Evaluating symptom burden in kidney transplant recipients: validation of the revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System for kidney transplant recipients - a single-center, cross-sectional study

Influence of Early Postoperative Basal Insulin Treatment and Post-Transplant Diabetes Mellitus Risk on Health-Related Quality of Life in Kidney Transplant Recipients-An Analysis of Data From a Randomized Controlled Trial

Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) improves after kidney transplantation (KT) but declines over time. Studies on the effect of early postoperative basal insulin therapy on HRQOL after KT, especially KTRs at high risk of developing post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM) are missing. Data from a randomized controlled trial on 148 non-diabetic KTRs were analyzed. HRQOL using the KDQOL-SF™ was compared in KTRs who either received early postoperative basal insulin therapy or standard-of-care and in KTRs at risk of developing PTDM. Determinants of HRQOL outcomes were investigated using multivariable linear regression analysis. In total, 148 patients completed the KDQOL-SF at baseline. Standard-of-care or early basal insulin therapy after KT did not influence HRQOL. Overall, KT improved the mental (MCS) and physical component summary (PCS) scores at 6-month after KT, which remained stable during further follow-up visits. However, patients at high-risk for PTDM had significantly greater impairment in the PCS score (baseline, 24 months) without differences in MCS scores. In the multivariable regression analysis, allograft function and hemoglobin levels were associated with decreased MCS and PCS scores, respectively. A limitation of the study is the fact that only around 50% of the ITP-NODAT study patients participated in the HRQOL evaluation. Still, our data clearly show that early basal insulin therapy does not affect HRQOL after KT but is negatively influenced by classical clinical factors and PTDM-risk at 24 months after KT. The latter might be influenced by older age.

Assessing Fatigue in Patients Receiving Kidney Replacement Therapy Using PROMIS Computer Adaptive Testing

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Fatigue is a debilitating symptom for many patients receiving kidney replacement therapy (KRT). Patient-reported outcome measures can help clinicians identify and manage fatigue efficiently. We assessed the measurement characteristics of the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-Fatigue Computer Adaptive Test (PROMIS-F CAT) in patients receiving KRT using the previously validated Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) questionnaire.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

198 adults treated with dialysis or recipients of a kidney transplant in Toronto, Canada.

PREDICTORS

Demographic data, FACIT-F scores, KRT type.

OUTCOME

Measurement properties of PROMIS-F CAT T scores.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Reliability and test-retest reliability were assessed using standard errors of measurement and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), respectively. Construct validity was assessed using correlation and comparisons across predefined groups expected to have different levels of fatigue. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess the discrimination of PROMIS-F CAT, with clinically relevant fatigue defined by a FACIT-F score of≤30.

RESULTS

Of the 198 participants, 57% were male, the mean±SD age was 57±14 years; 65% had received a kidney transplant. Based on the FACIT-F score, 47 patients (24%) had clinically relevant fatigue. PROMIS-F CAT and FACIT-F were strongly correlated (ρ =-0.80, P<0.001). PROMIS-F CAT had excellent reliability (>0.90 for 98% of sample), and good test-retest reliability (ICC=0.85). The ROC analysis demonstrated outstanding discrimination (area under ROC=0.93 [95%, CI 0.89-0.97]). A PROMIS-F CAT cutoff score of≥59 accurately identified most patients with clinically relevant fatigue (sensitivity=0.83; specificity=0.91).

LIMITATIONS

A convenience sample of clinically stable patients. FACIT-F items are a part of the PROMIS-F item bank, although there was minimal overlap with only 4 FACIT-F items completed in PROMIS-F CAT.

CONCLUSIONS

PROMIS-F CAT has robust measurement properties with low question burden to assess fatigue among patients with KRT.

Psychosocial determinants of healthcare use costs in kidney transplant recipients

Introduction

Psychosocial factors frequently occur in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs), leading to behavioral alterations and reduced therapeutic adherence. However, the burden of psychosocial disorders on costs for KTRs is unknown. The aim of the study is to identify predictors of healthcare costs due to hospital admissions and emergency department access in KTRs.

Methods

This is a longitudinal observational study conducted on KTRs aged >18 years, excluding patients with an insufficient level of autonomy and cognitive disorder. KTRs underwent psychosocial assessment via two interviews, namely the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview 6.0 (MINI 6.0) and the Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research Interview (DCPR) and via the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised (ESAS-R) scale, a self-administrated questionnaire. Sociodemographic data and healthcare costs for hospital admissions and emergency department access were collected in the 2016-2021 period. Psychosocial determinants were as follows: (1) ESAS-R psychological and physical score; (2) symptomatic clusters determined by DCPR (illness behavior cluster, somatization cluster, and personological cluster); and (3) ICD diagnosis of adjustment disorder, anxiety disorder, and mood disorder. A multivariate regression model was used to test the association between psychosocial determinants and total healthcare costs.

Results

A total of 134 KTRs were enrolled, of whom 90 (67%) were men with a mean age of 56 years. A preliminary analysis of healthcare costs highlighted that higher healthcare costs are correlated with worse outcomes and death (p < 0.001). Somatization clusters (p = 0.020) and mood disorder (p < 0.001) were positively associated with costs due to total healthcare costs.

Conclusions

This study showed somatization and mood disorders could predict costs for hospital admissions and emergency department access and be possible risk factors for poor outcomes, including death, in KTRs.

Two-step screening for depressive symptoms in patients treated with kidney replacement therapies: a cross-sectional analysis

BACKGROUND

Systematic screening for depressive symptoms may identify patients who may benefit from clinical assessment and psychosocial support. Here we assess a two-step screening using ultrabrief pre-screeners [Edmonton Symptom Assessment Survey-revised Depression item (ESASr-D) or Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2)] followed by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Depression questionnaire (PROMIS-D) to identify depressive symptoms in patients on kidney replacement therapies.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study of adults (kidney transplant recipients or treated with dialysis) in Toronto, ON, Canada. We simulated various two-step screening scenarios where only patients above a pre-screening cut-off score on the ESASr-D or PHQ-2 would move to step 2 (PROMIS-D). Screening performance was evaluated by sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) as the referent. The average number of items completed by patients in different scenarios was reported.

RESULTS

Of 480 participants, 60% were male with a mean age of 55 years. Based on PHQ-9, 19% of patients had moderate or severe depressive symptoms. Pre-screening with a PHQ-2 score ≥1 combined with a PROMIS-D score of ≥53 provided the best two-step results (sensitivity 0.81, specificity 0.84, NPV 0.95). Two-step screening also reduces question burden.

CONCLUSIONS

A two-step screening using a PHQ-2 score ≥1 followed by a PROMIS-D score ≥53 has good sensitivity and specificity for identifying potentially significant depressive symptoms among patients on kidney replacement therapies. This approach has lower question burden. Screened-in patients will need further clinical assessment to establish a diagnosis.

Kannada Translation and Validation of the ESAS-r Renal for Symptom Burden Survey in Patients with End-Stage Kidney Disease

Objectives

End-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is a life-limiting illness that leads to significant health-related suffering for the patients and their caregivers. Moreover, disease-directed options such as dialysis and renal transplant might not be universally accessible. Inadequate assessment and management of symptoms often lead to diminished quality of life. For evaluating symptoms and their associated distress, various tools have been identified. However, these are not available for the native Kannada-speaking population for assessing ESKD symptom burden. In this study, we determined the reliability and validity of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised Renal (ESAS-r: Renal) in Kannada-speaking ESKD patients.

Materials and Methods

ESAS-r: Renal English version was translated into Kannada using the forward and backward method. The translated version was endorsed by Nephrology, Palliative care, Dialysis technology and Nursing experts. As a pilot study, 12 ESKD patients evaluated the content of the questionnaires for appropriateness and relevance. The ESAS-r: Renal Kannada version was validated by administering this tool to 45 patients twice a fortnight.

Result

The translated ESAS-r: Renal Kannada version questionnaire had an acceptable face and content validity. Experts' opinion was assessed by content validity ratio (CVR), and the value of CVR of ESAS-r: Renal Kannada version was-'1'-. Internal consistency of the tool was assessed among Kannada-speaking ESKD patients; its Cronbach's α was 0.785, and test-retest validity was 0.896.

Conclusion

The validated Kannada version of ESAS-r: Renal was reliable and valid for assessing symptom burden in ESKD patients.

Experiences of Patients Undergoing Chemotherapy With Virtual Reality: Mixed Methods Feasibility Study

Background

Current research into virtual reality (VR) use during chemotherapy shows that it can be an effective distraction intervention. However, there is limited research in adult patients and to investigate how VR can be sustainably implemented in health care organizations.

Objective

The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility and acceptability of using VR for adult patients undergoing chemotherapy, and to identify the factors that would enable the sustained use of VR during chemotherapy in health care organizations.

Methods

Patients undergoing chemotherapy were recruited to participate in a VR intervention during chemotherapy infusion. Participants were observed during the session and completed a postintervention survey. Each participant was invited to participate in a semistructured interview about their experience.

Results

A total of 18 patients participated in the study, 5 of whom participated in semistructured interviews. Findings indicated that the use of VR was acceptable for patients undergoing chemotherapy and the intervention was also feasible. Some participants felt that the VR was an effective distraction during chemotherapy infusion, although most still seemed to be aware of how long their treatment was taking. Although VR was acceptable and feasible to patients, interviews identified several barriers to sustained implementation, including access to a reliable app library and impact on staff workloads.

Conclusions

VR was acceptable to patients with a diagnosis of cancer undergoing chemotherapy treatment. Patients found VR beneficial for breaking up the monotony of treatment, to provide an additional choice of activity in addition to other recreation, and in some instances as a distraction from the treatment itself. However, there are challenges to address if VR is to be implemented in practice for this patient group.

Patient-centred approaches for the management of unpleasant symptoms in kidney disease

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) frequently experience unpleasant symptoms. These can be gastrointestinal (constipation, nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea), psychological (anxiety and sadness), neurological (lightheadedness, headache and numbness), cardiopulmonary (shortness of breath and oedema), dermatological (pruritus and dry skin), painful (muscle cramps, chest pain and abdominal pain) or involve sexual dysfunction, sleep disorders and fatigue. These symptoms often occur in clusters, with one of them as the lead symptom and others as secondary symptoms. Uraemic toxins (also called uremic toxins) are often considered to be the main cause of CKD-associated symptom burden, but treatment of uraemia by dialysis often fails to resolve them and can engender additional symptoms. Indeed, symptoms can be exacerbated by comorbid conditions, pharmacotherapies, lifestyle and dietary regimens, kidney replacement therapy and ageing. Patients with kidney disease, including those who depend on dialysis or transplantation, should feel actively supported in their symptom management through the identification and targeting of unpleasant symptoms via a tailored palliative care approach. Such an approach may help minimize the burden and consequences of kidney disease, and lead to improved patient outcomes including health-related quality of life and better life participation.

Evaluation of PROMIS Preference Scoring System (PROPr) in Patients Undergoing Hemodialysis or Kidney Transplant

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

A preference-based health utility score (PROPr) can be calculated using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System domain scores. We assessed the construct validity of PROPr among patients treated with KRT (hemodialysis or kidney transplant).

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

We performed a secondary analysis of data collected in multicenter, cross-sectional studies of adults treated with KRT, recruited between April 2016 to March 2020 in Toronto, Canada. All participants provided informed consent. The outcome was the PROPr score. Coadministered outcome variables included the Short-Form Six-Domain (SF-6D) and EuroQol Five-Domain Five-Level (EQ-5D-5L) scores. Socioeconomic and clinical variables included age, sex, diabetes, eGFR, serum albumin, hemoglobin, KRT, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Construct validity was assessed through correlations between PROPr and SF-6D or EQ-5D-5L, and associations between PROPr and other exposure variables. Health-condition impact estimates (coefficients for health conditions compared with a referent category, e.g., dialysis versus kidney transplant) were calculated using multivariable linear regression.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) age of the 524 participants was 57 (17) years, 58% were male, and 45% were White. Median (interquartile range) score was 0.39 (0.24-0.58) for PROPr, 0.69 (0.58-0.86) for SF-6D, and 0.85 (0.70-0.91) for EQ-5D-5L. Large correlations were observed between PROPr versus SF-6D (0.79; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.76 to 0.82) and EQ-5D-5L (0.71; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.75). Both PROPr and the other utility indices demonstrated health-condition impact in the expected direction. For example, the estimate for PROPr was -0.17 (95% CI, -0.13 to -0.21) for dialysis (versus kidney transplant), -0.05 (95% CI, -0.11 to 0.01; P=0.08) for kidney transplant recipients with an eGFR of <45 versus ≥45 ml/min per 1.73 m², and -0.28 (95% CI, -0.22 to -0.33) for moderate/severe versus no/mild depressive symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support the validity of PROPr among patients treated with KRT.

Screening for symptoms of anxiety and depression in patients treated with renal replacement therapy: utility of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-Revised

PURPOSE

The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised (ESASr) is widely used in clinical oncology to screen for physical and emotional symptoms. The performance of the anxiety and depression items (ESASr-A and ESASr-D, respectively) as screening tools have not been evaluated in patients treated with renal replacement therapy.

METHODS

Kidney transplant recipients and patients on dialysis were recruited in Toronto. Patients were classified as having moderate/severe depression and anxiety symptoms using the established cut-off score of ≥ 10 on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and the General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) questionnaires.

RESULTS

This study included 931 participants; 62% male, mean age (SD) 55(16), and 52% White. All participants completed ESASr, however only 748 participants completed PHQ-9 and 769 participants completed GAD-7. Correlation between ESASr item scores and legacy scores were moderately strong (ESASr-D/PHQ-9: 0.61; ESASr-A/GAD-7: 0.64). We found good discrimination for moderate/severe depression and anxiety [area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (95% CI) ESASr-D 0.82(0.78-0.86); ESASr-A 0.87 (0.82, 0.92)]. The cut-off ≥ 2 for ESASr-D [Sensitivity = 0.76; Specificity = 0.77; Likelihood Ratio (LR) + = 3.29; LR - = 0.31] and ≥ 4 for ESASr-A (Sensitivity = 0.75; Specificity = 0.87; LR + = 5.76; LR - = 0.29) had the best combination of measurement characteristics.

CONCLUSION

The identified ESASr-D and ESASr-A cut-off scores may be used to rule out patients without emotional distress with few false negatives. However, the low sensitivity identified in our analysis suggests that neither ESASr-D or ESASr-A are acceptable as standalone screening tools.

Outcomes after kidney transplantation, let's focus on the patients' perspectives

Graft function and patient survival are traditionally the most used parameters to assess the objective benefits of kidney transplantation. Monitoring graft function, along with therapeutic drug concentrations and transplant complications, comprises the essence of outpatient management in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). However, the patient's perspective is not always included in this process. Patients' perspectives on their health after kidney transplantation, albeit subjective, are increasingly acknowledged as valuable healthcare outcomes and should be considered in order to provide patient-centred healthcare. Such outcomes are known as patient-reported outcomes (PROs; e.g. health-related quality of life and symptom burden) and are captured using PRO measures (PROMs). So far, PROMs have not been routinely used in clinical care for KTRs. In this review we will introduce PROMs and their potential application and value in the field of kidney transplantation, describe commonly used PROMs in KTRs and discuss structural PROMs implementation into kidney transplantation care.