Search

Background: Osteoarthritis is more prevalent and severe among women than among men, but women are less likely to access early diagnosis and first-line management, particularly racialized immigrant women. Previous research advocated for greater access to culturally safe osteoarthritis information for both diverse women and health care professionals. The internet can reduce disparities by facilitating access to health information, but online materials can vary in quality., Objective: This study aimed to assess the quality and cultural safety of online osteoarthritis materials for persons affected by osteoarthritis and health care professionals., Methods: Content analysis was used to describe publicly available materials on osteoarthritis first-line management developed by Canadian organizations for affected persons or health care professionals. Searching, screening, and data extraction were performed in triplicate. We identified materials by searching Google, MEDLINE, and references of osteoarthritis-relevant guidelines and policies, and consulting our research team and collaborators. We assessed quality using DISCERN (University of Oxford) and a compiled framework for affected persons and health care professionals. We compiled frameworks to assess cultural safety. We derived an overall score, categorized as low (<50%), moderate (50%-69%), or high (≥70%+) for criteria met., Results: After screening 176 items and eliminating 129, we included 47 osteoarthritis materials published between 2013 and 2023. Of those, 43 were for persons with osteoarthritis, most were developed by charities (n=31, 72.1%), based on expert advice (n=16, 55.2%), and in the format of booklets (n=15, 34.9%) or text on web pages (n=10, 23.3%). Of those, 23.3% (10/43) low, 46.5% (20/43) moderate, and 30.2% (13/43) high scored quality; and 25.6% (11/43), 48.8% (21/43), and 25.6% (11/43) were rated low, moderate, and high cultural safety, respectively. Of the 47 included osteoarthritis materials, 4 were for health care professionals. They were developed by a consortium (2/4, 50%), a charity (1/4, 25%), and a professional society (1/4, 25%), and largely based on expert advice (3/4, 75%). The format included infographics (3/4, 75%) and text on web pages (1/4, 25%). Of those, 25% (1/4), 25% (1/4), and 50% (2/4) were rated low, moderate, and high quality, respectively; and all were rated low for cultural safety. Quality and cultural safety did not appear to be associated with the characteristics of osteoarthritis materials (eg, type of developer, development method, and format)., Conclusions: Overall, included osteoarthritis materials for persons with osteoarthritis and health care professionals were of low to moderate quality and cultural safety. These findings reveal the need for further efforts to improve existing or develop new osteoarthritis materials for both affected persons, including ethnoculturally diverse immigrant women, and health care professionals. Further research is needed to assess the quality and cultural safety of osteoarthritis materials developed by organizations outside of Canada and to establish a framework or instrument to assess cultural safety in the osteoarthritis context., (©Smita Dhakal, Shermeen Merani, Vandana Ahluwalia, Marisa Battistella, Cornelia M Borkhoff, Glen Stewart Hazlewood, Aisha Lofters, Deborah A Marshall, Crystal MacKay, Anna R Gagliardi. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 18.10.2024.)

Background: While osteoarthritis is a significant issue within the hemodialysis population and contributes to reduced quality of life, pain related to osteoarthritis is poorly managed by healthcare professionals (HCPs) in hemodialysis settings due to the absence of clinical guidance applicable to this population. The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of HCPs on the barriers and facilitators to using a clinical decision support tool for osteoarthritis pain management in the hemodialysis setting., Methods: A qualitative descriptive study was conducted. Purposeful and snowball sampling techniques were used to recruit hemodialysis clinicians from academic and community settings across multiple Canadian provinces. One-to-one interviews were conducted with clinicians using a semi-structured, open ended interview guide informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework, a behavior change framework. A general inductive approach was applied to identify the main themes of barriers and facilitators., Results: A total of 11 interviews were completed with 3 nephrologists, 2 nurse practitioners and 6 pharmacists. Findings revealed 6 main barriers and facilitators related to the use of the clinical decision support tool. Alignment of the tool with practice roles emerged as a key barrier and facilitator. Other barriers included challenges related to the dialysis environment, varying levels of clinician comfort with pain medications, and limited applicability of the tool due to patient factors. An important facilitator was the intrinsic motivation among clinicians to use the tool., Conclusions: Most participants across the included hemodialysis settings expressed satisfaction with the clinical decision support tool and acknowledged its overall potential for improving osteoarthritis pain management among patients on hemodialysis. Future implementation of the tool may be limited by existing roles and practices at different institutions. Increased collaboration among hemodialysis and primary care teams may promote uptake of the tool., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Women are disproportionately impacted by osteoarthritis (OA) but less likely than men to access OA care, particularly racialized women. One way to reduce inequities is through policies that can influence healthcare services. We examined how OA-relevant policies in Canada address equitable, person-centred OA care for women., Methods: We used content analysis to extract data from English-language OA-relevant documents referred to as policies or other synonymous terms published in 2000 or later identified by searching governmental and other web sites. We used summary statistics to describe policy characteristics, person-centred care using McCormack's six-domain framework, and mention of OA prevalence, barriers and strategies to improve equitable access to OA care among women., Results: We included 14 policies developed from 2004 to 2021. None comprehensively addressed all person-centred care domains, and few addressed individual domains: enable self-management (50%), share decisions (43%), exchange information (29%), respond to emotions (14%), foster a healing relationship (0%) and manage uncertainty (0%). Even when mentioned, content offered little guidance for how to achieve person-centred OA care. Few policies acknowledged greater prevalence of OA among women (36%), older (29%) or Indigenous persons (29%) and those of lower socioeconomic status (14%); or barriers to OA care among those of lower socioeconomic status (50%), in rural areas (43%), of older age (37%) or ethno-cultural groups (21%), or women (21%). Four (29%) policies recommended strategies for improving access to OA care at the patient (self-management education material in different languages and tailored to cultural norms), clinician (healthcare professional education) and system level (evaluate OA service equity, engage lay health leaders in delivering self-management programs, and offer self-management programs in a variety of formats). Five (36%) policies recommended research on how to improve OA care for equity-seeking groups., Conclusions: Canadian OA-relevant policies lack guidance to overcome disparities in access to person-centred OA care for equity-seeking groups including women. This study identified several ways to strengthen policies. Ongoing research must identify the needs and preferences of equity-seeking persons with OA, and evaluate the impact of various models of service delivery, knowledge needed to influence OA-relevant policy., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objectives: Osteoarthritis (OA) prevalence, severity and related comorbid conditions are greater among women compared with men, but women, particularly racialised women, are less likely than men to access OA care. We aimed to prioritise strategies needed to reduce inequities in OA management., Design: Delphi survey of 28 strategies derived from primary research retained if at least 80% of respondents rated 6 or 7 on a 7-point Likert scale., Setting: Online., Participants: 35 women of diverse ethno-cultural groups and 29 healthcare professionals of various specialties from across Canada., Results: Of the 28 initial and 3 newly suggested strategies, 27 achieved consensus to retain: 20 in round 1 and 7 in round 2. Respondents retained 7 patient-level, 7 clinician-level and 13 system-level strategies. Women and professionals agreed on all but one patient-level strategy (eg, consider patients' cultural needs and economic circumstances) and all clinician-level strategies (eg, inquire about OA management needs and preferences). Some discrepancies emerged for system-level strategies that were more highly rated by women (eg, implement OA-specific clinics). Comments revealed general support among professionals for system-level strategies provided that additional funding or expanded scope of practice was targeted to only formally trained professionals and did not reduce funding for professionals who already managed OA., Conclusions: We identified multilevel strategies that could be implemented by healthcare professionals, organisations or systems to mitigate inequities and improve OA care for diverse women., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: The cause of constipation is multifactorial and common problem for patients on hemodialysis. A lack of strong evidence on suitable treatment strategies means there is an unorganized approach to selecting therapies, which can exacerbate constipation or worsen symptoms. Clinicians and patients would benefit from a content and face validated treatment algorithm for treating constipation. In this study, our objective was to develop and content and face validate a constipation treatment toolkit for patients on hemodialysis, consisting of treatment algorithm, and patient information tools (pamphlet and video)., Methods: Literature searches were performed to develop an initial toolkit using Lynn's method for developing content-valid clinical tools. Content and face validity were evaluated as per Lynn's method for determining content validity; the algorithm was evaluated by Canadian nephrology clinicians, while patient information tools were evaluated by clinicians and patients. Components were rated on a Likert scale for content relevance and on a 5-point scale for face validity. After each round, the content validity index (CVI) score was calculated and revisions were made based on feedback., Findings: A total of 23 clinicians and 15 patients were interviewed across three validation rounds. After three rounds, the treatment algorithm achieved content (overall CVI = 0.93) and face (91% agreement) validity. Our patient information tools achieved content and face validity (pamphlet overall CVI = 0.99, 85.5% agreement; video overall CVI = 0.99, 90.5% agreement)., Discussion: A treatment algorithm and patient information toolkit for the treatment of constipation in patients on hemodialysis were content and face validated via expert review. Further research will be needed to ascertain the effectiveness and implementation of this toolkit., (© 2021 International Society for Hemodialysis.)

Background: Older adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at heightened risk for polypharmacy. We examined potentially inappropriate prescribing in this population and whether introducing pharmacists into the ambulatory kidney care model was associated with improved prescribing practices., Methods: Retrospective cohort study using linked administrative databases. We included patients with an eGFR ≤30 mL/min/1.73 m2 ≥66 years of age followed in multidisciplinary kidney clinics in Ontario, Canada (n = 25,016 from 28 centres). The primary outcome was the absence of a statin prescription or the receipt of a potentially inappropriate prescription defined by the American Geriatric Society Beers Criteria® and a modified Delphi panel that identified key drugs of concern in CKD. We calculated the crude cumulative incidence and incidence rate for the primary outcome and used change-point regression to determine if a change occurred following pharmacist introduction., Results: There were 6,007 (24%) and 16,497 patients (66%) not prescribed a statin and with ≥1 potentially inappropriate prescription, respectively. The rate of potentially inappropriate prescribing was 125.6 per 100 person-years and was higher in more recent years. The change-point regression analysis included 2,275 patients from two centres. No immediate change was detected at pharmacist introduction, but potentially inappropriate prescribing was increasing pre-pharmacist introduction, and this rising trend was reversed post-pharmacist introduction. The incidence of potentially inappropriate prescribing still remained high post-pharmacist introduction., Conclusions: Potentially inappropriate prescribing practices were common. Incorporating pharmacists into the kidney care model may improve prescribing practices. The role of pharmacists in the ambulatory kidney care team warrants further investigation in a randomized controlled trial., Competing Interests: Manish M. Sood has received grant funding from Otsuka and speaker fees from Astrazeneca unrelated to this study. All other authors have no conflicts to declare. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Background: Antithrombotic therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) is considered a standard of care, but for hemodialysis (HD) patients the benefits are unclear, and bleeding risks are high. Our study objective was to compare cardiologists' and nephrologists' stroke prevention practices in different patient risk scenarios., Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional, online survey was distributed to members of three Canadian physician societies (Nephrology, Cardiovascular, Heart Rhythm), and to cardiologists affiliated with three Canadian Universities. The questionnaire included four AF scenarios in HD patients with varying stroke and bleeding risks. Physicians selected one of six antithrombotic therapy options for each scenario., Results: Cardiologists were 3 times more likely than nephro-logists to choose anticoagulant therapy over both antiplatelet and no drug therapy, regardless of stroke or bleeding risk (p < 0.001). Physicians' drug therapy choices in regards to level of stroke and bleeding risk reflected the expected pattern based on current evidence., Conclusion: Cardiologists were more likely to prescribe anticoagulant therapy for AF in the HD population compared to nephrologists, regardless of patient stroke or bleeding risk.

We congratulate the KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) work group on their comprehensive work in a broad subject area and agreed with many of the recommendations in their clinical practice guideline on the evaluation and management of chronic kidney disease. We concur with the KDIGO definitions and classification of kidney disease and welcome the addition of albuminuria categories at all levels of glomerular filtration rate (GFR), the terminology of G categories rather than stages to describe level of GFR, the division of former stage 3 into new G categories 3a and 3b, and the addition of the underlying diagnosis. We agree with the use of the heat map to illustrate the relative contributions of low GFR and albuminuria to cardiovascular and renal risk, though we thought that the highest risk category was too broad, including as it does people at disparate levels of risk. We add an albuminuria category A4 for nephrotic-range proteinuria and D and T categories for patients on dialysis or with a functioning renal transplant. We recommend target blood pressure of 140/90mm Hg regardless of diabetes or proteinuria, and against the combination of angiotensin receptor blockers with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. We recommend against routine protein restriction. We concur on individualization of hemoglobin A1c targets. We do not agree with routine restriction of sodium intake to <2g/d, instead suggesting reduction of sodium intake in those with high intake (>3.3g/d). We suggest screening for anemia only when GFR is <30mL/min/1.73m(2). We recognize the absence of evidence on appropriate phosphate targets and methods of achieving them and do not agree with suggestions in this area. In drug dosing, we agree with the recommendation of using absolute clearance (ie, milliliters per minute), calculated from the patient's estimated GFR (which is normalized to 1.73m(2)) and the patient's actual anthropomorphic body surface area. We agree with referral to a nephrologist when GFR is <30mL/min/1.73m(2) (and for many other scenarios), but suggest urine albumin-creatinine ratio > 60mg/mmol or proteinuria with protein excretion > 1g/d as the referral threshold for proteinuria., (Copyright © 2015 National Kidney Foundation, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)