Association of Longitudinal High-Sensitivity Troponin T With Mortality in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac troponin T (cTnT) is associated with mortality in chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, the association between longitudinal cTnT measurements and survival has not previously been assessed. OBJECTIVES: This study determined whether various parameterizations of longitudinal cTnT measurements were associated with patient survival in the older population with advanced CKD. METHODS: The EQUAL (European QUALity) study is an observational prospective cohort study that includes subjects with stage 4-5 CKD aged ≥65 years and not on dialysis. The study includes 176 participants in Sweden, where longitudinal information of cTnT was collected. The study uses joint models for longitudinal and time-to-event data to assess the longitudinal association between cTnT and survival. RESULTS: There were 927 cTnT measurements (median 6 per patient) collected over a median follow-up of 2.4 years. The overall 5-year survival was 57% (95% CI: 46%-69%). Longitudinally measured cTnT was associated with mortality risk, with every SD increase in cTnT, at any time point, associated with a 3.3-fold increase in mortality risk (HR: 3.3; 95% CI: 2.5-4.6). The slope of the cTnT trajectory was also associated with increased mortality risk (HR: 3.2; 95% CI: 2.0-6.0), as was the area under the cTnT trajectory (HR: 4.2; 95% CI: 2.6-7.2), which reflected the cumulative cTnT exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinally measured cTnT is independently associated with mortality risk in older patients with stage 4 and 5 CKD, which suggests that monitoring patients with cTnT could be a valuable tool for the identification of subjects with a high mortality risk.

Continuing education: preparing patients to choose a renal replacement therapy.

BACKGROUND: Patients with progressive chronic kidney disease face a series of treatment decisions that will impact the quality of life of themselves and their family. Renal replacement therapy option education (RRTOE), generally provided by nurses, is recommended by international guidelines OBJECTIVES: To provide nurses with advice and guidance on running RRTOE. DESIGN: A consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS: Four nurses, 5 nephrologists and 1 clinical psychologist (9 renal units; 6 European countries) from units that had extensive experience in RRTOE or were performing research in this field. APPROACH: Experts brainstormed and discussed quality standards for the education team, processes, content/topics, media/material/funding and quality measurements for RRTOE. RESULTS: Conclusions and recommendations from these discussions that are particularly pertinent to nurses are presented in this paper. CONCLUSIONS: Through careful planning and smooth interdisciplinary cooperation, it is possible to implement an education and support programme that helps patients choose a form of RRT that is most suited to their needs. This may result in benefits in quality of life and clinical outcomes. APPLICATION TO PRACTICE: There are large differences between renal units in terms of resources available and the demographics of the catchment area. Therefore, nurses should carefully consider how best to adapt the advice offered here to their own situation. Throughout this process, it is crucial to keep in mind the ultimate goal - providing patients with the knowledge and skill to make a modality choice that will enhance their quality of life to the greatest degree.

Quality standards for predialysis education: results from a consensus conference.

This position statement was compiled following an expert meeting in March 2013, Zurich, Switzerland. Attendees were invited from a spread of European renal units with established and respected renal replacement therapy option education programmes. Discussions centred around optimal ways of creating an education team, setting realistic and meaningful objectives for patient education, and assessing the quality of education delivered.

Predialysis education in practice: a questionnaire survey of centres with established programmes.

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that renal replacement therapy option education (RRTOE) can result in enhanced quality of life, improved clinical outcomes, and reduced health care costs. However, there is still no detailed guidance on the optimal way to run such programmes. To help address this knowledge gap, an expert meeting was held in March 2013 to formulate a position statement on optimal ways to run RRTOE. Experts were selected from units that had extensive experience in RRTOE or were performing research in this field. Before the meeting, experts completed a pilot questionnaire on RRTOE in their own units. They also prepared feedback on how to modify this questionnaire for a large-scale study. METHODS: A pilot, web-based questionnaire was used to obtain information on: the renal unit and patients, the education team, RRTOE processes and content, how quality is assessed, and funding. RESULTS: Four nurses, 5 nephrologists and 1 clinical psychologist (9 renal units; 6 EU countries) participated. Nurses were almost always responsible for organising RRTOE. Nephrologists spent 7.5% (median) of their time on RRTOE. Education for the patient and family began several months before dialysis or according to disease progression. Key topics such as the 'impact of the disease' were covered by every unit, but only a few units described all dialysis modalities. Visits to the unit were almost always arranged. Materials came in a wide variety of forms and from a wide range of sources. Group education sessions were used in 3/9 centres. Expectations on the timing of patients' decisions on modality and permanent access differed substantially between centres. Common quality assurance measures were: patient satisfaction, course attendance, updated materials. Only 1 unit had a dedicated budget. CONCLUSIONS: There were substantial variations in how RRTOE is run between the units. A modified version of this questionnaire will be used to assess RRTOE at a European level.

A fixed protocol for outpatient clinic routines in the care of patients with severe renal failure.

BACKGROUND: The primary aim of this study was to assess whether a fixed protocol, using a specially trained team, for intermediate follow-up to fulfillment of guideline targets is non-inferior to conventional follow-up in the care of uraemic patients. A secondary aim was to investigate possible impact on patient outcome. METHODS: The cohort comprised 424 patients from seven centers. Inclusion criteria were either serum creatinine exceeding 200 µmol/l or calculated clearance below 30 ml/min, representing CKD 4 or 5a. Six centers followed a standardized protocol (group 1). One center provided controls (group 2). The study design was prospective and interventional. The variables measured were blood hemoglobin, bicarbonate, calcium, phosphate, intact parathyroid hormone, albumin, renal function variables, blood pressure and RAAS blockade. The number of patients achieving the set goals was analyzed as a time trend to determine if the intervention resulted in an improvement. RESULTS: At baseline, group 1 had significantly lower GFR and higher serum creatinine, calcium, phosphate, calcium × phosphate product and bicarbonate, lower mean arterial pressure (MAP), systolic blood pressures and less use of RAAS. During the intervention, group 1 improved in the direction of guidelines for blood hemoglobin, albumin, bicarbonate and MAP. Outcome of secondary endpoints gave a risk of death of 30% in both groups, while the risk of renal replacement therapy was higher in group 1. CONCLUSIONS: However, the time to renal replacement therapy was significantly shorter in the intervention group, indicating that other variables than guideline achievements are important for the patient.