Nephrologists' perspectives on the impact of COVID-19 on caring for patients undergoing dialysis in Latin America: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the experiences of nephrologists on caring for patients undergoing in-centre haemodialysis during the COVID-19 pandemic in Latin America. DESIGN: Twenty-five semistructured interviews were conducted by Zoom videoconference in English and Spanish languages during 2020 until data saturation. Using thematic analysis, we conducted line-by-line coding to inductively identify themes. SETTING: 25 centres across nine countries in Latin America. PARTICIPANTS: Nephrologists (17 male and 8 female) were purposively sampled to include diverse demographic characteristics and clinical experience. RESULTS: We identified five themes: shock and immediate mobilisation for preparedness (overwhelmed and distressed, expanding responsibilities to manage COVID-19 infection and united for workforce resilience); personal vulnerability (being infected with COVID-19 and fear of transmitting COVID-19 to family); infrastructural susceptibility of dialysis units (lacking resources and facilities for quarantine, struggling to prevent cross-contamination, and depletion of personal protective equipment and cleaning supplies); helplessness and moral distress (being forced to ration life-sustaining equipment and care, being concerned about delayed and shortened dialysis sessions, patient hesitancy to attend to dialysis sessions, being grieved by socioeconomic disparities, deterioration of patients with COVID-19, harms of isolation and inability to provide kidney replacement therapy); and fostering innovative delivery of care (expanding use of telehealth, increasing uptake of PD and shifting focus on preventing syndemics). CONCLUSION: Nephrologists felt personally and professionally vulnerable and reported feeling helpless and morally distressed because they doubted their capacity to provide safe care for patients undergoing dialysis. Better availability and mobilisation of resources and capacities to adapt models of care, including telehealth and home-based dialysis, are urgently needed.

Research engagement by British early-career practitioners in nephrology: a multidisciplinary survey.

OBJECTIVES: To establish barriers and motivators underlying research engagement among early-career practitioners in nephrology across the UK, in order to guide potential interventions to enhance research involvement in renal units. DESIGN: Cross-sectional online survey employing a range of free-text, Likert scale and binomial/multiple-choice responses, distributed via mailing lists and social media. Topics covered research experience, research involvement and barriers, impact of COVID-19 and strategies to improve research engagement. Thematic analysis was used to assess free-text responses. SETTING: Renal units throughout the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Non-consultant healthcare staff self-identifying as working in nephrology were included (n=211), with responses from non-UK respondents or consultant nephrologists excluded (n=12). RESULTS: Responses were received from across the multidisciplinary team (physicians (n=83) and nurses (n=83)) and other allied health professionals (n=45). Most were aware of ongoing local research, but under half of them were actively involved. Multivariate analysis indicated employment as a physician, protected time for research activity and provision of appropriate training were associated with greater research experience and output. There was general enthusiasm to undertake research, but perceived barriers included insufficient staffing, lack of time, funding and encouragement. COVID-19 was felt to have further impacted negatively upon opportunities. Among the suggested strategies to promote engagement, mentorship and an online research resource were felt to be of most interest. CONCLUSIONS: In the first survey of this type in nephrology, we demonstrate differences across the multidisciplinary spectrum in perceived research experience and accessibility, which have been worsened by COVID-19. Our findings will guide strategies to broaden engagement in early-career practitioners and serve as a baseline to assess the impact of these interventions.

Changing landscape of living kidney donation and the role of telemedicine.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There has been a decline in living kidney donation over the last two decades. Donors from low-income families or racial/ethnic minorities face greater disproportionate geographic, financial, and logistical barriers to completing lengthy and complex evaluations. This has contributed to the decreased proportion of these subgroups. The authors view telemedicine as a potential solution to this problem. RECENT FINDINGS: Since the initial decline of donors in 2005, biologically related donors have experienced a lack of growth across race/ethnicity. Conversely, unrelated donors have emerged as the majority of donors in recent years across race/ethnicity, except for unrelated black donors. Disparities in access to living kidney donation persist. Telemedicine using live-video visits can overcome barriers to access transplant centers and facilitate care coordination. In a U.S. survey, nephrologists, surgeons, coordinators, social workers, and psychologists/psychologists across transplant centers are favorably disposed to use telemedicine for donor evaluation/follow-up beyond the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. However, with the waning of relaxed telemedicine regulations under the Public Health Emergency, providers perceive payor policy and out-of-state licensing as major factors hindering telemedicine growth prospects. SUMMARY: Permanent federal and state policies that support telemedicine services for living kidney donation can enhance access to transplant centers and help overcome barriers to donor evaluation.

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

INTRODUCTION: Acute kidney injury (AKI) affects nearly 20% of all hospitalised patients and is associated with poor outcomes. Long-term complications can be partially attributed to gaps in kidney-focused care and education during transitions. Building capacity across the healthcare spectrum by engaging a broad network of multidisciplinary providers to facilitate optimal follow-up care represents an important mechanism to address this existing care gap. Key participants include nephrologists and primary care providers and in-depth study of each specialty's approach to post-AKI care is essential to optimise care processes and healthcare delivery for AKI survivors. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This explanatory sequential mixed-methods study uses survey and interview methodology to assess nephrologist and primary care provider recommendations for post-AKI care, including KAMPS (kidney function assessment, awareness and education, medication review, blood pressure monitoring and sick day education) elements of follow-up, the role of multispecialty collaboration, and views on care process-specific and patient-specific factors influencing healthcare delivery. Nephrologists and primary care providers will be surveyed to assess recommendations and clinical decision-making in the context of post-AKI care. Descriptive statistics and the Pearson's χ2 or Fisher's exact test will be used to compare results between groups. This will be followed by semistructured interviews to gather rich, qualitative data that explains and/or connects results from the quantitative survey. Both deductive analysis and inductive analysis will occur to identify and compare themes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been reviewed and deemed exempt by the Institutional Review Board at Mayo Clinic (IRB 20-0 08 793). The study was deemed exempt due to the sole use of survey and interview methodology. Results will be disseminated in presentations and manuscript form through peer-reviewed publication.

Telemedicine monitoring in the follow-up of kidney transplant recipients: consensus indications from an Italian panel of surgeons and nephrologists after the COVID-19 experience.

The quality of follow-up has clearly emerged as a key factor for long-term kidney graft survival. Currently, many clinics are facing difficulties in delivering optimal surveillance because of the increased number and complexity of kidney transplant recipients, and because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Additional ways of performing follow-up visits are needed and telemedicine has emerged as a tool to strengthen patient care intensity. Six Italian transplant surgeons and nephrologists convened via teleconference to develop a consensual model of video visits for the follow-up of kidney transplant recipients. Issues discussed were: profile of eligible patients; assessments that can be carried out; video visit organization and medical professionals involved; supporting tools and implementation. The video visit was consensually recognized as the most relevant for the follow-up of kidney transplant recipients. Eligible patients should have basic electronic devices and the skills to correctly use them and be in clinically stable condition. With the exception of physical and instrumental examination, and kidney biopsy, all other assessments are feasible during a video visit and can be implemented by specific training and use of supporting tools. The video visit model is simple and adaptable to most transplant patients. It is not intended to replace face-to-face examinations, but is an additional tool for improving the intensity of follow-up of kidney transplant recipients, which can be integrated into current monitoring protocols.

COVID-19 and the Kidney: Should Nephrologists Care about COVID-19 rather than Maintaining Their Focus on Renal Patients?

Clinical Background: The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) rapidly spread globally from late 2019, reaching pandemic proportions. Epidemiology: The related disease, COVID-19, exacerbates and progresses due to patients' abnormal inflammatory/immune responses, widespread endothelial damage, and complement-induced blood clotting with microangiopathy. COVID-19 manifests mainly as a respiratory illness. In cases of severe viral pneumonia, it may lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome, respiratory failure, and death. Challenges: Many extrapulmonary manifestations commonly occur, and a substantial proportion of patients with severe COVID-19 exhibit signs of kidney damage. Clinically, kidney involvement ranges from mild/moderate proteinuria and hematuria to acute kidney injury (AKI) requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT). The pathophysiologic mechanisms of kidney damage and AKI in patients with COVID-19 remain unclear but are known to be multifactorial. Current knowledge implies direct SARS-CoV-2-dependent effects on kidney cells (tubular epithelial cells and podocytes) and indirect mechanisms through the systemic effect of viral infection secondary to the critical pulmonary illness and its management. Prevention and Treatment: Standard-of-care strategies apply, as there is no specific evidence to suggest that COVID-19 AKI should be managed differently from other types in severely ill patients. If conservative management fails, RRT should be considered. The choice of RRT approaches and sequential extracorporeal therapies depends on local availability, resources, and expertise. The focus should now be on the long-term follow-up of COVID-19 patients, especially those who developed kidney injury and dysfunction. This represents an opportunity for integrated multidisciplinary research to clarify the natural history of COVID-19 renal sequelae and the best therapeutic interventions to mitigate them.

COVID-19 vaccination among Spanish nephrologists: Acceptance and side effects.

INTRODUCTION: Four vaccines against Covid-19 have been approved to date. Their acceptance and safety have not been addressed on healthcare workers. The aim of the present study is to evaluate vaccination rates and side effects among Spanish nephrologists. METHODS: All the Spanish nephrologists were invited to participate in this survey. Data on demographics, Covid-19 infection status, received vaccine doses and side effects were collected. Acceptance and side effects were analyzed for Covid-19 vaccination. Factors associated to vaccination were assessed and a multivariate adjusted model was constructed to determine independent predictors for Covid-19 vaccine side effects. RESULTS: A total of 708 nephrologists answered the survey (460 [65%] women, mean age 44±11 years). Six-hundred and eight (86%) had received the first dose and 513 (72%) were fully vaccinated. Most of the subjects (565, 93%) received BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech®) vaccine. Among vaccinated nephrologists, 453 (75%) presented any side effect; the most frequent was local reaction (68%), followed by myalgia (44%), tiredness (39%) and headache (34%). Age (OR 0.97, 95%CI [0.95-0.99], p<0.0001) and prior Covid-19 infection (OR 2.37, 95%CI [1.27-4.42], p=0.007) were independent predictors for developing side effects with Covid-19 vaccine. Overall side effects were similar with both vaccines, being myalgia (p=0.006) and tiredness (p=0.032) more frequent with the Pfizer-BioNTech® one. CONCLUSION: Age and prior Covid-19 infection were predictors of vaccination side effects among Spanish nephrologists.

Ethical Duties of Nephrologists: When Patients Are Nonadherent to Treatment.

When providing care, nephrologists are subject to various ethical duties. Beyond the Hippocratic notion of doing no harm, nephrologists also have duties to respect their patients' autonomy and dignity, to meet their patients' care goals in the least invasive way, to act impartially, and, ultimately, to do what is (clinically) beneficial for their patients. Juggling these often-conflicting duties can be challenging at the best of times, but can prove especially difficult when patients are not fully adherent to treatment. When a patient's nonadherence begins to cause harm to themselves and/or others, it may be questioned whether discontinuation of care is appropriate. We discuss how nephrologists can meet their ethical duties when faced with nonadherence in patients undergoing hemodialysis, including episodic extreme agitation, poor renal diet, missed hemodialysis sessions, and emergency presentations brought on by nonadherence. Furthermore, we consider the impact of cognitive impairment and provider-family conflict when making care decisions in a nonadherence context, as well as how the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic might affect responses to nonadherence. Suggestions are provided for ethically informed responses, prioritizing a patient-narrative approach that is attentive to patients' values and preferences, multidisciplinarity, and the use of behavioral contracts and/or technology where appropriate.

Are There Differences in Arteriovenous Fistulae Created for Hemodialysis between Nephrologists and Vascular Surgeons?

OBJECTIVE: Many studies have reported insufficient support from surgical services, resulting in nephrologists creating arteriovenous fistulas in many centers. The aim of this study was to compare risk factors of arteriovenous fistula dysfunction in patients whose fistulas were created by nephrologists versus vascular surgeons. METHODS: This was a retrospective, analytical study of interventions by nephrologists and vascular surgeons during a period of 15 years. Out of a total of 1,048 fistulas, 764 (72.9%) were created by nephrologists patients, while vascular surgeons were responsible for 284 (27.1%) fistulae. Laboratory, demographic, and clinical parameters which might affect functioning of these arteriovenous fistulae were analyzed. RESULTS: Patients whose arteriovenous fistula was formed by nephrologists differed significantly from those created by vascular surgeons in relation to the preventive character of the arteriovenous fistula (p = 0.011), lumen of the vein (p < 0.001) and systolic blood pressure (p = 0.047). Multivariate logistic regression of arteriovenous fistula dysfunction showed that risk factors were female gender (odds ratio [OR] = 1.56, 95% CI 1.16-2.07), whether the fistulae were created by vascular surgeons or nephrologists (OR = 1.38; 95% CI 1.01-1.89) and the site of the arteriovenous fistula (OR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.48-0.85). CONCLUSIONS: Arteriovenous fistulae created by vascular surgeons, female gender, and the location are risk factors of dysfunction.

The use of virtual physician mentoring to enhance home dialysis knowledge and uptake.

Home dialysis therapies are flexible kidney replacement strategies with documented clinical benefits. While the incidence of end-stage kidney disease continues to increase globally, the use of home dialysis remains low in most developed countries. Multiple barriers to providing home dialysis have been noted in the published literature. Among known challenges, gaps in clinician knowledge are potentially addressable with a focused education strategy. Recent national surveys in the United States and Australia have highlighted the need for enhanced home dialysis knowledge especially among nephrologists who have recently completed training. Traditional in-person continuing professional educational programmes have had modest success in promoting home dialysis and are limited by scale and the present global COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesize that the use of a 'Hub and Spoke' model of virtual home dialysis mentorship for nephrologists based on project ECHO would support home dialysis growth. We review the home dialysis literature, known educational gaps and plausible educational interventions to address current limitations in physician education.