Search

Background: Coronary artery disease (CAD) confers increased risks of premature mortality, non-fatal morbidity, and significant impairment in functional status and health-related quality of life. Routine administration of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and its real time delivery to care providers is known to have the potential to inform routine cardiac care and to improve quality of care and patient outcomes. This study describes a user-centered development and evaluation of the Alberta Provincial Project for Outcomes Assessment (APPROACH) electronic Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement (e-PROM) system. This e-PROM system is an electronic system for the administration of PROMs to patients with CAD and the delivery of the summarized information to their care providers to facilitate patient-physician communication and shared decision-making. This electronic platform was designed to be accessible via web-based and hand-held devices. Heuristic and user acceptance evaluation were conducted with patients and attending care providers. Results: The APPROACH e-PROM system was co-developed with patients and care providers, research investigators, informaticians and information technology experts. Five PROMs were selected for inclusion in the online platform after consultations with patient partners, care providers, and PROMs experts: the Seattle Angina Questionnaire, Patient Health Questionnaire, EuroQOL, and Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey, and Self-Care of Coronary Heart Disease Inventory. The heuristic evaluation was completed by four design experts who examined the usability of the prototype interfaces. User acceptance testing was completed with 13 patients and 10 cardiologists who evaluated prototype user interfaces of the e-PROM system. Conclusion: Both patients and physicians found the APPROACH e-PROM system to be easy to use, understandable, and acceptable. The APPROACH e-PROM system provides a user-informed electronic platform designed to incorporate PROMs into the delivery of individualized cardiac care for persons with CAD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background There are no consensus definitions for evaluating kidney function recovery after acute kidney injury (AKI) and acute kidney disease (AKD), nor is it clear how recovery varies across populations and clinical subsets. We present a federated analysis of four population-based cohorts from Canada, Denmark and Scotland, 2011–18. Methods We identified incident AKD defined by serum creatinine changes within 48 h, 7 days and 90 days based on KDIGO AKI and AKD criteria. Separately, we applied changes up to 365 days to address widely used e-alert implementations that extend beyond the KDIGO AKI and AKD timeframes. Kidney recovery was based on resolution of AKD and a subsequent creatinine measurement below 1.2× baseline. We evaluated transitions between non-recovery, recovery and death up to 1 year; within age, sex and comorbidity subgroups; between subset AKD definitions; and across cohorts. Results There were 464 868 incident cases, median age 67–75 years. At 1 year, results were consistent across cohorts, with pooled mortalities for creatinine changes within 48 h, 7 days, 90 days and 365 days (and 95% confidence interval) of 40% (34%–45%), 40% (34%–46%), 37% (31%–42%) and 22% (16%–29%) respectively, and non-recovery of kidney function of 19% (15%–23%), 30% (24%–35%), 25% (21%–29%) and 37% (30%–43%), respectively. Recovery by 14 and 90 days was frequently not sustained at 1 year. Older males and those with heart failure or cancer were more likely to die than to experience sustained non-recovery, whereas the converse was true for younger females and those with diabetes. Conclusion Consistently across multiple cohorts, based on 1-year mortality and non-recovery, KDIGO AKD (up to 90 days) is at least prognostically similar to KDIGO AKI (7 days), and covers more people. Outcomes associated with AKD vary by age, sex and comorbidities such that older males are more likely to die, and younger females are less likely to recover. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Source Citation: Vazquez MA, Oliver G, Amarasingham R, et al; ICD-Pieces Study Group. Pragmatic trial of hospitalization rate in chronic kidney disease. N Engl J Med. 2024;390:1196-1206. 38598574 Clinical Impact Ratings: GIM/FP/GP: 6 out of 7 Cardiology: 5 out of 7 Endocrinology: 5 out of 7 Nephrology: 7 out of 7 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]