Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
Can J Kidney Health Dis ; 9: 20543581221131201, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20234945

ABSTRACT

Background: Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) is a quality improvement intervention designed to enhance access to kidney transplantation and living kidney donation. We conducted a cluster-randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effect of the intervention versus usual care on completing key steps toward receiving a kidney transplant. Objective: To prespecify the statistical analysis plan for the EnAKT LKD trial. Design: The EnAKT LKD trial is a pragmatic, 2-arm, parallel-group, registry-based, open-label, cluster-randomized, superiority, clinical trial. Randomization was performed at the level of the chronic kidney disease (CKD) programs (the "clusters"). Setting: Twenty-six CKD programs in Ontario, Canada. Participants: More than 10 000 patients with advanced CKD (ie, patients approaching the need for dialysis or receiving maintenance dialysis) with no recorded contraindication to receiving a kidney transplant. Methods: The trial data (including patient characteristics and outcomes) will be obtained from linked administrative health care databases (the "registry"). Stratified covariate-constrained randomization was used to allocate the 26 CKD programs (1:1) to provide the intervention or usual care from November 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021 (4.17 years). CKD programs in the intervention arm received the following: (1) support for local quality improvement teams and administrative needs; (2) tailored education and resources for staff, patients, and living kidney donor candidates; (3) support from kidney transplant recipients and living kidney donors; and (4) program-level performance reports and oversight by program leaders. Outcomes: The primary outcome is completing key steps toward receiving a kidney transplant, where up to 4 unique steps per patient will be considered: (1) patient referred to a transplant center for evaluation, (2) a potential living kidney donor begins their evaluation at a transplant center to donate a kidney to the patient, (3) patient added to the deceased donor transplant waitlist, and (4) patient receives a kidney transplant from a living or deceased donor. Analysis plan: Using an intent-to-treat approach, the primary outcome will be analyzed using a patient-level constrained multistate model adjusting for the clustering in CKD programs. Trial Status: The EnAKT LKD trial period is November 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021. We expect to analyze and report the results once the data for the trial period is available in linked administrative health care databases. Trial Registration: The EnAKT LKD trial is registered with the U.S. National Institute of Health at clincaltrials.gov (NCT03329521 available at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03329521). Statistical Analytic Plan: Version 1.0 August 26, 2022.


Contexte: EnAKT LKD est une intervention d'amélioration de la qualité visant à améliorer l'accès à la transplantation rénale et au don vivant de rein. Nous avons mené un essai clinique randomisé par grappes afin d'évaluer l'effet de l'intervention, par rapport aux soins habituels, sur le taux d'étapes clés réalisées dans le processus de réception d'une greffe de rein. Objectif: Exposer les grandes lignes du plan d'analyse statistique de l'essai EAKT LKD. Conception: EAKT LKD est un essai clinique pragmatique ouvert, à deux bras, en groupes parallèles, basé sur un registre, et randomisé en grappes. La randomisation a été réalisée au niveau des programmes d'insuffisance rénale chronique (IRC) (les « grappes ¼). Cadre: 26 programmes d'IRC en Ontario (Canada). Sujets: Plus de 10 000 patients atteints d'IRC de stade avancé (des patients approchant le besoin de dialyse ou recevant une hémodialyse d'entretien) sans contre-indication documentée à la greffe rénale. Méthodologie: Les données de l'essai (y compris les caractéristiques et les résultats des patients) seront obtenues à partir de bases de données administratives en santé (le « registre ¼). La randomisation stratifiée avec contraintes de covariables a servi à répartir les 26 programmes d'IRC (1:1) selon qu'ils allaient fournir l'intervention ou les soins habituels entre le 1er novembre 2017 et le 31 décembre 2021 (4,17 ans). Les programmes d'IRC du bras d'intervention ont eu droit au soutien suivant: (1) des équipes locales d'amélioration de la qualité et du soutien administratif; (2) de l'information et des ressources sur mesure pour le personnel, les patients et les donneurs vivants; (3) du soutien de la part de receveurs et de donneurs vivants; et (4) des rapports sur le rendement au niveau du programme et une surveillance assurée par les chefs de programme. Résultats: Le principal critère d'évaluation est le taux d'étapes clés accomplies vers la réception d'une greffe de rein, où jusqu'à quatre étapes uniques par patient seront comptabilisées: (1) le patient est aiguillé vers un centre de transplantation pour évaluation; (2) un possible donneur vivant de rein contacte un centre de transplantation pour un receveur en particulier et amorce son évaluation; (3) le patient est ajouté à la liste d'attente pour une transplantation d'un donneur décédé, et (4) le patient reçoit une greffe de rein d'un donneur vivant ou décédé. Plan d'analyse: Selon une approche fondée sur l'intention de traiter, le critère d'évaluation principal sera analysé au niveau du patient en utilisant un modèle multiétats contraint, corrigé dans les programmes d'IRC en fonction du regroupement. Statut de l'essai: L'essai EnAKT LKD s'est tenu du 1er novembre 2017 au 31 décembre 2021. Nous analyserons les résultats et en rendrons compte dès que les données seront disponibles dans les bases de données administratives couplées du système de santé.

2.
PLoS Med ; 20(4): e1004187, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2300630

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has exacerbated mental health challenges among physicians and non-physicians. However, it is unclear if the worsening mental health among physicians is due to specific occupational stressors, reflective of general societal stressors during the pandemic, or a combination. We evaluated the difference in mental health and addictions health service use between physicians and non-physicians, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada between March 11, 2017 and August 11, 2021 using data collected from Ontario's universal health system. Physicians were identified using registrations with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario between 1990 and 2020. Participants included 41,814 physicians and 12,054,070 non-physicians. We compared the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 11, 2020 to August 11, 2021) to the period before COVID-19 pandemic (March 11, 2017 to February 11, 2020). The primary outcome was mental health and addiction outpatient visits overall and subdivided into virtual versus in-person, psychiatrists versus family medicine and general practice clinicians. We used generalized estimating equations for the analyses. Pre-pandemic, after adjustment for age and sex, physicians had higher rates of psychiatry visits (aIRR 3.91 95% CI 3.55 to 4.30) and lower rates of family medicine visits (aIRR 0.62 95% CI 0.58 to 0.66) compared to non-physicians. During the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, the rate of outpatient mental health and addiction (MHA) visits increased by 23.2% in physicians (888.4 pre versus 1,094.7 during per 1,000 person-years, aIRR 1.39 95% CI 1.28 to 1.51) and 9.8% in non-physicians (615.5 pre versus 675.9 during per 1,000 person-years, aIRR 1.12 95% CI 1.09 to 1.14). Outpatient MHA and virtual care visits increased more among physicians than non-physicians during the first 18 months of the pandemic. Limitations include residual confounding between physician and non-physicians and challenges differentiating whether observed increases in MHA visits during the pandemic are due to stressors or changes in health care access. CONCLUSIONS: The first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a larger increase in outpatient MHA visits in physicians than non-physicians. These findings suggest physicians may have had larger negative mental health during COVID-19 than the general population and highlight the need for increased access to mental health services and system level changes to promote physician wellness.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mental Health , Humans , Ontario/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Cohort Studies , Patient Acceptance of Health Care
4.
J Am Soc Nephrol ; 33(4): 839-849, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2141045

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Vaccination studies in the hemodialysis population have demonstrated decreased antibody response compared with healthy controls, but vaccine effectiveness for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe disease is undetermined. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in the province of Ontario, Canada, between December 21, 2020, and June 30, 2021. Receipt of vaccine, SARS-CoV-2 infection, and related severe outcomes (hospitalization or death) were determined from provincial health administrative data. Receipt of one and two doses of vaccine were modeled in a time-varying cause-specific Cox proportional hazards model, adjusting for baseline characteristics, background community infection rates, and censoring for non-COVID death, recovered kidney function, transfer out of province, solid organ transplant, and withdrawal from dialysis. RESULTS: Among 13,759 individuals receiving maintenance dialysis, 2403 (17%) were unvaccinated and 11,356 (83%) had received at least one dose by June 30, 2021. Vaccine types were BNT162b2 (n=8455, 74%) and mRNA-1273 (n=2901, 26%); median time between the first and second dose was 36 days (IQR 28-51). The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe outcomes for one dose compared with unvaccinated was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.46 to 0.76) and 0.54 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.77), respectively, and for two doses compared with unvaccinated was 0.31 (95% CI, 0.22 to 0.42) and 0.17 (95% CI, 0.1 to 0.3), respectively. There were no significant differences in vaccine effectiveness among age groups, dialysis modality, or vaccine type. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination is effective in the dialysis population to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe outcomes, despite concerns about suboptimal antibody responses.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Ontario/epidemiology , Renal Dialysis , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccine Efficacy
5.
CMAJ Open ; 10(3): E657-E665, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1954932

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Health care workers have a higher risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection than the general population. Our study reports on SARS-CoV-2 testing, infection and associated outcomes in Ontario physicians before SARS-CoV-2 vaccination became available on Dec. 14, 2020. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive, population-based cohort study of physicians in Ontario, Canada, from Jan. 25 to Dec. 31, 2020. We included physicians and postgraduate medical trainees who were residents of Ontario and registrants with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario during the study period. We examined the proportion of physicians tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection, the proportion who tested positive, and how testing and infections varied by certain physician characteristics. We reported on clinical outcomes associated with infection, including hospital admission and death. RESULTS: Of 41 208 physicians (mean age 47 yr; 56.1% male), 19 116 (46.4%) were tested at least once for SARS-CoV-2 infection; 358 tested positive (0.9%). No physicians died within 30 days of testing positive; however, 20/358 (5.6%) were admitted to hospital. By specialty, the proportion tested was highest among postgraduate medical trainees (2531/4125 [61.4%]), emergency physicians (281/478 [58.8%]), infectious disease physicians (33/67 [49.3%]) and family physicians (8857/18 553 [47.7%]). The proportion who tested positive was highest among internal medicine physicians (44/3499 [1.3%]), postgraduate medical trainees (47/4125 [1.1%]) and family physicians (171/18 553 [0.9%]). Of 2290 physicians who worked in long-term care, 1636 (71.4%) were tested and 25 (1.1%) tested positive. INTERPRETATION: During the prevaccination period of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, nearly half of all physicians in the province were tested at least once for SARS-CoV-2 infection, 0.9% tested positive and none died. These findings may reflect the public health measures that were implemented in the province during this period.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19 Vaccines , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Ontario/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
6.
N Engl J Med ; 386(21): 1986-1997, 2022 05 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1864788

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Perioperative bleeding is common in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Tranexamic acid is an antifibrinolytic drug that may safely decrease such bleeding. METHODS: We conducted a trial involving patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Patients were randomly assigned to receive tranexamic acid (1-g intravenous bolus) or placebo at the start and end of surgery (reported here) and, with the use of a partial factorial design, a hypotension-avoidance or hypertension-avoidance strategy (not reported here). The primary efficacy outcome was life-threatening bleeding, major bleeding, or bleeding into a critical organ (composite bleeding outcome) at 30 days. The primary safety outcome was myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery, nonhemorrhagic stroke, peripheral arterial thrombosis, or symptomatic proximal venous thromboembolism (composite cardiovascular outcome) at 30 days. To establish the noninferiority of tranexamic acid to placebo for the composite cardiovascular outcome, the upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% confidence interval for the hazard ratio had to be below 1.125, and the one-sided P value had to be less than 0.025. RESULTS: A total of 9535 patients underwent randomization. A composite bleeding outcome event occurred in 433 of 4757 patients (9.1%) in the tranexamic acid group and in 561 of 4778 patients (11.7%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67 to 0.87; absolute difference, -2.6 percentage points; 95% CI, -3.8 to -1.4; two-sided P<0.001 for superiority). A composite cardiovascular outcome event occurred in 649 of 4581 patients (14.2%) in the tranexamic acid group and in 639 of 4601 patients (13.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.14; upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% CI, 1.14; absolute difference, 0.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.1 to 1.7; one-sided P = 0.04 for noninferiority). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing noncardiac surgery, the incidence of the composite bleeding outcome was significantly lower with tranexamic acid than with placebo. Although the between-group difference in the composite cardiovascular outcome was small, the noninferiority of tranexamic acid was not established. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; POISE-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03505723.).


Subject(s)
Antifibrinolytic Agents , Tranexamic Acid , Antifibrinolytic Agents/adverse effects , Antifibrinolytic Agents/therapeutic use , Canada , Hemorrhage/etiology , Hemorrhage/prevention & control , Humans , Surgical Procedures, Operative , Thrombosis/chemically induced , Thrombosis/drug therapy , Tranexamic Acid/adverse effects , Tranexamic Acid/therapeutic use
7.
Clin Kidney J ; 15(3): 507-516, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1701704

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severely ill people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at risk of acute kidney injury treated with renal replacement therapy (AKI-RRT). The understanding of the risk factors and outcomes for AKI-RRT is incomplete. METHODS: We prospectively collected data on the incidence, demographics, area of residence, time course, outcomes and associated risk factors for all COVID-19 AKI-RRT cases during the first two waves of the pandemic in Ontario, Canada. RESULTS: There were 271 people with AKI-RRT, representing 0.1% of all diagnosed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) cases. These included 10% of SARS-CoV-2 admissions to intensive care units (ICU). Median age was 65 years, with 11% <50 years, 76% were male, 47% non-White and 48% had diabetes. Overall, 59% resided in the quintile of Ontario neighborhoods with the greatest ethnocultural composition and 51% in the two lowest income quintile neighborhoods. Mortality was 58% at 30 days after RRT initiation, and 64% at 90 days. By 90 days, 20% of survivors remained RRT-dependent and 31% were still hospitalized. On multivariable analysis, people aged >70 years had higher mortality (odds ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 1.3, 4.6). Cases from the second versus the first COVID-19 wave were older, had more baseline comorbidity and were more likely to initiate RRT  >2 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis (34% versus 14%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: AKI-RRT is common in COVID-19 ICU admissions. Residency in areas with high ethnocultural composition and lower socioeconomic status are strong risk factors. Late-onset AKI-RRT was more common in the second wave. Mortality is high and 90-day survivors have persisting high morbidity.

8.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(1): e2143160, 2022 01 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1640613

ABSTRACT

Importance: Physicians self-report high levels of symptoms of anxiety and depression, and surveys suggest these symptoms have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it is not known whether pandemic-related stressors have led to increases in health care visits related to mental health or substance use among physicians. Objective: To evaluate the association between the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in outpatient health care visits by physicians related to mental health and substance use and explore differences across physician subgroups of interest. Design, Setting, and Participants: A population-based cohort study was conducted using health administrative data collected from the universal health system (Ontario Health Insurance Plan) of Ontario, Canada, from March 1, 2017, to March 10, 2021. Participants included 34 055 physicians, residents, and fellows who registered with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario between 1990 and 2018 and were eligible for the Ontario Health Insurance Plan during the study period. Autoregressive integrated moving average models and generalized estimating equations were used in analyses. Exposures: The period during the COVID-19 pandemic (March 11, 2020, to March 10, 2021) compared with the period before the pandemic. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was in-person, telemedicine, and virtual care outpatient visits to a psychiatrist or family medicine and general practice clinicians related to mental health and substance use. Results: In the 34 055 practicing physicians (mean [SD] age, 41.7 [10.0] years, 17 918 [52.6%] male), the annual crude number of visits per 1000 physicians increased by 27%, from 816.8 before the COVID-19 pandemic to 1037.5 during the pandemic (adjusted incident rate ratio per physician, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.07-1.19). The absolute proportion of physicians with 1 or more mental health and substance use visits within a year increased from 12.3% before to 13.4% during the pandemic (adjusted odds ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.14). The relative increase was significantly greater in physicians without a prior mental health and substance use history (adjusted incident rate ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.60-1.85) than in physicians with a prior mental health and substance use history. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a substantial increase in mental health and substance use visits among physicians. Physician mental health may have worsened during the pandemic, highlighting a potential greater requirement for access to mental health services and system level change.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mental Health , Pandemics , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Physicians/psychology , Stress, Psychological , Substance-Related Disorders , Adult , Ambulatory Care , Anxiety , Cohort Studies , Depression , Family Practice , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders , Middle Aged , Ontario , Psychiatry , Psychological Distress , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicine
9.
Clinical kidney journal ; 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1602459

ABSTRACT

Background Severely ill people with COVID-19 are at risk of acute kidney injury treated with renal replacement therapy (AKI-RRT). Understanding of risk factors and outcomes for AKI-RRT is incomplete. Methods We prospectively collected data on the incidence, demographics, area of residence, time course, outcomes, and associated risk factors for all COVID-19 AKI-RRT cases during the first 2 waves of the pandemic in Ontario, Canada Results There were 271 people with AKI-RRT, representing 0.1% of all diagnosed SARS-CoV-2 cases. These included 10% of SARS-CoV-2 admissions to intensive care units (ICU). Median age was 65 years, with 11% under 50, 76% were male, 47% non-white, and 48% had diabetes. Overall, 59% resided in the quintile of Ontario neighborhoods with the greatest ethnocultural composition and 51% in the 2 lowest income quintile neighborhoods. Mortality was 58% at 30 days after RRT initiation, and 64% at 90 days. By 90 days, 20% of survivors remained RRT-dependent and 31% were still hospitalized. On multivariable analysis, people aged over 70 had higher mortality (odds ratio (OR) 2.4, 95% CI: 1.3, 4.6). Cases from the second versus the first COVID-19 wave were older, had more baseline co-morbidity, and were more likely to initiate RRT over 2 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis (34% vs 14%, p < 0.001). Conclusions AKI-RRT is common in COVID-19 ICU admissions. Residency in areas with high ethnocultural composition and lower socioeconomic status are strong risk factors. Late onset AKI-RRT was more common in the second wave. Mortality is high and 90-day survivors have persisting high morbidity. Graphical Graphical

10.
Can J Kidney Health Dis ; 8: 2054358121997266, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1209863

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Many patients with kidney failure will live longer and healthier lives if they receive a kidney transplant rather than dialysis. However, multiple barriers prevent patients from accessing this treatment option. OBJECTIVE: To determine if a quality improvement intervention provided in chronic kidney disease (CKD) programs (vs. usual care) enables more patients with no recorded contraindications to kidney transplant to complete more steps toward receiving a kidney transplant. DESIGN: This protocol describes a pragmatic 2-arm, parallel-group, open-label, registry-based, cluster-randomized clinical trial-the Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) trial. SETTING: All 26 CKD programs in Ontario, Canada, with a trial start date of November 1, 2017. The original end date of March 31, 2021 (3.4 years) has been extended to December 31, 2021 (4.1 years) due to the COVID-19 pandemic. PARTICIPANTS: During the trial, the 26 CKD programs are expected to care for more than 10 000 adult patients with CKD (including patients approaching the need for dialysis and patients receiving dialysis) with no recorded contraindications to a kidney transplant. INTERVENTION: Programs were randomly allocated to provide a quality improvement intervention or usual care. The intervention has 4 main components: (1) local quality improvement teams and administrative support; (2) tailored education and resources for staff, patients, and living kidney donor candidates; (3) support from kidney transplant recipients and living kidney donors; and (4) program-level performance reports and oversight by program leaders. PRIMARY OUTCOME: The primary outcome is the number of key steps completed toward receiving a kidney transplant analyzed at the cluster level (CKD program). The following 4 unique steps per patient will be counted: (1) patient referred to a transplant center for evaluation, (2) at least one living kidney donor candidate contacts a transplant center for an intended recipient and completes a health history questionnaire to begin their evaluation, (3) patient added to the deceased donor transplant wait list, and (4) patient receives a kidney transplant from a living or deceased donor. PLANNED PRIMARY ANALYSIS: Study data will be obtained from Ontario's linked administrative healthcare databases. An intent-to-treat analysis will be conducted comparing the primary outcome between randomized groups using a 2-stage approach. First stage: residuals are obtained from fitting a regression model to individual-level variables ignoring intervention and clustering effects. Second stage: residuals from the first stage are aggregated at the cluster level as the outcome. LIMITATIONS: It may not be possible to isolate independent effects of each intervention component, the usual care group could adopt intervention components leading to contamination bias, and the relatively small number of clusters could mean the 2 arms are not balanced on all baseline prognostic factors. CONCLUSIONS: The EnAKT LKD trial will provide high-quality evidence on whether a multi-component quality improvement intervention helps patients complete more steps toward receiving a kidney transplant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov; identifier: NCT03329521.


CONTEXTE: Plusieurs patients atteints d'insuffisance rénale vivront plus longtemps et en meilleure santé s'ils reçoivent une greffe de rein plutôt que des traitements de dialyze. De nombreux obstacles empêchent cependant les patients d'accéder à la transplantation. OBJECTIF: Déterminer si une intervention visant l'amélioration de la qualité menée dans les programs d'insuffisance rénale chronique (IRC) permettrait à davantage de patients sans contre-indications à une greffe d'aller plus loin (comparativement aux soins habituels) dans le processus menant à la transplantation. TYPE D'ÉTUDE: Ce protocole décrit un essai clinique pragmatique ouvert, à deux bras, en groupes parallèles, à répartition aléatoire en grappes et fondé sur un registre ­ l'essai Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD). CADRE: Les 26 programs d'IRC de l'Ontario (Canada). L'essai a débuté le 1er novembre 2017 et devait initialement se terminer le 31 mars 2021 (3,4 ans); cette date a été reportée au 31 décembre 2021 (4,1 ans) en raison de la pandémie de COVID-19. SUJETS: Au cours de l'essai, on estime que les 26 programs d'IRC prendront en charge plus de 10 000 adultes atteints d'IRC (y compris des patients approchant le besoin de dialyze et des patients dialysés) sans contre-indications à une greffe. INTERVENTIONS: Les programs ont été répartis aléatoirement pour intégrer une intervention d'amélioration de la qualité ou pour prodiguer les soins habituels. L'intervention consiste en quatre composantes principales: (1) des équipes locales d'amélioration de la qualité et de soutien administratif; (2) de l'information et des ressources sur mesure pour le personnel, les patients et les donneurs vivants; (3) du soutien pour les receveurs et les donneurs vivants; et (4) des rapports sur le rendement au niveau du program et une surveillance assurée par les chefs de program. PRINCIPAUX RÉSULTATS: Le principal critère d'évaluation est le nombre d'étapes clés complétées en vue de la réception d'une greffe de rein tel qu'analysé au niveau de la grappe (program d'IRC). Pour chaque patient, quatre étapes spécifiques seront comptabilisées: (I) le patient est aiguillé vers un center de transplantation pour évaluation; (II) au moins un donneur vivant de rein contacte un center de transplantation pour un receveur en particulier et amorce son évaluation en remplissant un questionnaire sur ses antécédents médicaux; (III) le patient est ajouté à la liste d'attente pour une transplantation d'un donneur décédé, et (IV) le patient reçoit une greffe de rein d'un donneur vivant ou décédé. PRINCIPALE ANALYZE ENVISAGÉE: Les données sont tirées des bases de données administratives du système de santé ontarien. Une analyze en intention de traiter sera effectuée en comparant le principal critère d'évaluation entre les groupes répartis aléatoirement à l'aide d'une approche en deux étapes. Première étape: obtention de valeurs résiduelles en adaptant un modèle de régression aux variables de niveau individuel et en ignorant les effets de l'intervention et du regroupement. Deuxième étape: les valeurs résiduelles de la première étape agrégées au niveau du groupe constitueront le résultat. LIMITES: Il pourrait ne pas être possible d'isoler les effets indépendants de chaque composante de l'intervention. L'équipe prodiguant les soins habituels pourrait adopter des composantes de l'intervention menant à un biais de contamination. Le nombre relativement faible de groupes pourrait signifier que les deux bras ne sont pas équilibrés sur tous les facteurs pronostiques de base. CONCLUSION: L'essai EnAKT LKD fournira des données de haute qualité sur la question de savoir si une intervention à composantes multiples visant l'amélioration de la qualité aide effectivement les patients à franchir davantage d'étapes vers une transplantation rénale.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL