Search

Background This study aimed to compare attended home blood pressure (BP) measurements (HBPM) with ambulatory BP monitor (ABPM) readings and examine if level of agreement between measurement modalities differs overall and by subgroup. Methods This was a secondary analysis of data from a 2-year, multicenter observational study of children 11-19 years (mean 15, SD = 2.7) with chronic kidney disease. Participants had 3 standardized resting oscillometric home BPs taken by staff followed by 24-h ABPM within 2 weeks of home BP. BP indices (measured BP/95%ile BP) were calculated for mean triplicate attended HBPM and mean ABPM measurements. Paired HBPM and ABPM measurements taken during any of 5 study visits were compared using linear regression with robust standard errors. Generalized estimating equation-based logistic regression determined sensitivity, specificity, negative, and positive predictive values with ABPM as the gold standard. Analyses were conducted for the group overall and by subgroup. Results A total of 103 participants contributed 251 paired measurements. Indexed systolic BP did not differ between HBPM and daytime APBM (mean difference - 0.002; 95% CI: - 0.006, 0.003); the difference in indexed diastolic BP was minimal (mean difference - 0.033; 95% CI: - 0.040, - 0.025). Overall agreement between HBPM and 24-h ABPM in identifying abnormal BP was high (81.8%). HBPM had higher sensitivity (87.5%) than specificity (77.4%) and greater negative (89.8%) than positive (73.3%) predictive value, and findings were consistent in subgroups. Conclusions Attended HBPM may be reasonable for monitoring BP when ABPM is unavailable. The greater accessibility and feasibility of attended HBPM may potentially help improve BP control among at-risk youth. Graphical abstract A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information., Author(s): Trevor W. Glenn [sup.1] , Cyd K. Eaton [sup.2] , Kevin J. Psoter [sup.2] , Michelle N. Eakin [sup.2] , Cozumel S. Pruette [sup.2] , Kristin A. Riekert [sup.2] [...]

Background: Acknowledging the importance of preparing the pediatric dialysis patient for successful transfer to adult providers, centers from the Standardizing Care to Improve Outcomes in Pediatric End Stage Renal Disease (SCOPE) Dialysis Collaborative developed transition tools and performed iterative implementation of a transition of care (TOC) program to gain real-life insight into drivers and barriers towards implementation of a transition program for patients receiving dialysis. Methods: A TOC innovation workgroup was developed in 2019 from within SCOPE Collaborative that developed nine educational modules, along with introductory letter and assessment tool to be utilized by SCOPE centers. A 4-month pilot implementation study among six centers of varying patient population (age ≥ 11 years) was performed. TOC tools were further refined, and broader implementation within the collaborative was performed. Interim assessment of TOC tool utilization and implementation success was performed among 11 centers, as a foundation towards broader discussion regarding process, barriers, and success towards TOC implementation among 26 centers. Results: Transition champion was a key driver of successful implementation, and lack of institutional support and collaboration with adult dialysis centers were important barriers towards sustainability. COVID pandemic and increased staff turnover affected longer term implementation of TOC program. Conclusions: Successful transition and transfer of adolescents/young adults with kidney failure on dialysis remains a challenge. This study represents the experience of the largest cohort of pediatric dialysis centers, with diversity in population size and geography, towards development and implementation of a TOC program. This adds to the resources available to assist centers towards transition and transfer, with particular focus on transitioning patients on dialysis. A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Poor adherence habits are key contributors to nonadherence but there are few clinically feasible methods for evaluating adherence habits, particularly for youths with chronic kidney disease (CKD). This study investigated how participants' qualitative responses to three interview questions about adherence habits mapped to primary principles of habit formation and objectively measured medication adherence in youths with CKD. Methods: Participants (ages 11–21 years) were recruited from a pediatric nephrology clinic as part of a larger study. Participants' daily objective antihypertensive medication adherence was measured with an electronic pill bottle over a 4-week baseline period. Qualitative interviews about adherence habits and routines were conducted with a subset of participants (N = 18). Results: Clear qualitative differences emerged in how participants with high-medium adherence (80–100%) discussed adherence habits compared to participants with low adherence (0–79%). Participants with high-medium adherence discussed situational cues for taking medicine, including locations that cue adherence, step-by-step events leading up to taking medicine, and people who cue adherence. Participants with high-medium adherence regularly described taking medicine as "automatic," "second nature," and a "habit." Participants with low adherence rarely discussed these habit features nor did they explicitly acknowledge currently missing doses. Participants with low adherence tended to discuss challenges with organization and routines for taking medicine. Conclusions: Evaluating patient responses to questions about adherence habits may uncover challenges with adherence habit formation, provide direction for habit-strengthening intervention focused on developing automatic cues for taking medication, and support adherence successes for youths with CKD. Clinical trial registration number: NCT03651596. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

HLA eplet mismatch load has been suggested as an improvement to HLA antigen mismatch determination for organ selection. Given that eplet mismatches are determined based on amino acid sequence difference among HLA alleles, and that the frequency of HLA alleles varies between racial groups, we investigated the correlation between eplet mismatch load and allograft outcomes in 110 pediatric kidney transplant recipients who received their first organ from a donor of the same race (SRT) versus a donor of a different race (DRT). Adjusted modified Poisson regression was used to assess the interaction between eplet mismatch load and race mismatch and its effect on outcome. Caucasians and living donor recipients had lower eplet mismatched loads against their donors compared with non-Caucasian and deceased donor recipients. Overall, for the entire population, the risk of de novo HLA-DSA development was significantly increased with higher eplet loads (p < 0.001). Compared with the SRT group, the DRT group had higher eplet loads when compared with their donor, for HLA class I but not HLA class II molecules; however, there was no significant difference in the incidence of de novo HLA-DSA between the 2 groups. The risk of rejection increased significantly for DRT compared with SRT, only when class I eplet load was ≥ 70 (p = 0.04). Together this data show that eplet mismatch load analysis is an effective tool for alloimmune risk assessment. If considered for donor selection, acceptable eplet mismatch loads determined from studies in homogenous populations may restrict transplantation across racially diverse donor and patient groups with no evidence of poor outcome. Therefore, an acceptable eplet mismatch load threshold must consider the heterogeneity of the transplant population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Medical provider assessment of nonadherence is known to be inaccurate. Researchers have suggested using a multimethod assessment approach; however, no study has demonstrated how to integrate different measures to improve accuracy. This study aimed to determine if using additional measures improves the accurate identification of nonadherence beyond provider assessment alone.Methods: Eighty-seven adolescents and young adults (AYAs), age 11-19 years, with chronic kidney disease (CKD) [stage 1-5/end-stage renal disease (ESRD)] and prescribed antihypertensive medication, their caregivers, and 17 medical providers participated in the multisite study. Five adherence measures were obtained: provider report, AYA report, caregiver report, electronic medication monitoring (MEMS), and pharmacy refill data [medication possession ratio (MPR)]. Concordance was calculated using kappa statistic. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive power, and negative predictive power were calculated using MEMS as the criterion for measuring adherence.Results: There was poor to fair concordance (kappas = 0.12-0.54), with 35-61% of AYAs classified as nonadherent depending on the measure. While both providers and MEMS classified 35% of the AYAs as nonadherent, sensitivity (0.57) and specificity (0.77) demonstrated poor agreement between the two measures on identifying which AYAs were nonadherent. Combining provider report of nonadherence and MPR < 75% resulted in the highest sensitivity for identifying nonadherence (0.90) and negative predictive power (0.88).Conclusions: Nonadherence is prevalent in AYAs with CKD. Providers inaccurately identify nonadherence, leading to missed opportunities to intervene. Our study demonstrates the benefit to utilizing a multimethod approach to identify nonadherence in patients with chronic disease, an essential first step to reduce nonadherence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake. In the third paragraph of "Discussion," two references were missing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]