Integrating Conservative kidney management Options and advance care Planning Education (COPE) into routine CKD care: a protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Predialysis education for patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) typically focuses narrowly on haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis as future treatment options. However, patients who are older or seriously ill may not want to pursue dialysis and/or may not benefit from this treatment. Conservative kidney management, a reasonable alternative treatment, and advance care planning (ACP) are often left out of patient education and shared decision-making. In this study, we will pilot an educational intervention (Conservative Kidney Management Options and Advance Care Planning Education-COPE) to improve knowledge of conservative kidney management and ACP among patients with advanced CKD who are older and/or have poor functional status. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a single-centre pilot randomised controlled trial at an academic centre in Philadelphia, PA. Eligible patients will have: age ≥70 years and/or poor functional status (as defined by Karnofsky Performance Index Score <70), advanced CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate<20 mL/min/1.73 m2), prefer to speak English during clinical encounters and self-report as black or white race. Enrolled patients will be randomised 1:1, with stratification by race, to receive enhanced usual care or usual care and in-person education about conservative kidney management and ACP (COPE). The primary outcome is change in knowledge of CKM and ACP. We will also explore intervention feasibility and acceptability, change in communication of preferences and differences in the intervention's effects on knowledge and communication of preferences by race. We will assess outcomes at baseline, immediately post-education and at 2 and 12 weeks. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol has been approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Pennsylvania. We will obtain written informed consent from all participants. The results from this work will be presented at academic conferences and disseminated through peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under NCT03229811.

Caring for older patients with advanced chronic kidney disease and considering their needs: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Older patients with advanced chronic kidney disease often do not understand treatment options for renal replacement therapy, conservative kidney management, and advance care planning. It is unclear whether both clinicians and patients have similar perspectives on these treatments and end-of-life care. Thus, the aim of this study was to explore clinician and patient/caregiver perceptions of treatments for end-stage renal disease and advance care planning. METHODS: This was a qualitative interview study of nephrologists (n = 8), primary care physicians (n = 8), patients (n = 10, ≥ 65 years and estimated glomerular filtration rate < 20), and their caregivers (n = 5). Interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was reached. Transcripts were transcribed using TranscribeMe. Using Nvivo 12, we identified key themes via narrative analysis. RESULTS: We identified three key areas in which nephrologists', primary care physicians', and patients' expectations and/or experiences did not align: 1) dialysis discussions; 2) dialysis decision-making; and 3) processes of advance care planning. Nephrologist felt most comfortable specifically managing renal disease whereas primary care physicians felt their primary role was to advocate for patients and lead advance care planning discussions. Patients and caregivers had many concerns about the impact of dialysis on their lives and did not fully understand advance care planning. Clinicians' perspectives were aligned with each other but not with patient/caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the differences in experiences and expectations between clinicians, patients, and their caregivers regarding treatment decisions and advance care planning. Despite clinician agreement on their responsibilities, patients and caregivers were unclear about several aspects of their care. Further research is needed to test feasible models of patient-centered education and communication to ensure that all stakeholders are informed and feel engaged.

Initial Medication Adherence in the Elderly Using PACE Claim Reversals: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: The Medicare Modernization Act, with its requirements for Medicare Part D to comply with electronic prescribing (e-prescribing), bolstered the adoption of e-prescribing, which increased to 73% in 2013. Therefore, understanding whether electronic prescriptions are less likely to be picked up is important as e-prescribing continues to be emphasized. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether prescription origin is among the factors associated with initial medication adherence, using claim reversals as a proxy measure. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was completed using a sample of reversed claims from the Pharmaceutical Assistance Contract for the Elderly (PACE) program for September 2014. The total number of reversed claims for new prescriptions (15,966) was categorized by prescription origin (written, telephone, electronic, fax, and pharmacy). Using a chi-square analysis, the reversed claims were compared among prescription origin to determine if there is a difference in the proportion of electronic prescriptions reversed compared with those from other origins. RESULTS: When compared with all other prescription origins, electronic prescriptions (E) were more likely to be reversed at day 0 (E = 50%, any other [AO] = 49%, P < 0.05) and after day 0 (E = 58%, AO = 42%, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Electronic prescriptions are associated with a higher rate of claim reversals and may reflect poorer initial adherence. Electronic prescriptions may more likely be forgotten or not picked up because they were not presented to the pharmacy by the patient. The growing adoption of electronic prescriptions merits particular attention, since it may be a factor in initial medication adherence in the elderly. DISCLOSURES: This study was not supported by any funding. Peterson reports advisory board and consultancy fees from IMS Health and Pfizer and employment by Genentech. Klaiman is currently employed by AccessMatters. No other financial or other conflicts of interests were reported. Study concept and design were primarily contributed by Forestal, along with Klaiman and Peterson. Heller took the lead in data collection, along with Forestal, and data interpretation was performed by Forestal, Klaiman, and Peterson. Forestal, Klaiman, and Heller were responsible for manuscript preparation.

Initial Medication Adherence in the Elderly Using PACE Claim Reversals: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: The Medicare Modernization Act, with its requirements for Medicare Part D to comply with electronic prescribing (e-prescribing), bolstered the adoption of e-prescribing, which increased to 73% in 2013. Therefore, understanding whether electronic prescriptions are less likely to be picked up is important as e-prescribing continues to be emphasized. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether prescription origin is among the factors associated with initial medication adherence, using claim reversals as a proxy measure. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was completed using a sample of reversed claims from the Pharmaceutical Assistance Contract for the Elderly (PACE) program for September 2014. The total number of reversed claims for new prescriptions (15,966) was categorized by prescription origin (written, telephone, electronic, fax, and pharmacy). Using a chi-square analysis, the reversed claims were compared among prescription origin to determine if there is a difference in the proportion of electronic prescriptions reversed compared with those from other origins. RESULTS: When compared with all other prescription origins, electronic prescriptions (E) were more likely to be reversed at day 0 (E = 50%, any other [AO] = 49%, P < 0.05) and after day 0 (E = 58%, AO = 42%, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Electronic prescriptions are associated with a higher rate of claim reversals and may reflect poorer initial adherence. Electronic prescriptions may more likely be forgotten or not picked up because they were not presented to the pharmacy by the patient. The growing adoption of electronic prescriptions merits particular attention, since it may be a factor in initial medication adherence in the elderly. DISCLOSURES: This study was not supported by any funding. Peterson reports advisory board and consultancy fees from IMS Health and Pfizer and employment by Genentech. Klaiman is currently employed by AccessMatters. No other financial or other conflicts of interests were reported. Study concept and design were primarily contributed by Forestal, along with Klaiman and Peterson. Heller took the lead in data collection, along with Forestal, and data interpretation was performed by Forestal, Klaiman, and Peterson. Forestal, Klaiman, and Heller were responsible for manuscript preparation.

Opportunities for Prevention: Assessing Where Low-Income Patients Seek Care for Preventable Coronary Artery Disease.

The Affordable Care Act has many aspects that are aimed at improving health care for all Americans, including mandated insurance coverage for individuals, as well as required community health needs assessments (CHNAs), and reporting of investments in community benefit by nonprofit hospitals in order to maintain tax exemptions. Although millions of Americans have gained access to health insurance, many--often the most vulnerable--remain uninsured, and will continue to depend on hospital community benefits for care. Understanding where patients go for care can assist hospitals and communities to develop their CHNA and implementation plans in order to focus resources where the need for prevention is greatest. This study evaluated patient care-seeking behavior among patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) in Florida in 2008--analyzed in 2013--to assess whether low-income patients accessed specific safety net hospitals for treatment or received care from hospitals that were geographically closer to their residence. This study found evidence that low-income patients went to hospitals that treated more low-income patients, regardless of where they lived. The findings demonstrate that hospitals-especially public safety net hospitals with a tradition of treating low-income patients suffering from CAD-should focus prevention activities where low-income patients reside.