Search

Introduction Globally, there are more women with chronic kidney disease (CKD), yet they comprise only 40% of patients receiving kidney replacement therapy by dialysis. We aimed to describe the perspectives of nephrologists on gender disparities in access to care and outcomes in CKD and dialysis. Methods We conducted semi-structured interviews with 51 nephrologists (28, 55% women) from 22 countries from October-2019 to April-2020. Transcripts were analysed thematically. Results We identified six themes. Related to women were primary commitment to caregiving (with subthemes of coordinating care, taking charge of health management, deprioritising own health, centrality of family in decision-making); vigilance and self-reliance (diligence and conscientiousness, stoicism and tolerating symptoms, avoiding burden on family, isolation and coping alone); and stereotyping, stigma and judgement (body image, dismissed as anxiety, shame and embarrassment, weakness and frailty). Related to men was protecting masculinity (safeguarding the provider role, clinging to control, self-regard and entitled). Decisional power and ownership included men’s dominance in decision-making and women’s analytical approach in treatment decisions. Inequities compounded by social disadvantage (financial and transport barriers, without social security, limited literacy, entrenched discrimination, vulnerability) were barriers to care for women, particularly in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities. Conclusion Nephrologists perceived that women with CKD faced many challenges in accessing care related to social norms and roles of caregiving responsibilities, disempowerment, lack of support, stereotyping by clinicians, and entrenched social and economic disadvantage. Addressing power differences, challenging systemic patriarchy, and managing unconscious bias may help to improve equitable care and outcomes for all people with CKD.

Patients receiving dialysis have low employment rates, which compounds poorer health and socioeconomic outcomes. Reasons for under- and unemployment remain underexplored. We aimed to describe the perspectives of patients receiving hemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD) and their caregivers on ability to work. Data was derived from adult patients’ and caregivers’ responses from 26 focus groups, two international Delphi surveys and two consensus workshops conducted through the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology (SONG-HD) and SONG-PD programs. Our secondary thematic analysis identified concepts around ability to work. Five hundred four patients and 146 caregivers from 86 countries were included. We identified five themes: financial pressures and instability (with subthemes of rationing the budget with increased expenditure, losing financial independence and threatened job security); struggling to meet expectations (burdened by sociocultural norms and striving to protect independence); contending with upheaval of roles and responsibilities (forced to establish a new routine to accommodate work, symptoms disrupting work, prioritizing work and other duties, and adjusting to altered capacity to work); enabling flexibility and control (employment driving decisions about dialysis modality and schedule, workplace providing occupational safety and adaptability, requiring organizational support and planning for a future career); and finding purpose and value (accepting and redefining identity, pride and fulfillment, and protecting mental well-being). Employment enabled patients to maintain their identity, independence, financial security and mental health. Symptom burden, workplace inflexibility and juggling roles are major challenges. Interventions addressing motivation, workplace flexibility and safety, and establishing goals and routines could support patients’ capacities to work, thereby improving overall well-being and productivity.

Background More than 50% of children with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have uncontrolled hypertension, increasing their long-term risk of cardiovascular disease and progression to kidney failure. Children receiving medications or dialysis may also experience acute blood pressure fluctuations accompanied by debilitating symptoms. We aimed to describe the perspectives of children with CKD and their parental caregivers on blood pressure to inform patient-centered care. Methods Secondary thematic analysis was conducted on qualitative data from the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology—Children and Adolescents initiative, encompassing 16 focus groups, an international Delphi survey and two consensus workshops. We analyzed responses from children with CKD (ages 8–21 years) and caregivers (of children ages 0–21 years) pertaining to blood pressure. Results Overall, 120 patients and 250 caregivers from 22 countries participated. We identified five themes: invisibility and normalization (reassured by apparent normotension, absence of symptoms and expected links with CKD), confused by ambiguity (hypertension indistinguishable from cardiovascular disease, questioning the need for prophylactic intervention, frustrated by inconsistent messages and struggling with technical skills in measurement), enabling monitoring and maintaining health (gaging well-being and preventing vascular complications), debilitating and constraining daily living (provoking anxiety and agitation, helpless and powerless and limiting life activities) and burden of medications (overwhelmed by the quantity of tablets and distress from unexpected side effects). Conclusions For children with CKD and their caregivers, blood pressure was an important heath indicator, but uncertainty around its implications and treatment hampered management. Providing educational resources to track blood pressure and minimizing symptoms and treatment burden may improve outcomes in children with CKD.

Rationale and objective Sleep problems affect more than half of patients receiving dialysis and are associated with increased risk of mortality, cardiovascular events, depression and impaired functioning and quality of life. Symptoms such as fatigue and exhaustion may be attributed to sleep problems or sleep disorders, as well as the burden of kidney disease and treatment. This study aims to describe the patient perspectives on the reasons, impact and management of sleep problems in dialysis. Study design Systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies that report patient experience and perspectives on sleep in dialysis. Setting and population Patients receiving dialysis. Search strategy and sources MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, reference lists and PhD dissertations were searched from inception to August 2019. Data extraction All text from the results/conclusion of the primary studies. Analytical approach Thematic synthesis. Results We included 48 studies involving 1156 participants from 16 countries. We identified six themes: dominating demands of treatment (with subthemes of: demanding and relentless schedule, regret for wasted time); scheduling and control (managing sleep routines, napping and nocturnal sleep disruption, meditative aids); disruptions due to dialysis (unsettled sleep, hypervigilance and worry); symptoms depriving sleep (difficulty falling asleep, constant waking); overwhelmed and without choice (futility of sleep, uncontrollable exhaustion, restlessness is irrepressible); and as a coping mechanism (avoiding anxiety, alleviating symptoms, combating boredom). Limitations Most studies were conducted in high-income, English-speaking countries. Conclusion The treatment and symptom burden of dialysis disrupts and deprives patients of sleep, which leads to overwhelming and uncontrollable exhaustion. Better management of symptoms and effective strategies to manage sleep routines may improve sleep quality for better overall health in patients receiving dialysis.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., OBJECTIVES: Respiratory failure, multiple organ failure, shortness of breath, recovery, and mortality have been identified as critically important core outcomes by more than 9300 patients, health professionals, and the public from 111 countries in the global coronavirus disease 2019 core outcome set initiative. The aim of this project was to establish the core outcome measures for these domains for trials in coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: Three online consensus workshops were convened to establish outcome measures for the four core domains of respiratory failure, multiple organ failure, shortness of breath, and recovery. SETTING: International. PATIENTS: About 130 participants (patients, public, and health professionals) from 17 countries attended the three workshops. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Respiratory failure, assessed by the need for respiratory support based on the World Health Organization Clinical Progression Scale, was considered pragmatic, objective, and with broad applicability to various clinical scenarios. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment was recommended for multiple organ failure, because it was routinely used in trials and clinical care, well validated, and feasible. The Modified Medical Research Council measure for shortness of breath, with minor adaptations (recall period of 24 hr to capture daily fluctuations and inclusion of activities to ensure relevance and to capture the extreme severity of shortness of breath in people with coronavirus disease 2019), was regarded as fit for purpose for this indication. The recovery measure was developed de novo and defined as the absence of symptoms, resumption of usual daily activities, and return to the previous state of health prior to the illness, using a 5-point Likert scale, and was endorsed. CONCLUSIONS: The coronavirus disease 2019 core outcome set recommended core outcome measures have content validity and are considered the most feasible and acceptable among existing measures. Implementation of the core outcome measures in trials in coronavirus disease 2019 will ensure consistency and relevance of the evidence to inform decision-making and care of patients with coronavirus disease 2019.

Background Pain is the highest prioritized patient-reported outcome in people with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) but remains infrequently and inconsistently measured in clinical trials and poorly managed in clinical settings. A recently completed systematic review of pain in ADPKD identified 26 different outcome measures. None of these measures were considered appropriate as a core outcome measure due to the lack of patient-important dimensions, inadequate content, relatively long duration of completion time and limited evidence to support psychometric robustness. Methods We convened an international Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology–Polycystic Kidney Disease consensus workshop involving 21 patients/caregivers and 40 health professionals (clinicians, nurses, researchers, policy makers and industry representatives) from 18 countries to discuss the identification or development of a core outcome measure for pain. Results Four themes were identified highlighting fundamental issues for the measurement of pain in ADPKD: distressing and disrupting life participation; variability and ambiguity in defining pain; stigma, frustration and adaptation to pain; and ensuring validity and feasibility of pain measures. Conclusions Existing measures were found to be insufficient in capturing pain as a core outcome and there was consensus on the need for a new validated measure that is simple, succinct and addresses the impact of pain on life participation. This measure will facilitate the appropriate prioritization of pain in all trials and guide clinical decision making in people with ADPKD.

Background Fatigue is one of the most important symptoms among patients receiving dialysis and is nominated as a core outcome to be reported in all clinical trials in this setting. However, few trials of interventions targeting fatigue have been conducted. Patients historically have rarely been involved in the design of interventions, which can limit acceptability and uptake. When asked, they have indicated a preference for lifestyle interventions, such as exercise, to improve fatigue. While some research has focussed on intradialytic exercise for patients receiving haemodialysis, patients have also indicated a preference for a convenient method of exercising with guidance, but on their own time outside of dialysis hours. In response to this, a mobile phone application was proposed as the method of delivery for a home-based exercise intervention targeting fatigue. Methods We convened a workshop with five breakout group sessions in Australia, with 24 patients on dialysis (16 haemodialysis and 8 peritoneal dialysis) and 8 caregivers to identify, prioritize and discuss exercise interventions for fatigue in patients receiving dialysis and the delivery of this through a mobile application. Results Of the 21 types of exercise identified, the top-ranked were walking outdoors, walking on a treadmill and cardio and resistance training. Six themes were identified: (i) ‘an expectation of tangible gains from exercise’, including strengthening and protecting against bodily deterioration related to dialysis; (ii) ‘overcoming physical limitations’, meaning that comorbidities, baseline fatigue and fluctuating health needed to be addressed to engage in exercise; (iii) ‘fear of risks’, which reinforced the importance of safety and compatibility of exercise with dialysis; (iv) ‘realistic and achievable’ exercise, which would ensure initial readiness for uptake; (v) ‘enhancing motivation and interest’ , which expected to support sustained use of the exercise intervention and (vi) ‘ensuring usability of the mobile application’ , which would require simplicity, convenience and comprehensibility. Conclusion Exercise interventions that are expected by patients to improve health outcomes and that are safe, realistic and easy to adopt may be more acceptable to patients on dialysis.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has seen a global surge in anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and stress. AIMS: This study aimed to describe the perspectives of patients with COVID-19, their family, health professionals, and the general public on the impact of COVID-19 on mental health. METHODS: A secondary thematic analysis was conducted using data from the COVID-19 COS project. We extracted data on the perceived causes and impact of COVID-19 on mental health from an international survey and seven online consensus workshops. RESULTS: We identified four themes (with subthemes in parenthesis): anxiety amidst uncertainty (always on high alert, ebb and flow of recovery); anguish of a threatened future (intense frustration of a changed normality, facing loss of livelihood, trauma of ventilation, a troubling prognosis, confronting death); bearing responsibility for transmission (fear of spreading COVID-19 in public; overwhelming guilt of infecting a loved one); and suffering in isolation (severe solitude of quarantine, sick and alone, separation exacerbating grief). CONCLUSION: We found that the unpredictability of COVID-19, the fear of long-term health consequences, burden of guilt, and suffering in isolation profoundly impacted mental health. Clinical and public health interventions are needed to manage the psychological consequences arising from this pandemic.

Background Globally, over 1.2 million people die from chronic kidney disease (CKD) every year. Patients with CKD are up to 10 times more likely to die prematurely than progress to kidney failure requiring kidney replacement therapy. The burden of symptoms and impaired quality of life in CKD may be compounded by comorbidities and treatment side effects. However, patient-important outcomes remain inconsistently and infrequently reported in trials in patients with CKD, which can limit evidence-informed decision-making. The Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology – Chronic Kidney Disease (SONG-CKD) aims to establish a consensus-based core outcome set for trials in patients with CKD not yet requiring kidney replacement therapy to ensure outcomes of relevance to patients, caregivers and health professionals are consistently reported in trials. Methods SONG-CKD involves four phases: a systematic review to identify outcomes (domains and measures) that have been reported in randomised controlled trials involving adults with CKD who do not require kidney replacement therapy; stakeholder key informant interviews with health professionals involved in the care of adults with CKD to ascertain their views on establishing core outcomes in CKD; an international two-round online Delphi survey with patients, caregivers, clinicians, researchers, policy makers and industry representatives to obtain consensus on critically important outcome domains; and stakeholder consensus workshops to review and finalise the set of core outcome domains for trials in CKD. Discussion Establishing a core outcome set to be reported in trials in patients with CKD will enhance the relevance, transparency and impact of research to improve the lives of people with CKD. Trial registration Not applicable. This study is registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database: http://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1653.

The omission of outcomes that are of relevance to patients, clinicians, and regulators across trials in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) limits shared decision making. The Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Polycystic Kidney Disease (SONG-PKD) Initiative convened an international consensus workshop on October 25, 2018, to discuss the identification and implementation of a potential core outcome set for all ADPKD trials. This article summarizes the discussion from the workshops and the SONG-PKD core outcome set. Key stakeholders including 11 patients/ caregivers and 47 health professionals (nephrologists, policy makers, industry, and researchers) attended the workshop. Four themes emerged: "Relevance of trajectory and impact of kidney function" included concerns about a patient's prognosis and uncertainty of when they may need to commence kidney replacement therapy and the lack of an early prognostic marker to inform long-term decisions; "Discerning and defining pain specific to ADPKD" highlighted the challenges in determining the origin of pain, adapting to the chronicity and repeated episodes of pain, the need to place emphasis on pain management, and to have a validated measure for pain; "Highlighting ADPKD consequences" encompassed cyst-related complications and reflected patient's knowledge because of family history and the hereditary nature of ADPKD; and "Risk for life-threatening but rare consequences" such as cerebral aneurysm meant considering both frequency and severity of the outcome. Kidney function, mortality, cardiovascular disease, and pain were established as the core outcomes for ADPKD.

Sleep disturbances are common among patients receiving dialysis and are associated with an increased risk of mortality and morbidity, and impaired quality of life. Despite being highly prioritised by patients, sleep problems remain under-diagnosed and inadequately managed. The aim of the present study was to describe the perspectives of patients receiving dialysis and their caregivers on sleep. We extracted qualitative data on sleep from 26 focus groups, two international Delphi surveys, and two consensus workshops involving 644 patients and caregivers from 86 countries as part of the Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology-Haemodialysis and -Peritoneal Dialysis (SONG-HD/SONG-PD) initiatives. The responses were from patients aged ≥18 years receiving haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis, and their caregivers. We analysed the data using thematic analysis with five themes identified: constraining daily living (with subthemes of: battling intrusive tiredness, exacerbating debilitating conditions, broken and incapacitated); roadblocks in relationships (unable to meet family needs, antipathy due to misunderstanding, wreaking emotional havoc); burden on caregivers (stress on support persons, remaining alert to help); losing enjoyment (limiting social contact, disempowerment in life); and undermining mental resilience (aggravating low mood, diminishing coping skills, reducing functional ability). Sleep disturbances are exhausting for patients on dialysis and pervade all aspects of their lives including the ability to do daily tasks, and maintaining relationships, mental and emotional well-being. Better assessment and management of sleep problems in dialysis is needed, which may lead to improvements in overall health and quality of life.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., Objectives: There are over 4,000 trials conducted in people with coronavirus disease 2019. However, the variability of outcomes and the omission of patient-centered outcomes may diminish the impact of these trials on decision-making. The aim of this study was to generate a consensus-based, prioritized list of outcomes for coronavirus disease 2019 trials. Design: In an online survey conducted in English, Chinese, Italian, Portuguese, and Spanish languages, adults with coronavirus disease 2019, their family members, health professionals, and the general public rated the importance of outcomes using a 9-point Likert scale (7–9, critical importance) and completed a Best-Worst Scale to estimate relative importance. Participant comments were analyzed thematically. Setting: International. Subjects: Adults 18 years old and over with confirmed or suspected coronavirus disease 2019, their family members, members of the general public, and health professionals (including clinicians, policy makers, regulators, funders, and researchers). Interventions: None. Measurements: None. Main Results: In total, 9,289 participants from 111 countries (776 people with coronavirus disease 2019 or family members, 4,882 health professionals, and 3,631 members of the public) completed the survey. The four outcomes of highest priority for all three groups were: mortality, respiratory failure, pneumonia, and organ failure. Lung function, lung scarring, sepsis, shortness of breath, and oxygen level in the blood were common to the top 10 outcomes across all three groups (mean > 7.5, median ≥ 8, and > 70% of respondents rated the outcome as critically important). Patients/family members rated fatigue, anxiety, chest pain, muscle pain, gastrointestinal problems, and cardiovascular disease higher than health professionals. Four themes underpinned prioritization: fear of life-threatening, debilitating, and permanent consequences; addressing knowledge gaps; enabling preparedness and planning; and tolerable or infrequent outcomes. Conclusions: Life-threatening respiratory and other organ outcomes were consistently highly prioritized by all stakeholder groups. Patients/family members gave higher priority to many patient-reported outcomes compared with health professionals.

Background Diminished mental health is associated with increased morbidity and mortality and may contribute to loss of independence and motivation in patients receiving dialysis and their caregivers. Increased understanding of the patient perspective on triggers, impacts and strategies for managing mental health may inform ways to address mental health conditions in this population. Methods A secondary thematic analysis was undertaken using data from the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology (SONG)-Hemodialysis and SONG-Peritoneal Dialysis projects. We extracted and analysed data on the perceived causes, meaning, impact and management of mental health in patients receiving dialysis from 26 focus groups (in six countries), multinational Delphi surveys and consensus workshops. Results A total of 644 patients and caregivers participated. We identified five themes: bound to dialysis (forced into isolation, enslaved to a machine, stress of relentless planning and grieving the loss of a normal life), underrecognized and ignored (missed by health practitioners, need for mental health support), an uncertain future (dreading complications, coming to terms with mortality), developing self-reliance (vulnerability in being solely responsible for dialysis, sustaining motivation for dialysis, necessity for self-vigilance and taking charge to regulate emotions) and responding to a lifestyle overhaul (guilt of burdening family, controlling symptoms for overall mental wellness, protecting independence and trying to feel grateful). Conclusions Patients receiving dialysis and their caregivers endure mental and emotional distress attributed to the burden of dialysis, lifestyle restrictions, the constant threat of death and symptom burden, which can impair motivation for self-management. Increased attention to monitoring and management of mental health in this population is needed.

Aim: The management of blood pressure in patients requiring dialysis remains challenging and controversial. This study aimed to describe the perspectives of patients treated with peritoneal or haemodialysis regarding blood pressure, to inform patient-centred management. Methods: We conducted a secondary thematic analysis of qualitative data from multiple data sets derived from the Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology (SONG) initiative. We extracted and analysed the responses of adult patients (aged 18 years or over) on haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, and their caregivers. Qualitative data were extracted from 26 focus groups, two international Delphi surveys and two consensus workshops completed as part of the SONG-Haemodialysis and SONG-Peritoneal dialysis projects. Results: Collectively, the studies involved 644 patients and caregivers from 86 countries. We identified four themes: helpless and incapacitated (including the subthemes of disabling and debilitating symptoms, limiting ability to work, fear of “crashes” – a sudden drop in blood pressure – forced to depend on others); dismissed and ignored (disregarded as a problem, lacking information, education and reassurance); escalating medication burden; and taking control for improved self-management (determining thresholds in fluid management, establishing a routine for proactive monitoring). Conclusion: Blood pressure symptoms are debilitating for patients on dialysis and exacerbated by a perceived lack of information about how to understand and manage these symptoms. More patient-centred management of blood pressure, particularly symptom-causing blood pressure, in patients on dialysis is likely to substantially improve patient satisfaction and outcomes.

Objectives: The outcomes reported in trials in coronavirus disease 2019 are extremely heterogeneous and of uncertain patient relevance, limiting their applicability for clinical decision-making. The aim of this workshop was to establish a core outcomes set for trials in people with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019. Design: Four international online multistakeholder consensus workshops were convened to discuss proposed core outcomes for trials in people with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019, informed by a survey involving 9,289 respondents from 111 countries. The transcripts were analyzed thematically. The workshop recommendations were used to finalize the core outcomes set. Setting: International. Subjects: Adults 18 years old and over with confirmed or suspected coronavirus disease 2019, their family members, members of the general public and health professionals (including clinicians, policy makers, regulators, funders, researchers). Interventions: None. Measurements: None. Main Results: Six themes were identified. “Responding to the critical and acute health crisis” reflected the immediate focus on saving lives and preventing life-threatening complications that underpinned the high prioritization of mortality, respiratory failure, and multiple organ failure. “Capturing different settings of care” highlighted the need to minimize the burden on hospitals and to acknowledge outcomes in community settings. “Encompassing the full trajectory and severity of disease” was addressing longer term impacts and the full spectrum of illness (e.g. shortness of breath and recovery). “Distinguishing overlap, correlation and collinearity” meant recognizing that symptoms such as shortness of breath had distinct value and minimizing overlap (e.g. lung function and pneumonia were on the continuum toward respiratory failure). “Recognizing adverse events” refers to the potential harms of new and evolving interventions. “Being cognizant of family and psychosocial wellbeing” reflected the pervasive impacts of coronavirus disease 2019. Conclusions: Mortality, respiratory failure, multiple organ failure, shortness of breath, and recovery are critically important outcomes to be consistently reported in coronavirus disease 2019 trials.

International audience; BACKGROUND: Survival and quality of life for patients on hemodialysis therapy remain poor despite substantial research efforts. Existing trials often report surrogate outcomes that may not be relevant to patients and clinicians. The aim of this project was to generate a consensus-based prioritized list of core outcomes for trials in hemodialysis. STUDY DESIGN: In a Delphi survey, participants rated the importance of outcomes using a 9-point Likert scale in round 1 and then re-rated outcomes in rounds 2 and 3 after reviewing other respondents' scores. For each outcome, the median, mean, and proportion rating as 7 to 9 (critically important) were calculated. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 1,181 participants (202 [17%] patients/caregivers, 979 health professionals) from 73 countries completed round 1, with 838 (71%) completing round~3. OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS: Outcomes included in the potential core outcome set met the following criteria for both patients/caregivers and health professionals: median score~≥q 8, mean score~≥q 7.5, proportion rating the outcome as critically important~≥q 75%, and median score in the forced ranking question~

Background: Inconsistencies in outcome reporting and frequent omission of patient-centered outcomes can diminish the value of trials in treatment decision-making. We identified critically important outcome domains in kidney transplantation based on the shared priorities of patients/caregivers and health professionals. Methods: In a 3-round Delphi survey, patients/caregivers and health professionals rated the importance of outcome domains for trials in kidney transplantation on a 9-point Likert scale and provided comments. During Round 2 and 3, participants re-rated the outcomes after reviewing their own score, the distribution of the respondents’ scores, and comments. We calculated the median, mean, and proportion rating 7-9 (critically important), and analyzed comments thematically. Results: 1018 participants (461 [45%] patients/caregivers and 557 [55%] health professionals) from 79 countries completed Round 1, and 779 (77%) completed Round 3. The top eight outcomes that met the consensus criteria in Round 3 (mean ≥7.5, median ≥8 and proportion >85%) in both groups were graft loss, graft function, chronic rejection, acute rejection, mortality, infection, cancer (excluding skin) and cardiovascular disease. Compared with health professionals, patients/caregivers gave higher priority to six outcomes (mean difference of 0.5 or more): skin cancer, surgical complications, cognition, blood pressure, depression, and ability to work. We identified five themes: capacity to control and inevitability, personal relevance, debilitating repercussions, gaining awareness of risks, and addressing knowledge gaps. Conclusions: Graft complications and severe comorbidities were critically important for both stakeholder groups. These stakeholder-prioritized outcomes will inform the core outcome set to improve the consistency and relevance of trials in kidney transplantation.

International audience; BACKGROUND: Treatment decisions in kidney transplantation requires patients and clinicians to weigh the benefits and harms of a broad range of medical and surgical interventions, but the heterogeneity and lack of patient-relevant outcomes across trials in transplantation makes these trade-offs uncertain, thus, the need for a core outcome set that reflects stakeholder priorities. METHODS: We convened 2 international Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Kidney Transplantation stakeholder consensus workshops in Boston (17 patients/caregivers; 52 health professionals) and Hong Kong (10 patients/caregivers; 45 health professionals). In facilitated breakout groups, participants discussed the development and implementation of core outcome domains for trials in kidney transplantation. RESULTS: Seven themes were identified. Reinforcing the paramount importance of graft outcomes encompassed the prevailing dread of dialysis, distilling the meaning of graft function, and acknowledging the terrifying and ambiguous terminology of rejection. Reflecting critical trade-offs between graft health and medical comorbidities was fundamental. Contextualizing mortality explained discrepancies in the prioritization of death among stakeholders-inevitability of death (patients), preventing premature death (clinicians), and ensuring safety (regulators). Imperative to capture patient-reported outcomes was driven by making explicit patient priorities, fulfilling regulatory requirements, and addressing life participation. Specificity to transplant; feasibility and pragmatism (long-term impacts and responsiveness to interventions); and recognizing gradients of severity within outcome domains were raised as considerations. CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholders support the inclusion of graft health, mortality, cardiovascular disease, infection, cancer, and patient-reported outcomes (ie, life participation) in a core outcomes set. Addressing ambiguous terminology and feasibility is needed in establishing these core outcome domains for trials in kidney transplantation.

Background and objectives Patient centeredness is widely advocated as a cornerstone of health care, but it is yet to be fully realized, including in nephrology. Our study aims to describe nephrologists’ perspectives on defining and implementing patient-centered outcomes in hemodialysis. Design, setting, participants, & measurements Face-to-face, semistructured interviews were conducted with 58 nephrologists from 27 dialysis units across nine countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Singapore, and New Zealand. Transcripts were thematically analyzed. Results We identified five themes on defining and implementing patient-centered outcomes in hemodialysis: explicitly prioritized by patients (articulated preferences and goals, ascertaining treatment burden, defining hemodialysis success, distinguishing a physician-patient dichotomy, and supporting shared decision making), optimizing wellbeing (respecting patient choice, focusing on symptomology, perceptible and tangible, and judging relevance and consequence), comprehending extensive heterogeneity of clinical and quality of life outcomes (distilling diverse priorities, highly individualized, attempting to specify outcomes, and broadening context), clinically hamstrung (professional deficiency, uncertainty and complexity in measurement, beyond medical purview, specificity of care, mechanistic mindset [focused on biochemical targets and comorbidities], avoiding alarm, and paradoxical dilemma), and undermined by system pressures (adhering to overarching policies, misalignment with mandates, and resource constraints). Conclusions Improving patient-centered outcomes is regarded by nephrologists to encompass strategies that address patient goals and improve wellbeing and treatment burden in patients on hemodialysis. However, efforts are hampered by ambiguities about how to prioritize, measure, and manage the plethora of critical comorbidities and broader quality of life outcomes in a care setting that is technically demanding and driven by biochemical targets. Identifying critical patient–important outcomes and mechanisms for integrating them into practice may help to deliver patient-centered care in hemodialysis and other chronic disease settings. Podcast This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2017_02_28_Tong.mp3

There are an estimated 14,000 randomized trials published in chronic kidney disease. The most frequently reported outcomes are biochemical endpoints, rather than clinical and patient-reported outcomes including cardiovascular disease, mortality, and quality of life. While many trials have focused on optimizing kidney health, the heterogeneity and uncertain relevance of outcomes reported across trials may limit their policy and practice impact. The international Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology (SONG) Initiative was formed to identify core outcomes that are critically important to patients and health professionals, to be reported consistently across trials. We convened a SONG Implementation Workshop to discuss the implementation of core outcomes. Eighty-two patients/caregivers and health professionals participated in plenary and breakout discussions. In this report, we summarize the findings of the workshop in two main themes: socializing the concept of core outcomes, and demonstrating feasibility and usability. We outline implementation strategies and pathways to be established through partnership with stakeholders, which may bolster acceptance and reporting of core outcomes in trials, and encourage their use by end-users such as guideline producers and policymakers to help improve patient-important outcomes. ispartof: pages:1053-1068 ispartof: Kidney Int vol:94 issue:6 pages:1053-1068 ispartof: location:United States status: published

International audience; BACKGROUND: The potential for clinical trials to impact patient care may be limited if the outcomes reported vary by trial and lack direct relevance to patients. Despite the many trials conducted in kidney transplantation, premature death due to cardiovascular disease, infection, and malignancy remains high. We aimed to assess the range and consistency of outcomes reported in trials in kidney transplantation. METHODS: We searched for randomized trials conducted in kidney transplantation. We extracted the outcome measures, classified them into outcome domains, and into categories (clinical, surrogate or patient-reported outcome [PRO]). We assessed the measures used for the top 4 domains. RESULTS: Overall, 397 trials reported 12 047 outcomes measures and time points (median, 19 per trial; interquartile range, 9-42) across 106 different domains, of which 55 (52%) were surrogate, 35 (33%) clinical, and 16 (15%) PRO. The 4 most frequently reported were graft function (322 [81%] trials, 118 outcome measures), acute rejection (234 [59%], 93 measures), graft loss (215 [54%], 48 measures), and mortality (204 [51%], 51 measures). The remaining 102 domains were reported in less than 50% of trials. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality- and graft-related outcome domains were frequently reported and assessed with a multiplicity of measures. Most outcome domains were surrogate outcomes, and the reporting of relevant life-threatening complications and PRO were uncommon. Establishing core outcomes based on the shared priorities of patients/caregivers and health professionals in kidney transplantation may improve the relevance and consistency of outcome reporting in trials to better inform clinical decision making.

ObjectivesModifying lifestyle can prevent the progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD) but the specific elements which lead to favourable behaviour change are not well understood. We aimed to identify and evaluate behaviour change techniques and functions in lifestyle interventions for preventing the progression of CKD.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO.Eligibility criteriaTrials of lifestyle behaviour change interventions (including diet, physical activity, smoking and/or alcohol) published to September 2018 in adults with CKD stages 1–5.Data extraction and synthesisTrial characteristics including population, sample size, study setting, intervention, comparator, outcomes and study duration, were extracted. Study quality was independently assessed by two reviewers using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy v1 was used to identify behaviour change techniques (eg, goal setting) and the Health Behaviour Change Wheel was used to identify intervention functions (eg, education). Both were independently assessed by three reviewers.ResultsIn total, 26 studies involving 4263 participants were included. Risk of bias was high or unclear in most studies. Interventions involved diet (11), physical activity (8) or general lifestyle (7). Education was the most frequently used function (21 interventions), followed by enablement (18), training (12), persuasion (4), environmental restructuring (4), modelling (2) and incentivisation (2). The most common behaviour change techniques were behavioural instruction (23 interventions), social support (16), behavioural demonstration (13), feedback on behaviour (12) and behavioural practice/rehearsal (12). Eighteen studies (69%) showed a significant improvement in at least one primary outcome, all of which included education, persuasion, modelling and incentivisation.ConclusionLifestyle behaviour change interventions for CKD patients frequently used education, goal setting, feedback, monitoring and social support. The most promising interventions included education and used a variety of intervention functions (persuasion, modelling and incentivisation).PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019106053.

Background: Children with chronic kidney disease (CKD), requiring dialysis or kidney transplantation, have a mortality rate of up to 30-fold higher than the general aged-matched population, and severely impaired quality of life. Symptoms such as fatigue and pain are prevalent and debilitating. Children with CKD are at risk of cognitive impairment, and poorer educational, vocational, and psychosocial outcomes compared with their well peers, which have consequences through to adulthood. Treatment regimens for children with CKD are long-term, complex, and highly intrusive. While many trials have been conducted to improve outcomes in children with CKD, the outcomes measured and reported are often not relevant to patients and clinicians, and are highly variable. These problems can diminish the value of trials as a means to improve the lives of children with CKD. The Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology-Children and Adolescents (SONG-Kids) study aims to develop a core outcome set for trials in children and adolescents with any stage of CKD that is based on the shared priorities of all stakeholders. Methods/Design: SONG-Kids involves five phases: a systematic review to identify outcomes (both domains and measures) that have been reported in randomised controlled trials involving children aged up to 21 years with CKD; focus groups (using nominal group technique) with adolescent patients and caregivers of paediatric patients (all ages) to identify outcomes that are relevant and important to patients and their family and the reasons for their choices; semistructured key informant interviews with health professionals involved in the care of children with CKD to ascertain their views on establishing core outcomes in paediatric nephrology; an international three-round online Delphi survey with patients, caregivers, clinicians, researchers, policy-makers, and members from industry to develop consensus on important outcome domains; and a stakeholder workshop to review and finalise the set of core outcome domains for trials in children with CKD (including nondialysis-dependent, dialysis, and kidney transplantation). Discussion: Establishing a core outcome set to be reported in all trials conducted in children with any stage of CKD will enhance the relevance, transparency, and impact of research to improve the lives of children and adolescents with CKD.

Background: While advances in treatment have dramatically improved short-term graft survival and acute rejection in kidney transplant recipients, long-term graft outcomes have not substantially improved. Transplant recipients also have a considerably increased risk of cancer, cardiovasculardisease, diabetes, and infection, which all contribute to appreciable morbidity and premature mortality. Many trials in kidney transplantation are short-term, frequently use un-validated surrogate endpoints, outcomes of uncertain relevance to patients and clinicians, and do not consistently measure and report key outcomes like death, graft loss, graft function, and adverse effects of therapy. This diminishes the value of trials in supporting treatment decisions that require individual-level multiple trade-offs between graft survival and the risk of side effects, adverse events, and mortality. The StandardizedOutcomes in Nephrology –Transplantation (SONG-Tx) initiative aims to develop a core outcome set for trials in kidney transplantation that is based on the shared priorities of all stakeholders.Methods: This will include a systematic review to identify outcomes reported in randomized trials, a Delphi survey with an international multi-stakeholder panel (patients, caregivers, clinicians, researchers, policy makers, members from industry) to develop a consensus-based prioritized list of outcome domains, and a consensus workshop to review and finalize the core outcome set for trials in kidney transplantation.Conclusions: Developing and implementing a core outcome set to be reported, at a minimum, in all kidney transplantation trials will improve the transparency, quality and relevance of research; to enable kidney transplant recipients and their clinicians to make better informed treatment decisions for improved patient outcomes.

Background In the context of clinical research, investigators have historically selected the outcomes that they consider to be important, but these are often discordant with patients' priorities. Efforts to define and report patient-centered outcomes are gaining momentum, though little work has been done in nephrology. We aimed to identify patient and caregiver priorities for outcomes in hemodialysis. Study Design Nominal group technique. Setting & Participants Patients on hemodialysis therapy and their caregivers were purposively sampled from 4 dialysis units in Australia (Sydney and Melbourne) and 7 dialysis units in Canada (Calgary). Methodology Identification and ranking of outcomes. Analytical Approach Mean rank score (of 10) for top 10 outcomes and thematic analysis. Results 82 participants (58 patients, 24 caregivers) aged 24 to 87 (mean, 58.4) years in 12 nominal groups identified 68 outcomes. The 10 top-ranked outcomes were fatigue/energy (mean rank score, 4.5), survival (defined by patients as resilience and coping; 3.7), ability to travel (3.6), dialysis-free time (3.3), impact on family (3.2), ability to work (2.5), sleep (2.3), anxiety/stress (2.1), decrease in blood pressure (2.0), and lack of appetite/taste (1.9). Mortality ranked only 14th and was not regarded as the complement of survival. Caregivers ranked mortality, anxiety, and depression higher than patients, whereas patients ranked ability to work higher. Four themes underpinned their rankings: living well, ability to control outcomes, tangible and experiential relevance, and severity and intrusiveness. Limitations Only English-speaking participants were eligible. Conclusions Although trials in hemodialysis have typically focused on outcomes such as death, adverse events, and biological markers, patients tend to prioritize outcomes that are more relevant to their daily living and well-being. Researchers need to consider interventions that are likely to improve these outcomes and measure and report patient-relevant outcomes in trials, and clinicians may become more patient-orientated by using these outcomes in their clinical encounters.

Introduction Les essais randomises en recherche biomedicale permettent des prises de decision basees sur des preuves scientifiques lorsqu’ils mesurent et rapportent de maniere homogene des criteres de jugement pertinents pour tous les utilisateurs de la recherche. Le but de cette etude est d’evaluer l’homogeneite et la coherence des criteres de jugement rapportes dans les essais d’hemodialyse. Materiels et methodes Nous avons evalue les essais inclus dans toutes les revues systematiques Cochrane publiees jusqu’au 29 aout 2016 et les essais publiees et enregistres dans ClinicalTrials.gov depuis janvier 2011. Tous les essais interessant les adultes hemodialyses, quel que soit le type d’intervention etudiee, ont ete inclus. Nous avons evalue les caracteristiques detaillees et la frequence d’utilisation de chacun des criteres de jugement. Resultats Nous avons inclus 362 essais et analyse 10 713 mesures de criteres de jugement (mediane : 21 par essai, ecart interquartile : 10 a 39). Ces criteres ont ete classes en 81 domaines parmi lesquels 42 (52 %) etaient des criteres de substitution, 25 (31 %) des criteres cliniques et 14 (17 %) des criteres rapportes par le patient. Les cinq domaines les plus frequemment rapportes etaient tous des criteres de substitution : phosphore (125 [35 %] des essais), dose de dialyse (120 [33 %]), anemie (115 [32 %]), marqueurs de l’inflammation (114 [31 %]) et calcium (109 [30 %]). La mortalite, les evenements cardiovasculaires et la qualite de vie etaient rarement rapportes dans les essais (73 [20 %], 44 [12 %] et 32 [9 %], respectivement). Les criteres de jugement les plus frequemment rapportes etaient mesures de maniere heterogene entre les essais sans amelioration au cours du temps. Discussion Les criteres de jugement rapportes dans les essais incluant des adultes hemodialyses evaluent sont principalement des biomarqueurs plutot que des criteres cliniques ou centres sur le patient. Ces criteres sont multiples et heterogenes a chaque niveau de mesure : domaine, metrique, methode d’agregation et delai d’analyse. Cela rend difficile la synthese de resultats entre les essais et la pertinence des criteres rapportes est parfois discutable. Conclusion L’optimisation de l’homogeneite et de la coherence des criteres de jugement requiert leur standardisation dans les essais cliniques. Groupe(s) de travail SONG-HD.