The concept of justifiable healthcare and how big data can help us to achieve it

Over the last decades, the face of health care has changed dramatically, with big improvements in what is technically feasible. However, there are indicators that the current approach to evaluating evidence in health care is not holistic and hence in the long run, health care will not be sustainable. New conceptual and normative frameworks for the evaluation of health care need to be developed and investigated. The current paper presents a novel framework of justifiable health care and explores how the use of artificial intelligence and big data can contribute to achieving the goals of this framework.

Sustainable Development Goals relevant to kidney health: an update on progress

Globally, more than 5 million people die annually from lack of access to critical treatments for kidney disease — by 2040, chronic kidney disease is projected to be the fifth leading cause of death worldwide. Kidney diseases are particularly challenging to tackle because they are pathologically diverse and are often asymptomatic. As such, kidney disease is often diagnosed late, and the global burden of kidney disease continues to be underappreciated. When kidney disease is not detected and treated early, patient care requires specialized resources that drive up cost, place many people at risk of catastrophic health expenditure and pose high opportunity costs for health systems. Prevention of kidney disease is highly cost-effective but requires a multisectoral holistic approach. Each Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) has the potential to impact kidney disease risk or improve early diagnosis and treatment, and thus reduce the need for high-cost care. All countries have agreed to strive to achieve the SDGs, but progress is disjointed and uneven among and within countries. The six SDG Transformations framework can be used to examine SDGs with relevance to kidney health that require attention and reveal inter-linkages among the SDGs that should accelerate progress.

Working towards sustainable development is essential to tackle the rise in the global burden of non-communicable diseases, including kidney disease. Five years after the Sustainable Development Goal agenda was set, this Review examines the progress thus far, highlighting future challenges and opportunities, and explores the implications for kidney disease.

Each Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) has the potential to improve kidney health and prevent kidney disease by improving the general health and well-being of individuals and societies, and by protecting the environment.

Achievement of each SDG is interrelated to the achievement of multiple other SDGs; therefore, a multisectoral approach is required.

The global burden of kidney disease has been relatively underestimated because of a lack of data.

Structural violence and the social determinants of health have an important impact on kidney disease risk.

Kidney disease is the leading global cause of catastrophic health expenditure, in part because of the high costs of kidney replacement therapy.

Achievement of universal health coverage is the minimum requirement to ensure sustainable and affordable access to early detection and quality treatment of kidney disease and/or its risk factors, which should translate to a reduction in the burden of kidney failure in the future.

Increasing access to integrated ESKD care as part of universal health coverage

The global nephrology community recognizes the need for a cohesive strategy to address the growing problem of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). In March 2018, the International Society of Nephrology hosted a summit on integrated ESKD care, including 92 individuals from around the globe with diverse expertise and professional backgrounds. The attendees were from 41 countries, including 16 participants from 11 low- and lower-middle-income countries. The purpose was to develop a strategic plan to improve worldwide access to integrated ESKD care, by identifying and prioritizing key activities across 8 themes: (i) estimates of ESKD burden and treatment coverage, (ii) advocacy, (iii) education and training/workforce, (iv) financing/funding models, (v) ethics, (vi) dialysis, (vii) transplantation, and (viii) conservative care. Action plans with prioritized lists of goals, activities, and key deliverables, and an overarching performance framework were developed for each theme. Examples of these key deliverables include improved data availability, integration of core registry measures and analysis to inform development of health care policy; a framework for advocacy; improved and continued stakeholder engagement; improved workforce training; equitable, efficient, and cost-effective funding models; greater understanding and greater application of ethical principles in practice and policy; definition and application of standards for safe and sustainable dialysis treatment and a set of measurable quality parameters; and integration of dialysis, transplantation, and comprehensive conservative care as ESKD treatment options within the context of overall health priorities. Intended users of the action plans include clinicians, patients and their families, scientists, industry partners, government decision makers, and advocacy organizations. Implementation of this integrated and comprehensive plan is intended to improve quality and access to care and thereby reduce serious health-related suffering of adults and children affected by ESKD worldwide.

Development of an International Standard Set of Value-Based Outcome Measures for Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: A Report of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) CKD Working Group

Value-based health care is increasingly promoted as a strategy for improving care quality by benchmarking outcomes that matter to patients relative to the cost of obtaining those outcomes. To support the shift toward value-based health care in chronic kidney disease (CKD), the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) assembled an international working group of health professionals and patient representatives to develop a standardized minimum set of patient-centered outcomes targeted for clinical use. The considered outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures were generated from systematic literature reviews. Feedback was sought from patients and health professionals. Patients with very high-risk CKD (stages G3a/A3 and G3b/A2-G5, including dialysis, kidney transplantation, and conservative care) were selected as the target population. Using an online modified Delphi process, outcomes important to all patients were selected, such as survival and hospitalization, and to treatment-specific subgroups, such as vascular access survival and kidney allograft survival. Patient-reported outcome measures were included to capture domains of health-related quality of life, which were rated as the most important outcomes by patients. Demographic and clinical variables were identified to be used as case-mix adjusters. Use of these consensus recommendations could enable institutions to monitor, compare, and improve the quality of their CKD care.

Clinicians' and researchers' perspectives on establishing and implementing core outcomes in haemodialysis: semistructured interview study

OBJECTIVES

To describe the perspectives of clinicians and researchers on identifying, establishing and implementing core outcomes in haemodialysis and their expected impact.

DESIGN

Face-to-face, semistructured interviews; thematic analysis.

STETTING

Twenty-seven centres across nine countries.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifty-eight nephrologists (42 (72%) who were also triallists).

RESULTS

We identified six themes: reflecting direct patient relevance and impact (survival as the primary goal of dialysis, enabling well-being and functioning, severe consequences of comorbidities and complications, indicators of treatment success, universal relevance, stakeholder consensus); amenable and responsive to interventions (realistic and possible to intervene on, differentiating between treatments); reflective of economic burden on healthcare; feasibility of implementation (clarity and consistency in definition, easily measurable, requiring minimal resources, creating a cultural shift, aversion to intensifying bureaucracy, allowing justifiable exceptions); authoritative inducement and directive (endorsement for legitimacy, necessity of buy-in from dialysis providers, incentivising uptake); instituting patient-centredness (explicitly addressing patient-important outcomes, reciprocating trial participation, improving comparability of interventions for decision-making, driving quality improvement and compelling a focus on quality of life).

CONCLUSIONS

Nephrologists emphasised that core outcomes should be relevant to patients, amenable to change, feasible to implement and supported by stakeholder organisations. They expected core outcomes would improve patient-centred care and outcomes.

Clinical Practice Guideline on management of older patients with chronic kidney disease stage 3b or higher (eGFR<45 mL/min/1.73 m2): a summary document from the European Renal Best Practice Group

The population of patients with moderate and severe CKD is growing. Frail and older patients comprise an increasing proportion. Many studies still exclude this group, so the evidence base is limited. In 2013 the advisory board of ERBP initiated, in collaboration with European Union of Geriatric Medicine Societies (EUGMS), the development of a guideline on the management of older patients with CKD stage 3b or higher (eGFR >45 mL/min/1.73 m2). The full guideline has recently been published and is freely available online and on the website of ERBP (www.european-renal-best-practice.org). This paper summarises main recommendations of the guideline and their underlying rationales.

Hyponatraemia diagnosis and treatment clinical practice guidelines

Hyponatremia, defined as a serum sodium concentration <135mmol/l, is the most common water-electrolyte imbalance encountered in clinical practice. It can lead to a wide spectrum of clinical symptoms, from mild to severe or even life threatening, and is associated with increased mortality, morbidity and length of hospital stay. Despite this, the management of hyponatremia patients remains problematic. The prevalence of hyponatremia in a wide variety of conditions and the fact that hyponatremia is managed by clinicians with a broad variety of backgrounds have fostered diverse institution- and specialty-based approaches to diagnosis and treatment. To obtain a common and holistic view, the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM), the European Society of Endocrinology (ESE) and the European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA), represented by European Renal Best Practice (ERBP), have developed clinical practice guidelines on the diagnostic approach and treatment of hyponatremia as a joint venture of 3societies representing specialists with a natural interest in hyponatremia. In addition to a rigorous approach to the methodology and evaluation of the evidence, the document focuses on patient-positive outcomes and on providing a useful tool for clinicians involved in everyday practice. In this article, we present an abridged version of the recommendations and suggestions for the diagnosis and treatment of hyponatremia extracted from the full guide.

Nephrologists' Perspectives on Defining and Applying Patient-Centered Outcomes in Hemodialysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Patient centeredness is widely advocated as a cornerstone of health care, but it is yet to be fully realized, including in nephrology. Our study aims to describe nephrologists' perspectives on defining and implementing patient-centered outcomes in hemodialysis.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Face-to-face, semistructured interviews were conducted with 58 nephrologists from 27 dialysis units across nine countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Singapore, and New Zealand. Transcripts were thematically analyzed.

RESULTS

We identified five themes on defining and implementing patient-centered outcomes in hemodialysis: explicitly prioritized by patients (articulated preferences and goals, ascertaining treatment burden, defining hemodialysis success, distinguishing a physician-patient dichotomy, and supporting shared decision making), optimizing wellbeing (respecting patient choice, focusing on symptomology, perceptible and tangible, and judging relevance and consequence), comprehending extensive heterogeneity of clinical and quality of life outcomes (distilling diverse priorities, highly individualized, attempting to specify outcomes, and broadening context), clinically hamstrung (professional deficiency, uncertainty and complexity in measurement, beyond medical purview, specificity of care, mechanistic mindset [focused on biochemical targets and comorbidities], avoiding alarm, and paradoxical dilemma), and undermined by system pressures (adhering to overarching policies, misalignment with mandates, and resource constraints).

CONCLUSIONS

Improving patient-centered outcomes is regarded by nephrologists to encompass strategies that address patient goals and improve wellbeing and treatment burden in patients on hemodialysis. However, efforts are hampered by ambiguities about how to prioritize, measure, and manage the plethora of critical comorbidities and broader quality of life outcomes in a care setting that is technically demanding and driven by biochemical targets. Identifying critical patient-important outcomes and mechanisms for integrating them into practice may help to deliver patient-centered care in hemodialysis and other chronic disease settings.

Standardised outcomes in nephrology - Haemodialysis (SONG-HD): study protocol for establishing a core outcome set in haemodialysis

Background

Chronic kidney disease is a significant contributor to mortality and morbidity worldwide, and the number of people who require dialysis or transplantation continues to increase. People on dialysis are 15 times more likely to die than the general population. Dialysis is also costly, intrusive, and time-consuming and imposes an enormous burden on patients and their families. This escalating problem has spurred a proliferation of trials in dialysis, yet health and quality of life remain poor. The reasons for this are complex and varied but are attributable in part to problems in the design and reporting of studies, particularly outcome selection. Problems related to outcomes include use of unvalidated surrogates, outcomes of little or no relevance to patients, highly variable outcome selection limiting comparability across studies, and bias in reporting outcomes. The aim of the Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology-Haemodialysis (SONG-HD) study is to establish a core outcome set for haemodialysis trials, to improve the quality of reporting, and the relevance of trials conducted in people on haemodialysis.

Methods/design

SONG-HD is a five-phase project that includes the following: a systematic review to identify outcomes that have been reported in haemodialysis systematic reviews and trials; nominal group technique with patients and caregivers to identify, rank, and describe reasons for their choices; qualitative stakeholder interviews with patients, caregivers, clinicians, researchers, and policy makers to elicit individual values and perspectives on outcomes for haemodialysis trials; a three-round Delphi survey with stakeholder groups to distil and generate a prioritised list of core outcomes; and a consensus workshop to establish a core outcome set for haemodialysis trials.

Discussion

Establishing a core outcome set to be consistently measured and reported in haemodialysis trials will improve the integrity, transparency, usability, and contribution of research relevant to patients requiring haemodialysis; ensure that outcomes of relevance to all stakeholders are consistently reported across trials; and mitigate against outcome reporting bias. Ultimately, patients will be more protected from potential harm, patients and clinicians will be better able to make informed decisions about treatment, and researchers and policy makers will be more able to maximise the value of research to the public

Nephrologists' perceptions regarding dialysis withdrawal and palliative care in Europe: lessons from a European Renal Best Practice survey

BACKGROUND

There is a variation in dialysis withdrawal rates, but reasons for this variation across European countries are largely unknown. We therefore surveyed nephrologists' perceptions of factors concerning dialysis withdrawal and palliative care and explored relationships between these perceptions and reports of whether withdrawal actually occurred in practice.

METHODS

We developed a 33-item electronic survey, disseminated via an email blast to all European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) members. In our data analyses, we distinguished those respondents who reported occurrence from those reporting no dialysis withdrawal in their unit. With multilevel logistic regression, we investigated the association between respondents' characteristics and perceptions and whether they reported occurrence of dialysis withdrawal or not.

RESULTS

Five hundred and twenty-eight nephrologists from 45 countries completed the questionnaire; 42% reported occurrence of withdrawal in their unit in the past year, and 56% perceived that stopping life-prolonging treatment in terminally ill patients was allowed. Few respondents reported presence in their unit of protocols on withdrawal decision making (7%) or palliative care (10%) or the common involvement of a geriatrician in withdrawal decisions (10%). The majority stated that palliative care had not been part of their core curriculum (74%) and that they had not recently attended continuous medical education sessions on this topic (73%). Respondents from Eastern and Southern Europe had a 42 and 40% lower probability, respectively, of reporting withdrawal compared with those from North European countries. Working in a public centre [odds ratio (OR), 2.41; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.36-4.25] and respondents' perception that stopping life-prolonging treatment in terminally ill patients was allowed (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.23-3.12), that withdrawal decisions were commonly shared between doctor and patient (OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.26-3.08) and that palliative care was reimbursed (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.16-2.83) increased the odds of reporting occurrence of withdrawal.

CONCLUSION

Reports of dialysis withdrawal occurrence varied between European countries. Occurrence reports were more likely if respondents worked in a public centre, if stopping life-prolonging treatments was perceived as allowed, if withdrawal decisions were considered shared between doctors and patients and if reimbursement of palliative care was believed to be in place. There is room for improvement regarding protocols on withdrawal and palliative care processes and regarding nephrologists' training and education on end-of-life care.

European Society of Endocrinology Clinical Guideline: Treatment of chronic hypoparathyroidism in adults

Hypoparathyroidism (HypoPT) is a rare (orphan) endocrine disease with low calcium and inappropriately low (insufficient) circulating parathyroid hormone levels, most often in adults secondary to thyroid surgery. Standard treatment is activated vitamin D analogues and calcium supplementation and not replacement of the lacking hormone, as in other hormonal deficiency states. The purpose of this guideline is to provide clinicians with guidance on the treatment and monitoring of chronic HypoPT in adults who do not have end-stage renal disease. We intend to draft a practical guideline, focusing on operationalized recommendations deemed to be useful in the daily management of patients. This guideline was developed and solely sponsored by The European Society of Endocrinology, supported by CBO (Dutch Institute for Health Care Improvement) and based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) principles as a methodological base. The clinical question on which the systematic literature search was based and for which available evidence was synthesized was: what is the best treatment for adult patients with chronic HypoPT? This systematic search found 1100 articles, which was reduced to 312 based on title and abstract. The working group assessed these for eligibility in more detail, and 32 full-text articles were assessed. For the final recommendations, other literature was also taken into account. Little evidence is available on how best to treat HypoPT. Data on quality of life and the risk of complications have just started to emerge, and clinical trials on how to optimize therapy are essentially non-existent. Most studies are of limited sample size, hampering firm conclusions. No studies are available relating target calcium levels with clinically relevant endpoints. Hence it is not possible to formulate recommendations based on strict evidence. This guideline is therefore mainly based on how patients are managed in clinical practice, as reported in small case series and based on the experiences of the authors.

Setting Priorities for Optimizing Vascular Access Decision Making--An International Survey of Patients and Clinicians

BACKGROUND

Many decisions around vascular access for haemodialysis warrant a collaborative treatment decision-making process, involving both clinician and patient. Yet, patients' experiences in this regard have been suboptimal. Although clinical practice guidelines could facilitate collaborative decision making, they often focus on the clinicians' side of the process, while failing to address the patients' perspective. The objective of this study was to explore and compare kidney patients' and clinicians' views on what vascular access-related decisions deserved priority for developing guidelines that will contribute to optimizing collaborative decision making.

METHODS

In the context of updating their vascular access guideline, European Renal Best Practice surveyed an international panel of 85 kidney patients, 687 nephrologists, 194 nurses, and 140 surgeons/radiologists. In an electronic questionnaire, respondents rated 42 vascular access-related topics on a 5-point Likert scale. Based on mean standardized ratings, we compared priority ratings between patients and each clinician group.

RESULTS

Selection of access type and site, as well as prevention of access infections received top priority across all respondent groups. Patients generally assigned higher priority to decisions regarding managing adverse effects of arteriovenous access and patient involvement in care, while clinicians more often prioritized decisions around sustaining patients' access options, technical aspects of access creation, and optimizing fistula maturation and patency.

CONCLUSION

Apart from identifying the most pressing knowledge gaps, our study provides pointers for developing guidelines that may improve healthcare professionals' understanding of when to involve patients along the vascular access pathway.

The prevention of acute kidney injury an in-depth narrative review: Part 2: Drugs in the prevention of acute kidney injury

The second part of this in-depth clinical review focuses on drugs used in the prevention of AKI in the patient at risk and/or in the management of the patient with incipient AKI. Among the drugs used to maintain a normal renal perfusion pressure, norepinephrine and vasopressin are most commonly used in hypotensive critically ill patients. The most recent RCT did not find a difference between low-dose vasopressin plus norepinephrine and norepinephrine alone in patients with septic shock, suggesting that either approach is reasonable. However, vasopressin may be beneficial in the less severe septic shock subgroup. Loop diuretics may convert an oliguric into a non-oliguric form of AKI that may allow easier fluid and/or nutritional support of the patient. Volume overload in AKI patients is common and diuretics may provide symptomatic benefit in that situation. However, loop diuretics are neither associated with improved survival, nor with better recovery of renal function in AKI. Among the renal vasodilating drugs, the routine administration of dopamine to patients for the prevention of AKI or incipient AKI is no longer justified. On the other hand, although additional studies may be warranted, fenoldopam may appear to be a likely candidate for the prevention of AKI, particularly in critically ill patients, if the positive results obtained in some recent studies are confirmed. Trials with natriuretic peptides were in general inconclusive but despite the fact that nesiritide is currently approved by the FDA only for the treatment of heart failure, this vasodilator may in the future play a role in the prevention of AKI, particularly in association with heart failure and cardiac surgery. The most recent trials seem to confirm a potential positive preventive effect of N-acetylcysteine (NAC), particularly in contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN), NAC alone should never take the place of IV hydration in patients at risk for CIN; fluids likely have a more substantiated benefit. At present, initiation of statin therapy for the prevention of CIN cannot be recommended, but these drugs should not be stopped before a radiological intervention in patients on chronic statin therapy. Rasburicase is very effective in the prevention of acute tumour lysis syndrome. Erythropoietin (EPO) has tissue-protective effects and prevents tissue damage during ischaemia and inflammation, and currently trials are performed with EPO in the prevention of AKI post-cardiac surgery, CIN and post-kidney transplantation. From this review it becomes clear that single-drug therapy will probably never be effective in the prevention of AKI and that multiple agents may be needed to improve outcomes. In addition, drugs should be administered early during the course of the disease.

A survey on the methodological processes and policies of renal guideline groups as a first step to harmonize renal guidelines

BACKGROUND

Worldwide, several bodies produce renal guidelines, potentially leading to duplication of effort while other topics may remain uncovered. A collaborative work plan could improve efficiency and impact, but requires a common approved methodology. The aim of this study was to identify organizational and methodological similarities and differences among seven major renal guideline bodies to identify methodological barriers to a collaborative effort.

METHODS

An electronic 62-item survey with questions based on the Institute of Medicine standards for guidelines was completed by representatives of seven major organizations producing renal guidelines: the Canadian Society of Nephrology (CSN), European Renal Best Practice (ERBP), Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcome (KDIGO), Kidney Health Australia-Caring for Australians with Renal Insufficiency (KHA-CARI), Kidney Disease Outcome Quality Initiative (KDOQI), Sociedad Latino-Americano de Nefrologia e Hipertension (SLANH) and United Kingdom Renal Association (UK-RA).

RESULTS

Five of the seven groups conduct systematic searches for evidence, two include detailed critical appraisal and all use the GRADE framework. Five have public review of the guideline draft. Guidelines are updated as new evidence comes up in all, and/or after a specified time frame has passed (N = 3). Commentaries or position statements on guidelines published by other groups are produced by five, with the ADAPTE framework (N = 1) and the AGREEII (N = 2) used by some. Funding is from their parent organizations (N = 5) or directly from industry (N = 2). None allow funders to influence topic selection or guideline content. The budgets to develop a full guideline vary from $2000 to $500 000. Guideline development groups vary in size from <5 (N = 1) to 13-20 persons (N = 3). Three explicitly seek patient perspectives, for example, by involving patients in the scoping process, and four incorporate health economic considerations. All provide training in methodology for guideline development groups and six make their methods public. All try to avoid overlapping topics already planned or published by others. There is no common conflict of interest policy.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, there is considerable commonality in methods and approaches in renal guideline development by the different organizations, although some procedural differences remain. As the financial and human resource costs of guideline production are high, a collaborative approach is required to maximize impact and develop a sustainable work plan. Coming to consensus on methods and procedures is the first step and appears feasible.

A multicentric, international matched pair analysis of body composition in peritoneal dialysis versus haemodialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Volume status, lean and fat tissue are gaining interest as prognostic predictors in patients on dialysis. Comparative data in peritoneal dialysis (PD) versus haemodialysis (HD) patients are lacking.

METHODS

In a cohort of PD (EuroBCM) and HD (Euclid database) patients, matched for country, gender, age and dialysis vintage, body composition was assessed by bioimpedance spectroscopy (BCM, Fresenius Medical Care). Time-averaged volume overload (TAVO) was defined as the mean of pre- and post-dialysis volume overload (VO), and relative (%) (TA)VO as (TA)VO/ECV.

RESULTS

Four hundred and ninety-one matched pairs (55.2% males, median age 60.0 years) were included. The body mass index (BMI, PD = 26.5 ± 4.7 versus HD = 25.9 ± 4.6 kg/m(2), P = 0.18 in males and 27.4 ± 5.8 versus 27.5 ± 6.6 kg/m(2), P = 0.75 in females) and fat tissue index (males: 11.5 ± 5.3 versus 11.4 ± 5.4 kg/m(2), P = 0.90, females: 14.8 ± 6.7 versus 15.4 ± 7.2 kg/m(2), P = 0.30) were not different in PD versus HD patients, whereas the lean tissue index (LTI) was higher in PD versus HD patients (males: 14.5 ± 3.4 versus 13.7 ± 3.1 kg/m(2), P = 0.001, females: 12.6 ± 3.3 versus 11.5 ± 2.6 kg/m(2), P < 0.0001). VO/extracellular water (ECW) was not different between PD versus just before the HD treatment (males: 10.8 ± 12.1 versus 9.2 ± 10.2%, P = 0.09; females: 6.5 ± 10.8 versus 7.7 ± 9.4%, P = 0.19). The relative TAVO was higher in PD versus HD (10.8 ± 12.1% versus 3.2 ± 11.2%, and 6.5 ± 10.8% versus 1.2 ± 10.9%, both P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The LTI was impaired, and this was more in males versus females, but was better preserved on PD versus HD, whereas fat tissue index (FTI) was increased, but not different between PD and HD. Volume overload was more present in PD versus HD when TAVO, but not when predialysis volume status, was used as a reference.

Glucose-lowering drugs in patients with chronic kidney disease: a narrative review on pharmacokinetic properties

The achievement of a good glycaemic control is one of the cornerstones for preventing and delaying progression of microvascular and macrovascular complications in patients with both diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD). As for other drugs, the presence of an impaired renal function may significantly affect pharmacokinetics of the majority of glucose-lowering agents, thus exposing diabetic CKD patients to a higher risk of side effects, mainly hypoglycaemic episodes. As a consequence, a reduction in dosing and/or frequency of administration is necessary to keep a satisfactory efficacy/safety profile. In this review, we aim to summarize the pharmacology of the most widely used glucose-lowering agents, discuss whether and how it is altered by a reduced renal function, and the recommendations that can be made for their use in patients with different degrees of CKD.

Measuring the quality of renal care: things to keep in mind when selecting and using quality indicators

This educational paper discusses a variety of indicators that can be used to measure the quality of care in renal medicine. Based on what aspect of care they reflect, indicators can be grouped into four main categories: structure, process, surrogate outcome and outcome indicators. Each category has its own advantages and disadvantages, and we give some pointers on how to balance these pros and cons while taking into account the aim of the measurement initiative. Especially within initiatives that link payment or reputation to indicator measurement, this balancing should be done with utmost care to avoid potential, unintended consequences. Furthermore, we suggest consideration of (i) a causal chain-i.e. subsequent aspects of care connected by evidence-based links-as a starting point for composing a performance indicator set and (ii) adequate case-mix adjustment, not only of (surrogate) outcomes, but also of process indicators in order to obtain fair comparisons between facilities and within facilities over time.

Conservative care in Europe--nephrologists' experience with the decision not to start renal replacement therapy

BACKGROUND

For some patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), providing conservative care until death may be an acceptable alternative for renal replacement therapy (RRT). We aimed to estimate the occurrence of conservative care in Europe and evaluated opinions about which factors nephrologists consider important in their decision not to offer RRT.

METHODS

With a web-based survey sent to nephrologists in 11 European countries, we inquired how often RRT was not started in 2009 and how specific factors would influence the nephrologists' decision to provide conservative care. We compared subgroups by nephrologist and facility characteristics using chi-square tests and Mann-Whitney U tests.

RESULTS

We received 433 responses. Nephrologists decided to offer conservative care in 10% of their patients [interquartile range (IQR) 5-20%]. An additional 5% (IQR 2-10%) of the patients chose conservative care as they refused when nephrologists intended to start RRT. Patient preference (93%), severe clinical conditions (93%), vascular dementia (84%) and low physical functional status (75%) were considered extremely or quite important in the nephrologists' decision to provide conservative care. Nephrologists from countries with a low incidence of RRT, not-for-profit centres and public centres more often scored these factors as extremely or quite important than their counterparts from high-incidence countries, for-profit centres and private centres.

CONCLUSIONS

Nephrologists estimated conservative care was provided to up to 15% of their patients in 2009. The presence of severe clinical conditions, vascular dementia and a low physical functional status are important factors in the decision-making not to start RRT. Patient preference was considered as a very important factor, confirming the importance of extensive patient education and shared decision-making.

Reduced incidence of acute renal graft failure in patients treated with peritoneal dialysis compared with hemodialysis

In a case-control study performed in two centers, the incidence of delayed graft function (DGF), defined as the necessity to perform dialysis after transplantation, was analyzed according to prior treatment with continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD; n = 117) or hemodialysis (HD; n = 117). The patients were matched for age, sex, HLA compatibility, and cold ischemia time. The patients were followed up for 6 months to monitor renal graft function (serum creatinine [Screa] level immediately after transplantation, at 6 weeks, at 6 months) and postoperative complications. No significant differences were found in the warm ischemia time of the graft or previous time on dialysis. DGF occurred in 27 CAPD patients (23.1%) and 59 HD patients (50.4%; P < 0.0001). The decline in Screa level after transplantation was faster in CAPD patients: the time for Screa level to decrease 50% after transplantation (T1/2Screa) was reached after 5.0 +/- 6.6 days in the CAPD group compared with 9.8 +/- 11.5 days in the HD group (P < 0.0001). A greater number of patients developed acute rejection episodes in the CAPD group (P < 0. 05), but Screa level was not different in the two groups 6 weeks and 6 months after transplantation. No differences were observed in infectious or surgical complications. This study shows that immediate renal function after transplantation is better in CAPD patients and that peritoneal dialysis should be considered as a first choice for pretransplantation therapeutic modality.