Search

Background Mental health problems, particularly anxiety and depression, are common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and negatively impact quality of life, treatment adherence and mortality. However, the degree to which mental health and addiction services are utilized by those with CKD is unknown. We examined the history of mental health and addiction service use of individuals across levels of kidney function. Methods We performed a population-based cross-sectional study using linked healthcare databases from Ontario, Canada from 2009 to 2017. We abstracted the prevalence of individuals with mental health and addiction service use within the previous 3 years across levels of kidney function [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥60, 45 to <60, 30 to <45, 15 to <30, <15 ml/min/1.73 m2 and maintenance dialysis]. We calculated prevalence ratios (PRs) to compare prevalence across kidney function strata, while adjusting for age, sex, year of cohort entry, urban versus rural location, area-level marginalization and Charlson comorbidity index. Results Of 5 956 589 adults, 9% (n  = 534 605) had an eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m2 or were receiving maintenance dialysis. Fewer individuals with an eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m2 had a history of any mental health and addiction service utilization (crude prevalence range 28–31%) compared with individuals with an eGFR ≥60 ml/min/1.73 m2 (35%). Compared with an eGFR ≥60 ml/min/1.73 m2, the lowest prevalence of individuals with any mental health and addiction service utilization was among those with an eGFR of 15 to <30 ml/min/1.73 m2 {adjusted PR 0.86 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 0.88]}, an eGFR <15 ml/min/1.73 m2 [adjusted PR 0.81 (95% CI 0.76–0.86)] and those receiving maintenance dialysis [adjusted PR 0.83 (95% CI 0.81–0.84)]. Less use of outpatient services accounted for differences in service utilization. Conclusions Mental health and addiction service utilization is common but less so in individuals with advanced CKD in Ontario, Canada. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For decades, researchers have used linkable administrative health data for evaluating the health care system, subject to local privacy legislation. In Ontario, Canada, the relevant privacy legislation permits some organizations (prescribed entities) to conduct this kind of research but is silent on their ability to identify and contact individuals in those datasets. Following consultation with the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario, we developed a pilot study to identify and contact by mail a sample of people at high risk for kidney failure within the next 2 years, based on laboratory and administrative data from provincial datasets held by ICES, to ensure they receive needed kidney care. Before proceeding, we conducted six focus groups to understand the acceptability to the public and people living with chronic kidney disease of direct mail outreach to people at high risk of developing kidney failure. While virtually all participants indicated they would likely participate in the study, most felt strongly that the message should come directly from their primary care provider or whoever ordered the laboratory tests, rather than from an unknown organization. If this is not possible, they felt the health care provider should be made aware of the concern related to their kidney health. Most agreed that, if health authorities could identify people at high risk of a treatable life-threatening illness if caught early enough, there is a social responsibility to notify people. While privacy laws allow for free flow of health information among health care providers who provide direct clinical care, the proposed case-finding and outreach falls outside that model. Enabling this kind of information flow will require greater clarity in existing laws or revisions to these laws. This also requires adequate notification and culture change for health care providers and the public around information uses and flows. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Chronic pain is common, and its management is complex in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), but limited data are available on opioid prescribing. We examined opioid prescribing for non-cancer and non-end-of-life care in patients with CKD. Methods This was a population-based retrospective cohort study using administrative databases in Ontario, Canada which included adults with CKD defined by an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 from 1 November 2012 to 31 December 2018 and estimated the proportion of opioid prescriptions (type, duration, dose, potentially inappropriate prescribing, etc.) within 1 year of cohort entry. Prescriptions had to precede dialysis, kidney transplant or death. Results We included 680 445 adults with CKD, and 198 063 (29.1%) were prescribed opioids. Codeine (14.9%) and hydromorphone (7.2%) were the most common opioids. Among opioid users, 24.3% had repeated or long-term use, 26.1% were prescribed high doses and 56.8% were new users. Opioid users were more likely to be female, had cardiac disease or a mental health diagnosis, and had more healthcare visits. The proportions for potentially inappropriate prescribing indicators varied (e.g. 50.1% with eGFR <30 were prescribed codeine, and 20.6% of opioid users were concurrently prescribed benzodiazepines, while 7.2% with eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 were prescribed morphine, and 7.0% were received more than one opioid concurrently). Opioid prescriptions declined with time (2013 cohort: 31.1% versus 2018 cohort: 24.5%; p <0.0001), as did indicators of potentially inappropriate prescribing. Conclusions Opioid use was common in patients with CKD. While opioid prescriptions and potentially inappropriate prescribing have declined in recent years, interventions to improve pain management without the use of opioids and education on safer prescribing practices are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Large, population-based administrative healthcare databases can be used to identify patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) when serum creatinine laboratory results are unavailable. We examined the validity of algorithms that used combined hospital encounter and physician claims database codes for the detection of CKD in Ontario, Canada. Methods: We accrued 123,499 patients over the age of 65 from 2007 to 2010. All patients had a baseline serum creatinine value to estimate glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). We developed an algorithm of physician claims and hospital encounter codes to search administrative databases for the presence of CKD. We determined the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of this algorithm to detect our primary threshold of CKD, an eGFR <45 mL/min per 1.73 m2 (15.4% of patients). We also assessed serum creatinine and eGFR values in patients with and without CKD codes (algorithm positive and negative, respectively). Results: Our algorithm required evidence of at least one of eleven CKD codes and 7.7% of patients were algorithm positive. The sensitivity was 32.7% [95% confidence interval: (95% CI): 32.0 to 33.3%]. Sensitivity was lower in women compared to men (25.7 vs. 43.7%; p <0.001) and in the oldest age category (over 80 vs. 66 to 80; 28.4 vs. 37.6 %; p < 0.001). All specificities were over 94%. The positive and negative predictive values were 65.4% (95% CI: 64.4 to 66.3%) and 88.8% (95% CI: 88.6 to 89.0%), respectively. In algorithm positive patients, the median [interquartile range (IQR)] baseline serum creatinine value was 135 μmol/L (106 to 179 μmol/L) compared to 82 μmol/L (69 to 98 μmol/L) for algorithm negative patients. Corresponding eGFR values were 38 mL/min per 1.73 m2 (26 to 51 mL/min per 1.73 m2) vs. 69 mL/min per 1.73 m2 (56 to 82 mL/min per 1.73 m2), respectively. Conclusions: Patients with CKD as identified by our database algorithm had distinctly higher baseline serum creatinine values and lower eGFR values than those without such codes. However, because of limited sensitivity, the prevalence of CKD was underestimated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients should receive follow-up serum creatinine tests after an initial abnormal result to diagnose chronic kidney disease. However, half of the time this fails to occur in primary care. We interviewed primary care providers to better understand their perceptions of enablers and barriers to following this guideline-recommended care. Methods: We performed a qualitative descriptive study guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), a framework for behavioural change. We used purposeful sampling to recruit primary care providers (physicians and nurse practitioners) based on provider and practice characteristics (rural, solo versus team practice, etc.) from Ontario, Canada. We completed one-on-one interviews with providers using a semi-structured and open-ended interview guide based on the 14 TDF domains. We alternated between data collection and analysis, where we used directed content analysis to identify frequent, important, and conflicting enablers and barriers. Results: We completed 13 interviews with nine primary care physicians and four nurse practitioners. Nine themes related to the TDF emerged from the data: 1) environmental context and resources, 2) knowledge, 3) memory, attention, and decision processes, 4) beliefs about consequences, 5) goals, 6) social or professional role, 7) behavioural regulation, 8) skills, and 9) optimism. Within these themes, we identified 16 enablers and five barriers. Some enablers included, providers' knowledge on appropriate testing, their motivation to order these tests, and their use of tools and resources to help order follow-up serum creatinine tests. However, providers perceived some barriers including that ordering confirmatory laboratory tests for chronic kidney disease was not always a priority in regards to other care they wish to provide. Providers also noted that a perceived barrier is patients not going to the laboratory to complete the test. Conclusions: We identified novel enablers and barriers to primary care providers completing guideline recommended repeat testing for the diagnosis of chronic kidney disease. Similar research is needed to understand the views of patients. These research findings can be used to inform strategies to improve the quality of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]