A breakthrough series collaborative to increase patient participation with hemodialysis tasks: A stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial

Supporting patient self-management: A cross-sectional and prospective cohort study investigating Patient Activation Measure (PAM) and Clinician Support for PAM scores as part of a multi-centre haemodialysis breakthrough series collaborative

BACKGROUND

Patient self-management, measured by the Patient Activation Measure (PAM), is associated with reduced healthcare utilisation and better health-related quality of life. Self-management in haemodialysis (HD) is challenging and may require support from clinicians with positive attitudes towards self-management, measured by the Clinician Support for PAM (CSPAM).

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether kidney staff CSPAM scores are: 1) associated with their centre's patient PAM scores and 2) modifiable through staff coaching.

METHODS

Baseline PAM and CSPAM and six-month CSPAM were collected from HD patients and kidney staff respectively in seven UK kidney centres as part of a six-month breakthrough series collaborative (BTSC), which trained kidney staff in supporting patient independence with HD tasks. Firstly, multivariable linear regression analyses adjusted for patient characteristics were used to test the baseline association between centre-level staff CSPAM scores and patient PAM scores. Secondly, paired univariate and unpaired multivariable linear regression analyses were conducted to compare staff CSPAM scores at baseline and six months.

RESULTS

236 PAM questionnaires (mean score = 55.5) and 89 CSPAM questionnaires (median score = 72.6) were analysed at baseline. There was no significant association between centre-level mean CSPAM scores and PAM scores in univariate analyses (P = 0.321). After adjusting for patient-level characteristics, increasing centre-level mean CSPAM score by 1 point resulted in a non-significant 0.3-point increase in PAM score (0.328 (95% CI: -0.157 to 0.812; P = 0.184). Paired (n = 37) and unpaired (n = 174) staff analyses showed a non-significant change in CSPAM scores following the BTSC intervention (mean change in CSPAM score in unpaired analysis = 1.339 (95% CI: -1.945 to 4.623; P = 0.422).

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of a significant: 1) association between CSPAM and PAM scores and 2) change in CSPAM scores suggest that modifying staff beliefs alone is less likely to influence patient self-management, requiring co-production between patients and staff.

The Ottawa Statement implementation guidance document for cluster randomized trials in the hemodialysis setting

Research teams are increasingly interested in using cluster randomized trial (CRT) designs to generate practice-guiding evidence for in-center maintenance hemodialysis. However, CRTs raise complex ethical issues. The Ottawa Statement on the Ethical Design and Conduct of Cluster Randomized Trials, published in 2012, provides 15 recommendations to address ethical issues arising within 7 domains: justifying the CRT design, research ethics committee review, identifying research participants, obtaining informed consent, gatekeepers, assessing benefits and harms, and protecting vulnerable participants. But applying the Ottawa Statement recommendations to CRTs in the hemodialysis setting is complicated by the unique features of the setting and population. Here, with the help of content experts and patient partners, we co-developed this implementation guidance document to provide research teams, research ethics committees, and other stakeholders with detailed guidance on how to apply the Ottawa Statement recommendations to CRTs in the hemodialysis setting, the result of a 4-year research project. Thus, our work demonstrates how the voices of patients, caregivers, and all stakeholders may be included in the development of research ethics guidance.

The trajectory of a range of commonly captured symptoms with standard care in people with kidney failure receiving haemodialysis: consideration for clinical trial design

BACKGROUND

Despite the recognized high symptom prevalence in haemodialysis population, how these symptoms change over time and its implications for clinical practice and research is poorly understood.

METHODS

Prevalent haemodialysis patients in the SHAREHD trial reported 17 POS-S Renal symptoms (none, mild, moderate, severe and overwhelming) at baseline, 6, 12 and 18 months. To assess the prevalence change at population level in people reporting moderate or worse symptoms at baseline, the absolute change in prevalence was estimated using multi-level mixed effects probit regression adjusting for age, sex, time on haemodialysis and Charlson Comorbidity Score. To assess changes at individual level, the proportion of people changing their symptom score every 6 months was estimated.

RESULTS

Five hundred fifty-two participants completed 1725 questionnaires at four timepoints. Across all 17 symptoms with moderate or worse symptom severity at baseline, the majority of the change in symptom prevalence at population level occurred in the 'severe' category. The absolute improvement in prevalence of the 'severe' category was ≤ 20% over 18 months in eleven of the seventeen symptoms despite a large degree of relatively balanced movement of individuals in and out of severe category every six months. Examples include depression, skin changes and drowsiness, which had larger proportion (75-80%) moving in and out of severe category each 6 months period but < 5% difference between movement in and out of severe category resulting in relatively static prevalence over time. Meanwhile, larger changes in prevalence of > 20% were observed in six symptoms, driven by a 9 to 18% difference between movement in and movement out of severe category. All symptoms had > 50% of people in severe group changing severity within 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in the severity of existing symptoms under standard care were frequent, often occurring within six months. Certain symptoms exhibited clinically meaningful shifts at both the population and individual levels. This highlighted the need to consider improvements in symptom severity when determining sample size and statistical power for trials. By accounting for potential symptom improvements with routine care, researchers can design trials capable of robustly detecting genuine treatment effects, distinguishing them from spontaneous changes associated with standard haemodialysis.

Relationship Between Standardized Measures of Chronic Kidney Disease-associated Pruritus Intensity and Health-related Quality of Life Measured with the EQ-5D Questionnaire: A Mapping Study

Chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus is linked with decreased health-related quality of life assessed using disease-specific instruments. The extent to which worsening pruritus reduces generic quality of life assessed using the EQ-5D instrument is unknown. Prevalent kidney failure patients receiving in-centre haemodialysis from 5 centres completed the EQ-5D-5L quality of life measure, worst Itching Intensity Numerical Rating Scale and 5-D itch pruritus instruments. Latent class models were used to identify clusters of patients with similarly affected body parts, and mixture models were used to map the pruritus measures to the EQ-5D. Data on 487 respondents were obtained. Latent class analysis identified 3 groups of patients who had progressively worsening severity and an increasing number of body parts affected. Although the worst itching intensity numerical rating scale and 5-D itch instruments correlated with each other, only the latter had a strong relationship with EQ-5D. When controlling for age, sex, diabetes and years receiving dialysis, the meanpredicted EQ-5D utility (1: perfect health, 0: dead) decreased progressively from 0.69 to 0.41. These findings suggest that pruritus instruments that include domains capturing how the individual is physically, mentally and socially affected by their pruritus, in addition to severity, more closely approximate the EQ-5D generic quality of life measure.

A learning process to deliver virtual staff training involving patients in shared haemodialysis care

Shared haemodialysis (HD) care (SHC) is a person-centred approach delivering a flexible choice of options for centre-based HD patients to become more involved in their treatment. To support this, a 4-day course was developed to provide healthcare professionals with the confidence and skills to engage, involve, support and train patients in their care and has been accessed by >700 UK staff over 9 years. The disruption caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in 2020 prompted a revision of what was deliverable within the restrictions. In response to this, we designed, developed and tested a virtual training program that was shorter and more accessible while remaining effective in meeting its core objectives. This provides a greater geographical reach and enables a collaborative team approach with patients and staff learning from and with each other, thus supporting a partnership approach advocated in shared decision making. In this review we explore the learning that informed the virtual training program 2022 and provide qualitative evaluation to demonstrate evidence of understanding, behavioural change and organisational benefit. Using a validated evaluation, we present key themes that support the initiation, development and sustainability of SHC in the form of a roadmap to guide strategic planning.

The NightLife study - the clinical and cost-effectiveness of thrice-weekly, extended, in-centre nocturnal haemodialysis versus daytime haemodialysis using a mixed methods approach: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In-centre nocturnal haemodialysis (INHD) offers extended-hours haemodialysis, 6 to 8 h thrice-weekly overnight, with the support of dialysis specialist nurses. There is increasing observational data demonstrating potential benefits of INHD on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). There is a lack of randomised controlled trial (RCT) data to confirm these benefits and assess safety.

METHODS

The NightLife study is a pragmatic, two-arm, multicentre RCT comparing the impact of 6 months INHD to conventional haemodialysis (thrice-weekly daytime in-centre haemodialysis, 3.5-5 h per session). The primary outcome is the total score from the Kidney Disease Quality of Life tool at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include sleep and cognitive function, measures of safety, adherence to dialysis and impact on clinical parameters. There is an embedded Process Evaluation to assess implementation, health economic modelling and a QuinteT Recruitment Intervention to understand factors that influence recruitment and retention. Adults (≥ 18 years old) who have been established on haemodialysis for > 3 months are eligible to participate.

DISCUSSION

There are 68,000 adults in the UK that need kidney replacement therapy (KRT), with in-centre haemodialysis the treatment modality for over a third of cases. HRQoL is an independent predictor of hospitalisation and mortality in individuals on maintenance dialysis. Haemodialysis is associated with poor HRQoL in comparison to the general population. INHD has the potential to improve HRQoL. Vigorous RCT evidence of effectiveness is lacking. The NightLife study is an essential step in the understanding of dialysis therapies and will guide patient-centred decisions regarding KRT in the future.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registration number: ISRCTN87042063. Registered: 14/07/2020.

Home dialysis: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference

Home dialysis modalities (home hemodialysis [HD] and peritoneal dialysis [PD]) are associated with greater patient autonomy and treatment satisfaction compared with in-center modalities, yet the level of home-dialysis use worldwide is low. Reasons for limited utilization are context-dependent, informed by local resources, dialysis costs, access to healthcare, health system policies, provider bias or preferences, cultural beliefs, individual lifestyle concerns, potential care-partner time, and financial burdens. In May 2021, KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) convened a controversies conference on home dialysis, focusing on how modality choice and distribution are determined and strategies to expand home-dialysis use. Participants recognized that expanding use of home dialysis within a given health system requires alignment of policy, fiscal resources, organizational structure, provider incentives, and accountability. Clinical outcomes across all dialysis modalities are largely similar, but for specific clinical measures, one modality may have advantages over another. Therefore, choice among available modalities is preference-sensitive, with consideration of quality of life, life goals, clinical characteristics, family or care-partner support, and living environment. Ideally, individuals, their care-partners, and their healthcare teams will employ shared decision-making in assessing initial and subsequent kidney failure treatment options. To meet this goal, iterative, high-quality education and support for healthcare professionals, patients, and care-partners are priorities. Everyone who faces dialysis should have access to home therapy. Facilitating universal access to home dialysis and expanding utilization requires alignment of policy considerations and resources at the dialysis-center level, with clear leadership from informed and motivated clinical teams.

Cost Effectiveness of Difelikefalin Compared to Standard Care for Treating Chronic Kidney Disease Associated Pruritus (CKD-aP) in People with Kidney Failure Receiving Haemodialysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus (CKD-aP) is associated with an increased risk of depression, poor sleep and reduced health-related quality of life. Two phase III studies (KALM-1 and KALM-2) of difelikefalin showed reduced CKD-aP severity and improved itch-related health-related quality of life in patients with moderate and severe CKD-aP receiving haemodialysis for kidney failure.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to estimate the cost effectiveness of difelikefalin for patients with CKD-aP receiving haemodialysis for kidney failure compared to standard care from a UK National Health Service perspective.

METHODS

A cohort model was developed with four health states representing levels of pruritus intensity over time, based on the KALM trials augmented with longer term CKD-aP severity data from another haemodialysis trial (SHAREHD) for standard care. Utilities were estimated from a mapping study of 5-D Itch to EQ-5D-5L in 487 patients receiving haemodialysis, costs were estimated based on resource use alongside the SHAREHD and 2018 unit costs, and inflated to 2021 costs. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years were discounted at 3.5% per annum. A de novo economic model was developed in Microsoft Excel with scenario analyses performed using a range of assumptions.

RESULTS

In the base-case analysis over a time horizon of 64 weeks, using a placeholder cost of £75 per 28-days for difelikefalin, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of difelikefalin compared with standard care was £19,558/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Scenario analyses resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios that ranged from £10,154/QALY (severe only) to £16,957/QALY (5-year horizon) for difelikefalin compared to standard care. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggested difelikefalin has a 48.6% probability of being cost effective at a threshold of £20,000/QALY and a 57.2% probability of being cost effective at a threshold of £30,000/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

The cost effectiveness of difelikefalin in a range of scenarios could make it an important pharmacotherapy to address the high burden of disease and unmet need for treatments associated with CKD-aP in the UK.

The Feasibility of a Transitional Care Unit for Patients Newly Started on In-Center Hemodialysis: A Research Letter

Background:

Patients with end-stage kidney disease face high mortality and morbidity after dialysis initiation. Transitional care units (TCUs) are typically 4- to 8-week structured multidisciplinary programs targeted toward patients starting hemodialysis during this high-risk time in their care. The goals of such programs are to provide psychosocial support, provide dialysis modality education, and reduce risks of complications. Despite apparent benefits, the TCU model may be challenging to implement, and the effect on patient outcomes is unclear.

Objective:

To assess a newly created multidisciplinary TCUs’ feasibility for patients newly started on hemodialysis.

Design:

Before-and-after study.

Setting:

Kingston Health Sciences Centre hemodialysis unit in Ontario, Canada.

Patients:

We considered all adult patients (age 18+) who initiated in-center maintenance hemodialysis eligible for the TCU program, although patients on infection control precautions and evening shifts were not able to receive TCU care due to staffing limitations.

Measurements:

We defined feasibility as eligible patients completing the TCU program in a timely fashion without additional need for space, no signal of harm, and without explicit concerns from TCU staff or patients at weekly meetings. Key outcomes at 6 months included mortality, proportion hospitalized, dialysis modality, vascular access, initiation of transplant workup, and code status.

Methods:

The TCU care consisted of 1:1 nursing and education until predefined clinical stability and dialysis decisions were satisfied. We compared outcomes among the pre-TCU cohort who initiated hemodialysis between June 2017 and May 2018, and TCU patients who initiated dialysis between June 2018 and March 2019. We summarized outcomes descriptively, along with unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results:

We included 115 pre-TCU patients and 109 post-TCU patients, of whom 49/109 (45%) entered and completed the TCU. The most common reasons for not participating in the TCU included evening hemodialysis shifts (18/60, 30%) or contact precautions (18/60, 30%). The TCU patients completed the program in a median of 35 (25-47) days. We observed no differences in mortality (9% vs 8%; OR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.28-3.13) or proportion hospitalized (38% vs 39%; OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.51-2.03) between the pre-TCU cohort and TCU patients. There was also no difference in use of home dialysis (16% vs 10%; OR = 1.67, 95% CI = 0.64-4.39), non-catheter access (32% vs 25%; OR = 1.44, 95% CI = 0.69-2.98), initiation of transplant workup (14% vs 12%; OR 1.67; 95% CI = 0.64-4.39), and choosing “do not resuscitate” (DNR) orders (22% vs 19%; OR = 1.22, 95% CI = 0.54-2.77). There was no negative patient or staff feedback on the program.

Limitations:

Small sample size and potential for selection bias given inability to provide TCU care for patients on infection control precautions or evening shifts.

Conclusions:

The TCU accommodated a large number of patients, who completed the program in a timely fashion. The TCU model was determined to be feasible at our center. There was no difference in outcomes due to the small sample size. Future work at our center is required to expand the number of TCU dialysis chairs to evening shifts and evaluate the TCU model in prospective, controlled studies.

Symptom burden according to dialysis day of the week in three times a week haemodialysis patients

Background

Haemodialysis patients experience significant symptom burden and effects on health-related quality of life. Studies have shown increases in fluid overload, hospitalization and mortality immediately after the long interdialytic interval in thrice weekly in-centre haemodialysis patients, however the relationship between the dialytic interval and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) has not been quantified and the extent to which dialysis day of PROM completion needs to be standardised is unknown.

Methods

Three times a week haemodialysis patients participating in a stepped wedge trial to increase patient participation in haemodialysis tasks completed PROMs (POS-S Renal symptom score and EQ-5D-5L) at recruitment, six, 12 and 18 months. Time from the long interdialytic interval, HD day of the week, and HD days vs non-HD days were included in mixed effects Linear Regression, estimating severity (none to overwhelming treated as 0 to 4) of 17 symptoms and EQ-5D-5L, adjusting for age, sex, time on HD, control versus intervention and Charlson Comorbidity Score.

Results

517 patients completed 1659 YHS questionnaires that could be assigned HD day (510 on Mon/Tue/Sun, 549 on Wed/Thu/Tue, 308 on Fri/Sat/Thu and 269 on non-HD days). With the exception of restless legs and skin changes, there was no statistically significant change in symptom severity or EQ-5D-5L with increasing time from the long interdialytic interval. Patients who responded on non-HD days had higher severity of poor appetite, constipation, difficulty sleeping, poor mobility and depression (approximately 0.2 severity level), and lower EQ-5D-5L (-0.06, CI -0.09 to -0.03) compared to HD days.

Conclusions

Measuring symptom severity and EQ-5D-5L in haemodialysis populations does not need to account for dialysis schedule, but completion either on HD or non-HD days could introduce bias that may impact evaluation of interventions. Researchers should ensure completion of these instruments are standardized on either dialysis or non-dialysis days.