Assessing the impact of screening, early identification and intervention programmes for chronic kidney disease: protocol for a scoping review

Cost-effectiveness of screening for chronic kidney disease in the general adult population: a systematic review

Introduction

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a significant public health problem, with rising incidence and prevalence worldwide, and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Early identification and treatment of CKD can slow its progression and prevent complications, but it is not clear whether CKD screening is cost-effective. The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of CKD screening strategies in general adult populations worldwide, and to identify factors, settings and drivers of cost-effectiveness in CKD screening.

Methods

Studies examining the cost-effectiveness of CKD screening in the general adult population were identified by systematic literature search on electronic databases (MEDLINE OVID, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science) for peer-reviewed publications, hand-searched reference lists and grey literature of relevant sites, focusing on the following themes: (i) CKD, (ii) screening and (iii) cost-effectiveness. Studies comprising health economic evaluations performed for CKD screening strategies, compared with no CKD screening or usual-care strategy in adult individuals, were included. Study characteristics, model assumptions and CKD screening strategies of selected studies were identified. The primary outcome of interest is the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CKD screening, in cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and life-year gained (LYG), expressed in 2022 US dollars equivalent.

Results

Twenty-one studies were identified, examining CKD screening in general and targeted populations. The cost-effectiveness of screening for CKD was found to vary widely across different studies, with ICERs ranging from $113 to $430 595, with a median of $26 662 per QALY and from $6516 to $38 372, with a median of $29 112 per LYG. Based on the pre-defined cost-effectiveness threshold of $50 000 per QALY, the majority of the studies found CKD screening to be cost-effective. CKD screening was especially cost-effective in those with diabetes ($113 to $42 359, with a median of $27 471 per QALY) and ethnic groups identified to be higher risk of CKD development or progression ($23 902 per QALY in African American adults and $21 285 per QALY in Canadian indigenous adults), as indicated by a lower ICER. Additionally, the cost-effectiveness of CKD screening improved if it was performed in older adults, populations with higher CKD risk scores, or when setting a higher albuminuria detection threshold or increasing the interval between screening. In contrast, CKD screening was not cost-effective in populations without diabetes and hypertension (ICERs range from $117 769 to $1792 142, with a median of $202 761 per QALY). Treatment effectiveness, prevalence of CKD, cost of CKD treatment and discount rate were identified to be the most common influential drivers of the ICERs.

Conclusions

Screening for CKD is especially cost-effective in patients with diabetes and high-risk ethnic groups, but not in populations without diabetes and hypertension. Increasing the age of screening, screening interval or albuminuria detection threshold, or selection of population based on CKD risk scores, may increase cost-effectiveness of CKD screening, while treatment effectiveness, prevalence of CKD, cost of CKD treatment and discount rate were influential drivers of the cost-effectiveness.

Prevalence of chronic kidney disease in Kazakhstan: evidence from a national cross-sectional study

To date, there have been no large-scale national studies of the prevalence of chronic kidney disease in Kazakhstan. It includes the research based on the analysis of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The aim of this study was to investigate the population prevalence of CKD and associated risk factors in Kazakhstan. The cross-sectional study consisted of a nationally representative sample of n = 6 720 adults aged 18 to 69 from 14 regions and 3 major cities in Kazakhstan. The study covered the period from October 2021 to May 2022. The WHO STEPS questionnaire was used for the survey. For the diagnosis of CKD, creatinine levels in collected blood samples were measured to assess eGFR. Demographic characteristics were collected and studied. The total and adjusted prevalence of factors associated with the presence of CKD were calculated and analysed using logistic regression. 73.5% (n = 4940) of participants had normal eGFR, while 25.2% (n = 1695) had mild CKD (eGFR = 60-89 mL/min/1.7 m2). The overall prevalence of CKD with eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.7 m2 was 1.3% (n = 85), of which 0.2% (n = 15) had eGFR < 45 ml/min/1.7 m2. A mild degree of CKD was most often determined in residents of the East Kazakhstan region in 10.4%, and in 7.8-8.0% of cases. The majority of CKD patients was detected in the East Kazakhstan region and Almaty city, 15.3% and 10.6% of cases respectively. In mild and CKD with GFR < 60 ml/min/1.7 m2, the age of participants was 50-69 years in 61.5% and 78.8% of cases, respectively (p < 0.001). In addition to the association with the place of residence, a statistically significant relationship was found between the risk of developing CKD and underweight (OR 1.43, 95% CI (1.09-1.88), p < 0.001), as well as the presence of obesity (OR 1.24, 95% CI (0.99-1.53), p = 0.04). We observed the prevalence of CKD with eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.7 m2 at the level of 1.3%. However, a fairly large part of study participants had a mild CKD (25.2%). The results of this study can be used for the optimization of the doctors workload and the timely provision of care to patients with CKD.

Early Identification of Chronic Kidney Disease – A Scoping Review of the Global Populations

Introduction

Decisions on whether to screen for chronic kidney disease (CKD) or not remain contentious in nephrology. This study provides a global overview of early CKD identification efforts.

Methods

Guidelines for scoping reviews were followed and studies were identified by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, ISI Web of Science, and PsycINFO. Data extracted from included studies focused on the following 4 themes: study population, measurement methods, interventions used, and available policies.

Results

We identified 290 CKD screening and detection programs from 83 countries. Overall sample size was 3.72 million (North East Asia: 1.19 million), detection of CKD was the aim in 97.6%, 63.1% used population-based screening methods, and only 12.4% were in rural populations. Reported CKD prevalence (stages 3–5) was higher in targeted- (14.8%) than population-based studies (8.0%). Number of persons needed to screen (NNS) to identify 1 case was also lower in targeted studies (7 vs. 13). Single measurements (80%) and the combination of estimation of glomerular filtration rate with a urine test (albuminuria/proteinuria) (71.4%) were frequently used to detect CKD. Only 2.8% of studies included an intervention such as pharmacotherapy in identified cases. Policies on early identification were available in 30.1% of countries included.

Conclusion

Methods for early CKD identification vary worldwide, often leading to wide variations in the reported prevalence. Efforts to standardize measurement methods for early detection focusing on high-risk populations and ensuring appropriate interventions are available to those identified with CKD will improve the value of programs and improve patient outcomes.