Back to Search Start Over

Quality indicators of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) care in critically ill patients: a systematic review.

Authors :
Rewa, Oleksa
Villeneuve, Pierre-Marc
Lachance, Philippe
Eurich, Dean
Stelfox, Henry
Gibney, R.
Hartling, Lisa
Featherstone, Robin
Bagshaw, Sean
Rewa, Oleksa G
Eurich, Dean T
Stelfox, Henry T
Gibney, R T Noel
Bagshaw, Sean M
Source :
Intensive Care Medicine. Jun2017, Vol. 43 Issue 6, p750-763. 14p.
Publication Year :
2017

Abstract

<bold>Objectives: </bold>Renal replacement therapy is increasingly utilized in the intensive care unit (ICU), of which continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) is most common. Despite CRRT being a relatively invasive and resource intensive technology, there remains wide practice variation in its application. This systematic review appraised the evidence for quality indicators (QIs) of CRRT care in critically ill patients.<bold>Design: </bold>A comprehensive search strategy was developed and performed in five citation databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and PubMed) and select grey literature sources. Two reviewers independently screened, selected, and extracted data using standardized forms. Each retrieved citation was appraised for quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data were summarized narratively.<bold>Measurements and Main Results: </bold>Our search yielded 8374 citations, of which 133 fulfilled eligibility. This included 97 cohort studies, 24 randomized controlled trials, 10 case-control studies, and 2 retrospective medical audits. The quality of retrieved studies was generally good. In total, 18 QIs were identified that were mentioned in 238 instances. Identified QIs were classified as related to structure (n = 4, 22.2 %), care processes (n = 9, 50.0 %), and outcomes (n = 5, 27.8 %). The most commonly mentioned QIs focused on filter lifespan (n = 98), small solute clearance (n = 46), bleeding (n = 30), delivered dose (n = 19), and treatment interruption (n = 5). Across studies, the definitions used for QIs evaluating similar constructs varied considerably. When identified, QIs were most commonly described as important (n = 144, 48.3 %), scientifically acceptable (n = 32, 10.7 %), and useable and/or feasible (n = 17, 5.7 %) by their primary study authors.<bold>Conclusions: </bold>We identified numerous potential QIs of CRRT care, characterized by heterogeneous definitions, varying quality of derivation, and limited evaluation. Further study is needed to prioritize a concise inventory of QIs to measure, improve, and benchmark CRRT care for critically ill patients.<bold>Systematic Review Registration: </bold>PROSPERO CRD42015015530. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
03424642
Volume :
43
Issue :
6
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
Intensive Care Medicine
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
123518832
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-016-4579-x