What insights do patients and caregivers have on acute kidney injury and posthospitalisation care? A single-centre qualitative study from Toronto, Canada

Pediatric AKI in the real world: changing outcomes through education and advocacy-a report from the 26th Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI) consensus conference

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is independently associated with increased morbidity and mortality across the life course, yet care for AKI remains mostly supportive. Raising awareness of this life-threatening clinical syndrome through education and advocacy efforts is the key to improving patient outcomes. Here, we describe the unique roles education and advocacy play in the care of children with AKI, discuss the importance of customizing educational outreach efforts to individual groups and contexts, and highlight the opportunities created through innovations and partnerships to optimize lifelong health outcomes.

METHODS

During the 26th Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI) consensus conference, a multidisciplinary group of experts discussed the evidence and used a modified Delphi process to achieve consensus on recommendations on AKI research, education, practice, and advocacy in children.

RESULTS

The consensus statements developed in response to three critical questions about the role of education and advocacy in pediatric AKI care are presented here along with a summary of available evidence and recommendations for both clinical care and research.

CONCLUSIONS

These consensus statements emphasize that high-quality care for patients with AKI begins in the community with education and awareness campaigns to identify those at risk for AKI. Education is the key across all healthcare and non-healthcare settings to enhance early diagnosis and develop mitigation strategies, thereby improving outcomes for children with AKI. Strong advocacy efforts are essential for implementing these programs and building critical collaborations across all stakeholders and settings.

Challenges in the Care of Patients with AKI Receiving Outpatient Dialysis: AKINow Recovery Workgroup Report

BACKGROUND

Up to one third of survivors of AKI that required dialysis (AKI-D) during hospitalization remain dialysis dependent at hospital discharge. Of these, 20%-60%, depending on the clinical setting, eventually recover enough kidney function to stop dialysis, and the remainder progress to ESKD.

METHODS

To describe the challenges facing those still receiving dialysis on discharge, the AKINow Committee conducted a group discussion comprising 59 participants, including physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, pharmacists, and patients. The discussion was framed by a patient who described gaps in care delivery at different transition points and miscommunication between care team members and the patient.

RESULTS

Group discussions collected patient perspectives of ( 1 ) being often scared and uncertain about what is happening to and around them and ( 2 ) the importance of effective and timely communication, a comfortable physical setting, and attentive and caring health care providers for a quality health care experience. Provider perspectives included ( 1 ) the recognition of the lack of evidence-based practices and quality indicators, the significant variability in current care models, and the uncertain reimbursement incentives focused on kidney recovery and ( 2 ) the urgency to address communication barriers among hospital providers and outpatient facilities.

CONCLUSIONS

The workgroup identified key areas for future research and policy change to ( 1 ) improve communication among hospital providers, dialysis units, and patients/care partners; ( 2 ) develop tools for risk classification, subphenotyping, and augmented clinical decision support; ( 3 ) improve education to providers, staff, and patients/care partners; ( 4 ) identify best practices to improve relevant outcomes; ( 5 ) validate quality indicators; and ( 6 ) assess the effect of social determinants of health on outcomes. We urge all stakeholders involved in the process of AKI-D care to align goals and work together to fill knowledge gaps and optimize the care to this highly vulnerable patient population.

Optimum Care of AKI Survivors Not Requiring Dialysis after Discharge: An AKINow Recovery Workgroup Report

AKI survivors experience gaps in care that contribute to worse outcomes, experience, and cost.Challenges to optimal care include issues with information transfer, education, collaborative care, and use of digital health tools.Research is needed to study these challenges and inform optimal use of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions to promote recovery AKI affects one in five hospitalized patients and is associated with poor short-term and long-term clinical and patient-centered outcomes. Among those who survive to discharge, significant gaps in documentation, education, communication, and follow-up have been observed. The American Society of Nephrology established the AKINow taskforce to address these gaps and improve AKI care. The AKINow Recovery workgroup convened two focus groups, one each focused on dialysis-independent and dialysis-requiring AKI, to summarize the key considerations, challenges, and opportunities in the care of AKI survivors. This article highlights the discussion surrounding care of AKI survivors discharged without the need for dialysis. On May 3, 2022, 48 patients and multidisciplinary clinicians from diverse settings were gathered virtually. The agenda included a patient testimonial, plenary sessions, facilitated small group discussions, and debriefing. Core challenges and opportunities for AKI care identified were in the domains of transitions of care, education, collaborative care delivery, diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, and digital health applications. Integrated multispecialty care delivery was identified as one of the greatest challenges to AKI survivor care. Adequate templates for communication and documentation; education of patients, care partners, and clinicians about AKI; and a well-coordinated multidisciplinary posthospital follow-up plan form the basis for a successful care transition at hospital discharge. The AKINow Recovery workgroup concluded that advancements in evidence-based, patient-centered care of AKI survivors are needed to improve health outcomes, care quality, and patient and provider experience. Tools are being developed by the AKINow Recovery workgroup for use at the hospital discharge to facilitate care continuity.

Posthospital Multidisciplinary Care for AKI Survivors: A Feasibility Pilot

Rationale & Objective

Innovative models are needed to address significant gaps in kidney care follow-up for acute kidney injury (AKI) survivors.

Study Design

This quasi-experimental pilot study reports the feasibility of the AKI in Care Transitions (ACT) program, a multidisciplinary approach to AKI survivor care based in the primary care setting.

Setting & Participants

The study included consenting adults with stage 3 AKI discharged home without dialysis.

Interventions

The ACT intervention included predischarge education from nurses and coordinated postdischarge follow-up with a primary care provider and pharmacist within 14 days. ACT was implemented in phases (Usual Care, Education, ACT).

Outcomes

The primary outcome was feasibility. Secondary outcomes included process and clinical outcomes.

Results

In total, 46 of 110 eligible adults were enrolled. Education occurred in 18/18 and 14/15 participants in the Education and ACT groups, respectively. 30-day urine protein evaluation occurred in 15%, 28%, and 87% of the Usual Care, Education, and ACT groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Cumulative incidence of provider (primary care or nephrologist) and laboratory follow-up at 14 and 30 days was different across groups (14 days: Usual care 0%, Education 11%, ACT 73% [P < 0.01]; 30 days: 0%, 22%, and 73% [P < 0.01]). 30-day readmission rates were 23%, 44%, and 13% in the Usual Care, Education, and ACT groups, respectively (P = 0.13).

Limitations

Patients were not randomly assigned to treatment groups. The sample size limited the ability to detect some differences or perform multivariable analysis.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated the feasibility of multidisciplinary AKI survivor follow-up beginning in primary care. We observed a higher cumulative incidence of laboratory and provider follow-up in ACT participants.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04505891).

Plain-Language Summary

Abrupt loss of kidney function in hospitalized patients, acute kidney injury (AKI), increases the chances of long-term kidney disease and a worse health care experience for patients. One out of 3 people who experience AKI do not get the follow-up kidney care they need. We performed a pilot study to test whether a program that facilitates structured AKI follow-up in primary care called the AKI in Care Transitions (ACT) program was possible. ACT brings together the unique expertise of nurses, doctors, and pharmacists to look at the patient's kidney health plan from all angles. The study found that the ACT program was possible and led to more complete kidney care follow-up after discharge than the normal approach to care.

Digital health and acute kidney injury: consensus report of the 27th Acute Disease Quality Initiative workgroup

Acute kidney injury (AKI), which is a common complication of acute illnesses, affects the health of individuals in community, acute care and post-acute care settings. Although the recognition, prevention and management of AKI has advanced over the past decades, its incidence and related morbidity, mortality and health care burden remain overwhelming. The rapid growth of digital technologies has provided a new platform to improve patient care, and reports show demonstrable benefits in care processes and, in some instances, in patient outcomes. However, despite great progress, the potential benefits of using digital technology to manage AKI has not yet been fully explored or implemented in clinical practice. Digital health studies in AKI have shown variable evidence of benefits, and the digital divide means that access to digital technologies is not equitable. Upstream research and development costs, limited stakeholder participation and acceptance, and poor scalability of digital health solutions have hindered their widespread implementation and use. Here, we provide recommendations from the Acute Disease Quality Initiative consensus meeting, which involved experts in adult and paediatric nephrology, critical care, pharmacy and data science, at which the use of digital health for risk prediction, prevention, identification and management of AKI and its consequences was discussed.

Acute Kidney Injury Survivor Care Following Hospital Discharge: A Mixed-Methods Study of Nephrologists and Primary Care Providers

Rationale & Objective

Widespread delivery of high-quality care for acute kidney injury (AKI) survivors after hospital discharge requires a multidisciplinary team. We aimed to compare management approaches between nephrologists and primary care providers (PCPs) and explored strategies to optimize collaboration.

Study Design

Explanatory sequential mixed-methods study using a case-based survey followed by semi-structured interviews.

Setting & Participants

Nephrologists and PCPs providing AKI survivor care at 3 Mayo Clinic sites and the Mayo Clinic Health System were included.

Outcomes

Survey questions and interviews elucidated participants' recommendations for post-AKI care.

Analytical Approach

Descriptive statistics were used to summarize survey responses. Qualitative data analysis used deductive and inductive strategies. A connecting and merging approach was used for mixed-methods data integration.

Results

148 of 774 (19%) providers submitted survey responses (24/72 nephrologists and 105/705 PCPs). Nephrologists and PCPs recommended laboratory monitoring and follow-up with a PCP shortly after hospital discharge. Both indicated that the need for nephrology referral, and its timing should be dictated by clinical and non-clinical patient-specific factors. There were opportunities for improvement in medication and comorbid condition management in both groups. Incorporation of multidisciplinary specialists (eg, pharmacists) was recommended to expand knowledge, optimize patient-centered care, and alleviate provider workload.

Limitations

Survey findings may have been affected by non-response bias and the unique challenges facing clinicians and health systems during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were from a single health system, and their views or experiences may differ from those in other health systems or serving different populations.

Conclusions

A multidisciplinary team-based model of post-AKI care may facilitate implementation of a patient-centered care plan, improve adherence to best practices, and reduce clinician and patient burden. Individualizing care for AKI survivors based on clinical and non-clinical patient-specific factors is needed to optimize outcomes for patients and health systems.

Optimising transitions of care for acute kidney injury survivors: protocol for a mixed-methods study of nephrologist and primary care provider recommendations

INTRODUCTION

Acute kidney injury (AKI) affects nearly 20% of all hospitalised patients and is associated with poor outcomes. Long-term complications can be partially attributed to gaps in kidney-focused care and education during transitions. Building capacity across the healthcare spectrum by engaging a broad network of multidisciplinary providers to facilitate optimal follow-up care represents an important mechanism to address this existing care gap. Key participants include nephrologists and primary care providers and in-depth study of each specialty's approach to post-AKI care is essential to optimise care processes and healthcare delivery for AKI survivors.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This explanatory sequential mixed-methods study uses survey and interview methodology to assess nephrologist and primary care provider recommendations for post-AKI care, including KAMPS (kidney function assessment, awareness and education, medication review, blood pressure monitoring and sick day education) elements of follow-up, the role of multispecialty collaboration, and views on care process-specific and patient-specific factors influencing healthcare delivery. Nephrologists and primary care providers will be surveyed to assess recommendations and clinical decision-making in the context of post-AKI care. Descriptive statistics and the Pearson's χ² or Fisher's exact test will be used to compare results between groups. This will be followed by semistructured interviews to gather rich, qualitative data that explains and/or connects results from the quantitative survey. Both deductive analysis and inductive analysis will occur to identify and compare themes.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been reviewed and deemed exempt by the Institutional Review Board at Mayo Clinic (IRB 20-0 08 793). The study was deemed exempt due to the sole use of survey and interview methodology. Results will be disseminated in presentations and manuscript form through peer-reviewed publication.

Use of Guideline-Based Therapy for Diabetes, Coronary Artery Disease, and Chronic Kidney Disease After Acute Kidney Injury: A Retrospective Observational Study

Background

Survivors of acute kidney injury (AKI) are at a high risk for cardiovascular complications. An underrecognition of this risk may contribute to the low utilization of relevant guideline-based therapies in this population.

Objective

We sought to assess accordance with guideline-based recommendations for survivors of AKI with diabetes, coronary artery disease (CAD), and preexisting chronic kidney disease (CKD) in a post-AKI clinic, and identify factors that may be associated with guideline accordance.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting

Post-AKI clinics at 2 tertiary care centers in Ontario, Canada.

Patients

We included adult patients seen in both post-AKI clinics between 2013 and 2019 who had at least 2 clinic visits within 24 months of an index AKI hospitalization.

Measurements

We assessed accordance to recommendations from the most recent North American and international guidelines available at the time of study completion for diabetes, CAD, and CKD.

Methods

We compared guideline accordance between visits using the Cochran Mantel Haenszel test. We used multivariable Poisson regression to identify prespecified factors associated with accordance.

Results

Of 213 eligible patients, 192 (90%) had Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes Stage 2-3 AKI, 91 (43%) had diabetes, 76 (36%) had CAD, and 88 (41%) had preexisting CKD. From the first clinic visit to the second, there was an increase in angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker (ACE-I/ARB) use across all disease groups-from 33% to 46% (P = .028) in patients with diabetes, from 30% to 57% (P = .002) in patients with CAD, and from 16% to 35% (P < .001) in patients with preexisting CKD. Statin use increased in patients with preexisting CKD from 64% to 71% (P = .034). Every 25 μmol/L rise in the discharge serum creatinine was associated with a 19% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8%-28%) and 12% (95% CI, 2%-21%) lower likelihood of being on an ACE-I/ARB in patients with diabetes and preexisting CKD, respectively.

Limitations

The study lacked a comparison group that received usual care. The small sample and multiple comparisons make false positives possible.

Conclusion

There is room to improve guideline-based cardiovascular risk factor management in survivors of AKI, particularly ACE-I/ARB use in patients with an elevated discharge serum creatinine.

What Do AKI Survivors Want to Know About Their AKI?: A Qualitative Study

Rationale & Objective

Acute kidney injury (AKI) in the hospital often occurs with other serious illnesses that take medical priority. Despite a persistent risk of adverse outcomes following hospital discharge, AKI survivors often receive inadequate education about how best to mitigate risks once home. We sought to identify AKI survivors’ perceived barriers to shared and informed decision-making regarding their AKI diagnosis and self-management.

Study Design

Semistructured phone interviews were used to assess patients’ perceived barriers and facilitators to AKI self-management after a hospital-related AKI event.

Setting & Participants

AKI survivors discharged from Duke University Hospital in Durham, NC, were recruited for interviews to discuss their AKI experiences. Those who received dialysis for AKI were excluded because their perceptions of AKI care were hypothesized to be much different from those of patients not requiring dialysis.

Analytical Approach

Twenty-four interviews were conducted between May and August 2018. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by study team members to identify common themes and discrepancies and reach a final consensus.

Results

Five consistent themes emerged after thematic saturation: (1) patients were unaware of their AKI diagnosis; (2) patients lacked information about AKI and how to manage it at home; (3) patients identified a lack of understanding about AKI; (4) patients were concerned about dialysis; and (5) patients wanted to know how to prevent AKI in the future.

Limitations

Limitations include recruitment from a single center, all study participants receiving a nephrology consultation, and several patients being unable to participate because of persistent illness following hospitalization.

Conclusions

AKI survivors are unaware of their diagnosis, receive suboptimal education while hospitalized, and are not equipped with tools to mitigate risks following discharge. Patient-centered interventions promoting AKI awareness and self-management may improve long-term outcomes for high-risk AKI survivors.

Recovery after Critical Illness and Acute Kidney Injury

AKI is a common complication in hospitalized and critically ill patients. Its incidence has steadily increased over the past decade. Whether transient or prolonged, AKI is an independent risk factor associated with poor short- and long-term outcomes, even if patients do not require KRT. Most patients with early AKI improve with conservative management; however, some will require dialysis for a few days, a few weeks, or even months. Approximately 10%-30% of AKI survivors may still need dialysis after hospital discharge. These patients have a higher associated risk of death, rehospitalization, recurrent AKI, and CKD, and a lower quality of life. Survivors of critical illness may also suffer from cognitive dysfunction, muscle weakness, prolonged ventilator dependence, malnutrition, infections, chronic pain, and poor wound healing. Collaboration and communication among nephrologists, primary care physicians, rehabilitation providers, physical therapists, nutritionists, nurses, pharmacists, and other members of the health care team are essential to create a holistic and patient-centric care plan for overall recovery. Integration of the patient and family members in health care decisions, and ongoing education throughout the process, are vital to improve patient well-being. From the nephrologist standpoint, assessing and promoting recovery of kidney function, and providing appropriate short- and long-term follow-up, are crucial to prevent rehospitalizations and to reduce complications. Return to baseline functional status is the ultimate goal for most patients, and dialysis independence is an important part of that goal. In this review, we seek to highlight the varying aspects and stages of recovery from AKI complicating critical illness, and propose viable strategies to promote recovery of kidney function and dialysis independence. We also emphasize the need for ongoing research and multidisciplinary collaboration to improve outcomes in this vulnerable population.

Nephrologist Follow-Up versus Usual Care after an Acute Kidney Injury Hospitalization (FUSION): A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Survivors of AKI are at higher risk of CKD and death, but few patients see a nephrologist after hospital discharge. Our objectives during this 2-year vanguard phase trial were to determine the feasibility of randomizing survivors of AKI to early follow-up with a nephrologist or usual care, and to collect data on care processes and outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

We performed a randomized controlled trial in patients hospitalized with Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) stage 2-3 AKI at four hospitals in Toronto, Canada. We randomized patients to early nephrologist follow-up (standardized basket of care that emphasized BP control, cardiovascular risk reduction, and medication safety) or usual care from July 2015 to June 2017. Feasibility outcomes included the proportion of eligible patients enrolled, seen by a nephrologist, and followed to 1 year. The primary clinical outcome was a major adverse kidney event at 1 year, defined as death, maintenance dialysis, or incident/progressive CKD.

RESULTS

We screened 3687 participants from July 2015 to June 2017, of whom 269 were eligible. We randomized 71 (26%) patients (34 to nephrology follow-up and 37 to usual care). The primary reason stated for declining enrollment included hospitalization-related fatigue (n=65), reluctance to add more doctors to the health care team (n=59), and long travel times (n=40). Nephrologist visits occurred in 24 of 34 (71%) intervention participants, compared with three of 37 (8%) participants randomized to usual care. The primary clinical outcome occurred in 15 of 34 (44%) patients in the nephrologist follow-up arm, and 16 of 37 (43%) patients in the usual care arm (relative risk, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.60 to 1.73).

CONCLUSIONS

Major adverse kidney events are common in AKI survivors, but we found the in-person model of follow-up posed a variety of barriers that was not acceptable to many patients.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NAME AND REGISTRATION NUMBER

Nephrologist Follow-up versus Usual Care after an Acute Kidney Injury Hospitalization (FUSION), NCT02483039 CJASN 16: 1005-1014, 2021. doi: https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.17331120.

Mapping Stakeholder Perspectives on Engagement in Concussion Research to Theory

BACKGROUND

Involving stakeholders has been acknowledged as a way to improve quality and relevance in health research. The mechanisms that support effective research engagement with stakeholders have not been studied in the area of concussion. Concussion is a large public health concern worldwide with billions of dollars spent on health care services and research with improvements in care and service delivery not moving forward as quickly as desired. Enabling effective stakeholder engagement could improve concussion research and care.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to identify potential benefits, challenges, and motivators to engaging in research by gathering the perspectives of adults with lived experience of concussion.

METHODS

A thematic analysis of qualitative responses collected from a convenience sample attending a provincial brain injury conference (n = 60) was undertaken using open coding followed by axial coding.

RESULTS

Four themes regarding benefits to engagement emerged: first-hand account, meaningful recovery, research relevance, and better understanding of gaps. Three forces inhibited engagement: environmental barriers, injury-related constraints, and personal deterrents. Four enablers supported engagement: focus on positive impact, build connections, create a supportive environment, and provide financial assistance.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding stakeholder's perspectives on research engagement is an important issue that may serve to improve research quality. There may be unique nuances at play with injury-specific stakeholders that require researchers to consider a balance between reducing inhibitors while supporting enablers. These findings are preliminary and limited. Nevertheless, they provide needed insight and guidance for ongoing investigation regarding improvement of stakeholder engagement in concussion research.

Post-discharge care following acute kidney injury: quality improvement in primary care

BACKGROUND

Over the past decade, targeting acute kidney injury (AKI) has become a priority to improve patient safety and health outcomes. Illness complicated by AKI is common and is associated with adverse outcomes including high rates of unplanned hospital readmission. Through national patient safety directives, NHS England has mandated the implementation of an AKI clinical decision support system in hospitals. In order to improve care following AKI, hospitals have also been incentivised to improve discharge summaries and general practices are recommended to establish registers of people who have had an episode of illness complicated by AKI. However, to date, there is limited evidence surrounding the development and impact of interventions following AKI.

DESIGN

We conducted a quality improvement project in primary care aiming to improve the management of patients following an episode of hospital care complicated by AKI. All 31 general practices within a single NHS Clinical Commissioning Group were incentivised by a locally commissioned service to engage in audit and feedback, education training and to develop an action plan at each practice to improve management of AKI.

RESULTS

AKI coding in general practice increased from 28% of cases in 2015/2016 to 50% in 2017/2018. Coding of AKI was associated with significant improvements in downstream patient management in terms of conducting a medication review within 1 month of hospital discharge, monitoring kidney function within 3 months and providing written information about AKI to patients. However, there was no effect on unplanned hospitalisation and mortality.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that the quality improvement intervention successfully engaged a primary care workforce in AKI-related care, but that a higher intensity intervention is likely to be required to improve health outcomes. Development of a real-time audit tool is necessary to better understand and minimise the impact of the high mortality rate following AKI.

Implementing post-discharge care following acute kidney injury in England: a single-centre qualitative evaluation

OBJECTIVES

We sought to understand the factors influencing the implementation of a primary care intervention to improve post-discharge care following acute kidney injury (AKI).

DESIGN

Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis.

SETTING

General practices in one Clinical Commissioning Group area in England.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 18 healthcare staff took part in interviews. Participants were practice pharmacists, general practitioners, practice managers and administrators involved in implementing the intervention.

RESULTS

We identified three main factors influencing implementation: differentiation of the new intervention from other practice work; development of skill mix and communication across organisations. Overall, post-AKI processes of care were deemed straightforward to embed into existing practice. However, it was also important to separate the intervention from other work in general practice. Dedicating staff time to proactively identify AKI on discharge summaries and to coordinate the provision of care enabled implementation of the intervention. The post-AKI intervention provided an opportunity for practice pharmacists to expand their primary care role. Working in a new setting also brought challenges; time to develop trusting relationships including an understanding of boundaries of clinical expertise influenced pharmacists' roles. Unclear and inconsistent information on discharge summaries contributed to concerns about additional work in primary care.

CONCLUSIONS

The research highlights challenges around post-discharge management in the primary care context. Coordination and communication were key factors for improving follow-up care following AKI. Further consideration is required to understand patient experiences of the interface between secondary and primary care. The issues pertaining to discharge care following AKI are relevant to practitioners and commissioners as they work to improve transitions of care for vulnerable patient populations.

Community Health Care Quality Standards to Prevent Acute Kidney Injury and Its Consequences

As the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) increases, prevention strategies are needed across the health care continuum, which begins in the community. Recognizing this knowledge gap, the 22nd Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI) was tasked to discuss the evidence for quality-of-care measurement and care processes to prevent AKI and its consequences in the community. Using a modified Delphi process, an international and interdisciplinary group provided a framework to identify and monitor patients with AKI in the community. The recommendations propose that risk stratification involve both susceptibilities (eg, chronic kidney disease) and exposures (eg, coronary angiography), with the latter triggering a Kidney Health Assessment. This assessment should include blood pressure, serum creatinine, and urine dipstick, followed by a Kidney Health Response to prevent AKI that encompasses cessation of unnecessary medications, minimization of nephrotoxins, patient education, and ongoing monitoring until the exposure resolves. These recommendations give community health care providers and health systems a starting point for quality improvement initiatives to prevent AKI and its consequences in the community.

Long-term outcomes of acute kidney injury and strategies for improved care

Acute kidney injury (AKI), once viewed predominantly as a self-limited and reversible condition, is now recognized as a growing problem associated with significant risks of adverse long-term health outcomes. Many cohort studies have established important relationships between AKI and subsequent risks of recurrent AKI, hospital re-admission, morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disease and cancer, as well as the development of chronic kidney disease and end-stage kidney disease. In both high-income countries (HICs) and low-income or middle-income countries (LMICs), several challenges exist in providing high-quality, patient-centered care following AKI. Despite advances in our understanding about the long-term risks following AKI, large gaps in knowledge remain about effective interventions that can improve the outcomes of patients. Therapies for high blood pressure, glycaemic control (for patients with diabetes), renin-angiotensin inhibition and statins might be important in improving long-term cardiovascular and kidney outcomes after AKI. Novel strategies that incorporate risk stratification approaches, educational interventions and new models of ambulatory care following AKI have been described, and some of these are now being implemented and evaluated in clinical studies in HICs. Care for AKI in LMICs must overcome additional barriers due to limited resources for diagnosis and management.