Effectiveness and acceptability of a multidisciplinary approach in improving the care of patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at determining the feasibility of conducting a large-scale pragmatic effectiveness study on the implementation of multidisciplinary care (MDC) program for patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: This is a single-arm pre-post intervention design pilot study over 12 months. Participants with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) between 11 and 20 ml/min/1.73m2 were screened and recruited at the initial MDC clinic visit and followed for 12 months. Clinical parameters, KDQOL™-36, questionnaires, and interviews were collected, administered, and analysed for enrolment and completion rates, baseline characteristics, implementation fidelity, adherence to CKD interventions, eGFR decline, CKD complications, health-related quality of life, and participants' acceptability of the program. RESULTS: The study enrolment and completion rates were 43.1% (50/116 screened) and 66.0% (33/50 recruited) respectively. The participants had a mean age of 68.5 years (SD9.0) and a mean eGFR of 15.4 ml/min/1.73m2(3.2). After 12 months of MDC program, there was increased adherence to CKD interventions (difference  - 0.6(1.0), 95%CI  - 1.1,  - 0.1, p = 0.02). There was good participants' acceptability of the program with participants being more satisfied with the waiting time and having a better understanding of kidney failure after attending the program. No difference in the eGFR decline noted (difference 0.0 ml/min/1.73m2(5.3), 95%CI  - 1.9, 1.9, p = 1.00). CONCLUSION: Our pilot data suggest increased adherence to CKD interventions and good acceptability to MDC program, albeit no difference in eGFR decline probably because of the small sample size. However, reasons for overall low enrolment and completion rates need to be explored and addressed while designing a future large-scale randomised controlled trial.

Modified minimal-contact COVID-19 workflow allows for safe, remote parenteral nutrition prescribing in non-critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: In line with recent guidance from the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) and the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) to minimize healthcare team exposure by clustering care and relying on other providers or telehealth to collect relevant nutrition assessments, our nutrition support team has adopted a modified workflow using information technology to provide parenteral nutrition (PN) remotely in a safe and timely manner. We aim to compare our prescribing adequacy and PN-related complications before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak using the modified workflow in non-critically ill patients. METHODS: This study reviewed a prospectively recruited cohort of adults receiving PN in the general wards or high-dependency units from December 5, 2019, to April 15, 2020. Demographic data, nutrition assessment, PN prescriptions, blood results, electronic notes, capillary blood glucose monitoring, and catheter-related bloodstream infection rates were reviewed for patients who received PN. RESULTS: We found that patients who started PN during COVID-19 were more malnourished with lower body mass index and higher proportion of Subjective Global Assessment B/C scores (52 [92.9%] vs 36 [73.5%], P < .005). The proportion of patients who achieved target energy amounts within 5 days was similar in both groups. Protein prescription was >1 g/kg/day in both groups, though there was a trend of higher protein prescription during COVID-19. Complications were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that minimal contact with effective multidisciplinary communication using the modified workflow can allow for safe and timely PN administration.