacy of RPM-APD. Trial Registration: CRIS identifier: KCT0003390, registered on December 14, 2018 – retrospectively registered, https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/search_result_st01.jsp?seq=12348.

urology & nephrology
Does Provider Self-Reporting of Etiquette Behaviors Improve Patient Experience? A Randomized Controlled Trial

Zishan Siddiqui,Rehan Qayyum,Amanda Bertram,Nowella Durkin,Sosena Kebede,Lucia Ponor,Ibironke Oduyebo,Lisa Allen,Daniel J Brotman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12788/jhm.2744

Abstract:Background: There is a glaring lack of published evidence-based strategies to improve the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) patient experience scores on the physician domain. Strategies that have been used are resource intensive and difficult to sustain. Objective: We hypothesized that prompting providers to assess their own etiquette-based practices every 2 weeks over the course of 1 year would improve patient experience on the physician domain. Design: Randomized controlled trial. Setting: 4 acute care hospitals. Participants: Hospitalists. Intervention: Hospitalists were randomized to the study or the control arm. The study arm was prompted every 2 weeks for 12 months to report how frequently they engaged in 7 best-practice bedside etiquette behaviors. Control arm participants received similarly worded questions on quality improvement behaviors. Measurement: Provider experience scores were calculated from the physician HCAHPS and Press Ganey survey provider items. Results: Physicians reported high rates of etiquette-based behavior at baseline, and this changed modestly over the study period. Self-reported etiquette behaviors were not associated with experience scores. The difference in difference analysis of the baseline and postintervention physician experience scores between the intervention arm and the control arm was not statistically significant (P = 0.71). Conclusion: In this 12-month study, biweekly reflection and reporting of best-practice bedside etiquette behaviors did not result in significant improvement on physician domain experience scores. It is likely that hospitalists' self-assessment of their bedside etiquette may not reflect patient perception of these behaviors. Furthermore, hospitalists may be resistant to improvement in this area since they rate themselves highly at baseline. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2017;12:402-406.
The Patient's Perspective: Does It Align with Dialysis Adequacy?

Keren Cohen-Hagai,Angam Kitani,Sydney Benchetrit,Daniel Erez,Antebi Alon,Rachel Wilf-Miron,Mor Saban

DOI: https://doi.org/10.34067/KID.0000000000000505

2024-08-01

Kidney360

Abstract:Key Points: This study showed variation in satisfaction and quality of life between three dialysis centers, suggesting local factors influence outcomes.One center linked better dialysis to less satisfaction, but fully grasping satisfaction differences between sites warrants additional study. Background: The concept of patient-centered care puts the individual's health needs and desired health outcomes as the driving forces behind medical decision making and quality assessment in the health care system. Patients with ESKD treated by hemodialysis require frequent encounters with the dialysis facility to survive. Therefore, their satisfaction with care and perceived patient experience are important aspects that might affect their adherence to the care regimen. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient satisfaction and its association with perceived patient experience and objective clinical quality parameters, across three hemodialysis clinics. Methods: A prospective cohort study analyzed the data of 126 patients with ESKD receiving chronic hemodialysis over 9 months in three different care facilities. Sociodemographic characteristics, medical history, treatment details, and dialysis adequacy (measures as STDKt/V) were collected. Perceived quality of care, patient satisfaction, and clinical outcomes were assessed. Results: Patients differed significantly between sites by age, diabetes status, and biochemical parameters. Satisfaction scores varied significantly for 12/14 survey questions and at the site-level, with site 2 scoring the highest. Overall satisfaction did not correlate with Kt/V. At site 1, a moderate negative correlation was found between satisfaction and Kt/V. Kt/V correlated positively with age but inversely with satisfaction. Hospitalization rates were similar regardless of satisfaction. Mortality trended lower in the highest Kt/V quartile. Conclusions: Achieving clinical quality while optimizing patient satisfaction requires multifactorial approaches tailored to the unique population of the hemodialysis facility. Further research is needed to fully understand factors influencing satisfaction and perceived quality.
The Role of Patient-Reported Experience and Outcome Measures in Kidney Health Equity-Oriented Quality Improvement

Shivani Sharma,Emily Beadle,Emma Caton,Ken Farrington,Zoe Radnor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semnephrol.2024.151553

IF: 4.472

2024-09-02

Seminars in Nephrology

Abstract:Summary Risk, prevalence, management, and outcomes in chronic kidney disease (CKD) are influenced by social and broader determinants of health. Consequently, there are wide-ranging kidney health inequities. As patients are key stakeholders, their perspectives on the care they receive and on health status are central in guiding health system improvement, particularly to reduce the impact of disadvantage. Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important self-report tools in quality improvement, acting to guide initatives aimed at enhancing access to timely and relevant support. However, the extent to which PREMs and PROMs address the reduction of kidney health inequities is unclear. The aim of this review is to summarize how PREMs and PROMs are designed and implemented, highlighting key dimensions that are integral to health equity-oriented quality improvement in kidney care. There are several problems yet to be overcome so that such tools do not unintentionally reproduce kidney health gaps. Inclusive generation of the scope of tools, transparent reporting on attributes of patients who engage, and embedding PREMs and PROMs within a framework of value-based quality improvement is fundamental to their impact as part of equitable health system transformation. Semin Nephrol 36:x-xx © 20XX Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

urology & nephrology
Self-reported MeasUrement of Physical and PsychosOcial Symptoms Response Tool (SUPPORT-dialysis): systematic symptom assessment and management in patients on in-centre haemodialysis - a parallel arm, non-randomised feasibility pilot study protocol

Gill,J. K.,Pucci,M.,Samudio,A.,Ahmed,T.,Siddiqui,R.,Edwards,N.,Marticorena,R. M.,Donnelly,S.,Lok,C.,Wentlandt,K.,Wolofsky,K.,Mucsi,I.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080712

IF: 3.006

2024-01-31

BMJ Open

Abstract:Introduction Patients with kidney failure experience symptoms that are often under-recognised and undermanaged. These symptoms negatively impact health-related quality of life and are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Regular symptom assessment, using electronic patient reported outcomes measure (ePROMs) linked to systematic symptom management, could improve such outcomes. Clinical implementation of ePROMs have been successful in routine oncology care, but not used for patients on dialysis. In this study, we describe a pilot study of ePROM-based systematic symptom monitoring and management intervention in patients treated with in-centre haemodialysis. Methods and analysis This is a parallel-arm, controlled pilot of adult patients receiving in-centre maintenance haemodialysis. Participants in the intervention arm will complete ePROMs once a month for 6 months. ePROMs will be scored real time and the results will be shared with participants and with the clinical team. Moderate-severe symptoms will be flagged using established cut-off scores. Referral options for those symptoms will be shared with the clinical team, and additional symptom management resources will also be provided for both participants and clinicians. Participants in the control arm will be recruited at a different dialysis unit, to prevent contamination. They will receive usual care, except that they will complete ePROMs without the presentation of results to participants of the clinical team. The primary objectives of the pilot are to assess (1) the feasibility of a larger, randomised clinical effectiveness trial and (2) the acceptability of the intervention. Interviews conducted with participants and staff will be assessed using a content analysis approach. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the University Health Network (REB#21-5199) and the William Osler Health System (#23-0005). All study procedures will be conducted in accordance with the standards of University Health Network research ethics board and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments. Results of this study will be shared with participants, patients on dialysis and other stakeholders using lay language summaries, oral presentations to patients and nephrology professionals. We will also be publishing the results in a peer-reviewed journal and at scientific meetings. Protocol version 4 (16 November 2022). Trial registration number NCT05515991.

medicine, general & internal
Do injection site reactions induce fibrosarcomas in cats?

M. Hendrick,M. Goldschmidt

1991-10-15

Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

Abstract:

Radiopharmaceutical chemistry for positron emission tomography.

"You need a team": perspectives on interdisciplinary symptom management using patient-reported outcome measures in hemodialysis care-a qualitative study

The WISHED Randomized Controlled Trial: Impact of an Interactive Health Communication Application on Home Dialysis Use in People With Chronic Kidney Disease

Scope and Heterogeneity of Outcomes Reported in Randomized Trials in Patients Receiving Peritoneal Dialysis

Clinical Impact of Routine Assessment of Patient-Reported Health Status in Heart Failure Clinic

An International Delphi Survey Helped Develop Consensus-Based Core Outcome Domains for Trials in Peritoneal Dialysis

Patient and Caregiver Priorities for Outcomes in Peritoneal Dialysis: Multinational Nominal Group Technique Study

Molecular characterization of HPH-1: a mouse mutant deficient in GTP cyclohydrolase I activity.

Evaluation and Measurement Properties of a Patient-Reported Experience Measure for Home Dialysis

Psychosocial Determinants for Self-Reported Health Status in Hemodialysis Patients: A Cohort Analysis of the CONVINCE Randomized Trial

Ethnic Differences in Health Literacy, Self-Efficacy, and Self-Management in Patients Treated With Maintenance Hemodialysis

Patient Perspectives of Center-Specific Reporting in Kidney Failure Care: An Australian Qualitative Study

FC004: Improved Prediction of Hospitalization and Mortality Risk by Addition of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROM) into Risk Algorithms among Dialysis Patients

Varying Association of Extended Hours Dialysis with Quality of Life.

Variations in provider practices in remote patient monitoring on peritoneal dialysis in the USA and Canada

Outcomes of Remote Patient Monitoring for Automated Peritoneal Dialysis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Does Provider Self-Reporting of Etiquette Behaviors Improve Patient Experience? A Randomized Controlled Trial

The Patient's Perspective: Does It Align with Dialysis Adequacy?

The Role of Patient-Reported Experience and Outcome Measures in Kidney Health Equity-Oriented Quality Improvement

Self-reported MeasUrement of Physical and PsychosOcial Symptoms Response Tool (SUPPORT-dialysis): systematic symptom assessment and management in patients on in-centre haemodialysis - a parallel arm, non-randomised feasibility pilot study protocol

Do injection site reactions induce fibrosarcomas in cats?