Search

BackgroundInconsistencies 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.MethodsIn 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 rounds 2 and 3, participants rerated the outcomes after reviewing their own score, the distribution of the respondents' scores, and comments. We calculated the median, mean, and proportion rating 7 to 9 (critically important), and analyzed comments thematically.ResultsOne thousand eighteen participants (461 [45%] patients/caregivers and 557 [55%] health professionals) from 79 countries completed round 1, and 779 (77%) completed round 3. The top 8 outcomes that met the consensus criteria in round 3 (mean, ≥7.5; median, ≥8; 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 6 outcomes (mean difference of 0.5 or more): skin cancer, surgical complications, cognition, blood pressure, depression, and ability to work. We identified 5 themes: capacity to control and inevitability, personal relevance, debilitating repercussions, gaining awareness of risks, and addressing knowledge gaps.ConclusionsGraft 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.

Evidence-informed decision making in clinical care and policy in nephrology is undermined by trials that selectively report a large number of heterogeneous outcomes, many of which are not patient centered. The Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) Initiative convened an international consensus workshop on November 7, 2015, to discuss the identification and implementation of a potential core outcome set for all trials in hemodialysis. The purpose of this article is to report qualitative analyses of the workshop discussions, describing the key aspects to consider when establishing core outcomes in trials involving patients on hemodialysis therapy. Key stakeholders including 8 patients/caregivers and 47 health professionals (nephrologists, policymakers, industry, and researchers) attended the workshop. Attendees suggested that identifying core outcomes required equitable stakeholder engagement to ensure relevance across patient populations, flexibility to consider evolving priorities over time, deconstruction of language and meaning for conceptual consistency and clarity, understanding of potential overlap and associations between outcomes, and an assessment of applicability to the range of interventions in hemodialysis. For implementation, they proposed that core outcomes must have simple, inexpensive, and validated outcome measures that could be used in clinical care (quality indicators) and trials (including pragmatic trials) and endorsement by regulatory agencies. Integrating these recommendations may foster acceptance and optimize the uptake and translation of core outcomes in hemodialysis, leading to more informative research, for better treatment and improved patient outcomes.

Background: A randomized trial (the Alberta Vascular Risk Reduction Community Pharmacy Project) showed that a community pharmacist-led intervention was efficacious for reducing cardiovascular (CV) risk. However, the cost of this strategy is unknown.Objectives: We examined the short- and long-term cost of a pharmacist-led intervention to reduce CV risk compared to usual care.Methods: We conducted a trial-based cost analysis from the perspective of a publicly funded healthcare system. Over 3 and 12 months of follow-up, we examined specific intervention costs (pharmacy claims), related intervention costs (laboratory tests and medications), and ongoing healthcare costs (physician claims, emergency department visits, and hospital admissions). We also used the validated CV Disease Policy Model-Canada to estimate the long-term effects.Results: A total of 684 participants (mean age 62, 57% male) were included. Overall, there were no significant differences in healthcare costs at 3 or 12 months between the usual care and intervention groups (P = .127). The CV disease-related healthcare cost of managing a patient over a lifetime was estimated to be Can$45 530 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 45 460-45 580) and Can$40 750 (95% UI, 37 780-43 620) in usual care and intervention groups, respectively, an incremental cost savings of Can$4770 per patient (95% UI, 1900-7760). The intervention dominated usual care (better outcomes and lower costs) across 3-year, 5-year, 10-year, and lifetime horizons.Conclusion: This economic analysis suggests that a clinical pathway-driven pharmacist-led intervention (previously shown to reduce CV risk) was associated with similar measured healthcare costs over 1 year, and lower extrapolated healthcare costs over a patient lifetime. This strategy could be broadly implemented to realize its benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION: Japan is a developed country with high use of Internet and online platforms for health information. 'Yahoo! Answer Japan' is the most commonly used question-and-answer service in Japan. AIM: To explore the information users seek regarding breast cancer from the 'Yahoo! Answer Japan' web portal. METHODS: The 'Yahoo! Answer Japan' portal was searched for the key word 'breast cancer' and all questions searched for the period of 1 January to 31 December 2014 were obtained. The selected questions related to human breast cancer and were not advertisements or promotional material. The questions were categorized using a coding schema. High and low access of the questions were defined by the number of view-counts. RESULTS: Among the 2392 selected questions, six major categories were identified; (1) suspected breast cancer, (2) breast cancer screening, (3) treatment of breast cancer, (4) life with breast cancer, (5) prevention of breast cancer and (6) others. The highest number of questions were treatment related (28.8%) followed by suspected breast cancer-related questions (23.4%) and screening-related questions (20%). Statistical analysis revealed that the treatment-related questions were more likely to be highly accessed. CONCLUSION: Content analysis of Internet question--answer communities is important, as questions posted on these sites would serve as a rich source of direct reflection regarding the health-related information needs of the general population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The importance of engaging key stakeholders, and patients in particular, in determining research priorities has been recognized. We sought to identify the top 10 research priorities for patients with non-dialysis chronic kidney disease (CKD), their caregivers, and the clinicians and policy-makers involved in their care. Methods: We used the four-step James Lind Alliance process to establish the top 10 research priorities. A national survey of patients with non-dialysis CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate <45 mL/min/1.73 m2), their caregivers, and the clinicians and policy-makers involved in their care was conducted to identify research uncertainties. A Steering Group of patients, caregivers, clinicians and researchers combined and reduced these uncertainties to 30 through a series of iterations. Finally, a workshop with participants from across Canada (12 patients, 6 caregivers, 3 physicians, 2 nurses, 1 pharmacist and 1 policy-maker) was held to determine the top 10 research priorities, using a nominal group technique. Results: Overall, 439 individuals responded to the survey and identified 1811 uncertainties, from which the steering group determined the top 30 uncertainties to be considered at the workshop. The top 10 research uncertainties prioritized at the workshop included questions about treatments to prevent progression of kidney disease (including diet) and to treat symptoms of CKD, provider- and patient-targeted strategies for managing CKD, the impact of lifestyle on disease progression, harmful effects of medications on disease progression, optimal strategies for treatment of cardiovascular disease in CKD and for early identification of kidney disease, and strategies for equitable access to care for patients with CKD. Conclusions: We identified the top 10 research priorities for patients with CKD that can be used to guide researchers, as well as inform funders of health-care research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Objectives The objective of our study is to evaluate the effectiveness of dementia case management compared with usual care on reducing long-term care placement, hospitalization, and emergency department visits for adult patients with dementia. We also sought to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention on delaying time to long-term care placement and hospitalization. Methods We searched electronic databases supplemented by bibliographies and conference proceedings for randomized controlled trials testing the effectiveness of dementia case management in reducing resource utilization in a population of caregiver-care recipient dyads living in the community. We meta-analyzed the risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean differences of long-term care placement and the RR of hospital admissions. Pooled estimates were further stratified by study characteristics and measures of study quality. Results Seventeen studies were included in the meta-analysis. The overall pooled RR of long-term care placement was 0.94 (95% confidence interval [0.85, 1.03]; p = 0.227) for dementia case management compared with usual care. Stratification by follow-up duration indicated a statistically significant reduction in risk of long-term care placement when follow-up duration was less than 18 months (RR 0.61, 95% confidence interval [0.41, 0.91], p = 0.015). There was no effect of dementia case management compared with usual care for the other outcomes. Conclusion Dementia case management demonstrated a short-term positive effect on reducing the risk of long-term care placement among older people with dementia residing in the community. However, other sources of resource utilization and more extended effects of dementia case management on risk of long-term care placement warrant further investigation. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]