Limited data exist regarding uropathogen resistance in randomized controlled trials of urinary tract infection (UTI) prevention and antibiotic prophylaxis. To assess the effect of prophylaxis on developing a multidrug-resistant first recurrent UTI among children with vesicoureteral reflux. Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialized Register through May 25, 2017. Randomized controlled trials of patients ≤18 years of age with a history of vesicoureteral reflux being treated with continuous antibiotic prophylaxis compared with no treatment or placebo with available antibiotic sensitivity profiles. Two independent observers abstracted data and assessed quality and validity per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Adjusted meta-analyses were performed by using a mixed-effects logistic regression model. One thousand two hundred and ninety-nine patients contributed 224 UTIs. Patients treated with prophylaxis were more likely to have a multidrug-resistant infection (33% vs 6%, P < .001) and were more likely to receive broad-spectrum antibiotics (68% vs 49%, P = .004). Those receiving prophylaxis had 6.4 times the odds (95% confidence interval: 2.7-15.6) of developing a multidrug-resistant infection. One multidrug-resistant infection would develop for every 21 reflux patients treated with prophylaxis. Variables that may contribute to resistance such as medication adherence and antibiotic exposure for other illnesses could not be evaluated. Prophylaxis increases the risk of multidrug resistance among recurrent infections. This has important implications in the risk-benefit assessment of prophylaxis as a management strategy and in the selection of empirical treatment of breakthrough infections in prophylaxis patients.

There are major gaps between our growing knowledge of effective treatments for chronic kidney disease (CKD), and the delivery of evidence-based therapies to populations around the world. Although there remains a need for new, effective therapies, current evidence suggests that many patients with CKD are yet to fully realize the benefits of blood pressure-lowering drugs (with and without reducing proteinuria with renin-angiotensin system blockade), wider use of statins to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events, and better glycemic control in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. There are many barriers to optimizing evidence-based nephrology care around the world, including access to health care, affordability of treatments, consumer attitudes and circumstances, the dissemination of appropriate knowledge, the availability of expertise and structural impediments in the delivery of health care. Further investment in implementation science that addresses the major barriers to effective care in a cost-effective manner could yield both local and global benefits.

Background

Randomized trials can provide evidence to inform decision-making but this may be limited if the outcomes of importance to patients and clinicians are omitted or reported inconsistently. We aimed to assess the scope and heterogeneity of outcomes reported in trials in peritoneal dialysis (PD).

Methods

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialized Register for randomized trials in PD. We extracted all reported outcome domains and measurements and analyzed their frequency and characteristics.

Results

From 128 reports of 120 included trials, 80 different outcome domains were reported. Overall, 39 (49%) domains were surrogate, 23 (29%) patient-reported and 18 (22%) clinical. The five most commonly reported domains were PD-related infection [59 (49%) trials], dialysis solute clearance [51 (42%)], kidney function [45 (38%)], protein metabolism [44 (37%)] and inflammatory markers/oxidative stress [42 (35%)]. Quality of life was reported infrequently (4% of trials). Only 14 (12%) trials included a patient-reported outcome as a primary outcome. The median number of outcome measures (defined as a different measurement, aggregation and metric) was 22 (interquartile range 13-37) per trial. PD-related infection was the most frequently reported clinical outcome as well as the most frequently stated primary outcome. A total of 383 different measures for infection were used, with 66 used more than once.

Conclusions

Trials in PD include important clinical outcomes such as infection, but these are measured and reported inconsistently. Patient-reported outcomes are infrequently reported and nearly half of the domains were surrogate. Standardized outcomes for PD trials are required to improve efficiency and relevance.

Background

While peritoneal dialysis (PD) can offer patients more independence and flexibility compared with in-center hemodialysis, managing the ongoing and technically demanding regimen can impose a burden on patients and caregivers. Patient empowerment can strengthen capacity for self-management and improve treatment outcomes. We aimed to describe patients' and caregivers' perspectives on the meaning and role of patient empowerment in PD.

Methods

Adult patients receiving PD (n = 81) and their caregivers (n = 45), purposively sampled from nine dialysis units in Australia, Hong Kong and the USA, participated in 14 focus groups. Transcripts were thematically analyzed.

Results

We identified six themes: lacking clarity for self-management (limited understanding of rationale behind necessary restrictions, muddled by conflicting information); PD regimen restricting flexibility and freedom (burden in budgeting time, confined to be close to home); strength with supportive relationships (gaining reassurance with practical assistance, comforted by considerate health professionals, supported by family and friends); defying constraints (reclaiming the day, undeterred by treatment, refusing to be defined by illness); regaining lost vitality (enabling physical functioning, restoring energy for life participation); and personal growth through adjustment (building resilience and enabling positive outlook, accepting the dialysis regimen).

Conclusions

Understanding the rationale behind lifestyle restrictions, practical assistance and family support in managing PD promoted patient empowerment, whereas being constrained in time and capacity for life participation outside the home undermined it. Education, counseling and strategies to minimize the disruption and burden of PD may enhance satisfaction and outcomes in patients requiring PD.

Shared decision-making about clinical care options in end-stage kidney disease is limited by inconsistencies in the reporting of outcomes and the omission of patient-important outcomes in trials. Here we generated a consensus-based prioritized list of outcomes to be reported during trials in peritoneal dialysis (PD). In an international, online, three-round Delphi survey, patients/caregivers and health professionals rated the importance of outcomes using a 9-point Likert scale (with 7-9 indicating critical importance) and provided comments. Using a Best-Worst Scale (BWS), the relative importance of outcomes was estimated. Comments were analyzed thematically. In total, 873 participants (207 patients/caregivers and 666 health professionals) from 68 countries completed round one, 629 completed round two and 530 completed round three. The top outcomes were PD-related infection, membrane function, peritoneal dialysis failure, cardiovascular disease, death, catheter complications, and the ability to do usual activities. Compared with health professionals, patients/caregivers gave higher priority to six outcomes: blood pressure (mean difference, 0.4), fatigue (0.3), membrane function (0.3), impact on family/friends (0.1), peritoneal thickening (0.1) and usual activities (0.1). Four themes were identified that underpinned the reasons for ratings: contributing to treatment longevity, preserving quality of life, escalating morbidity, and irrelevant and futile information and treatment. Patients/caregivers and health professionals gave highest priority to clinical outcomes. In contrast to health professionals, patients/caregivers gave higher priority to lifestyle-related outcomes including the impact on family/friends and usual activities. Thus, prioritization will inform a core outcome set to improve the consistency and relevance of outcomes for trials in PD.

Background

Worldwide, approximately 11% of patients on dialysis receive peritoneal dialysis (PD). Whilst PD may offer more autonomy to patients compared with hemodialysis, patient and caregiver burnout, technique failure, and peritonitis remain major challenges to the success of PD. Improvements in care and outcomes are likely to be mediated by randomized trials of innovative therapies, but will be limited if the outcomes measured and reported are not important for patients and clinicians. The aim of the Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology-Peritoneal Dialysis (SONG-PD) study is to establish a set of core outcomes for trials in patients on PD based on the shared priorities of all stakeholders, so that outcomes of most relevance for decision-making can be evaluated, and that interventions can be compared reliably.

Methods

The 5 phases in the SONG-PD project are: a systematic review to identify outcomes and outcome measures that have been reported in randomized trials involving patients on PD; focus groups using nominal group technique with patients and caregivers to identify, rank, and describe reasons for their choice of outcomes; semi-structured key informant interviews with health professionals; a 3-round international Delphi survey involving a multi-stakeholder panel; and a consensus workshop to review and endorse the proposed set of core outcome domains for PD trials.

Discussion

The establishment of 3 to 5 high-priority core outcomes, to be measured and reported consistently in all trials in PD, will enable patients and clinicians to make informed decisions about the relative effectiveness of interventions, based upon outcomes of common importance.

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

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 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.

Results

One 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.

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.

Introduction

Patients with glomerular disease experience symptoms that impair their physical and mental health while managing their treatments, diet, appointments and monitoring general and specific indicators of health and their illness. We sought to describe the perspectives of patients and their care partners on self-management in glomerular disease.

Methods

We conducted 16 focus groups involving adult patients with glomerular disease (n = 101) and their care partners (n = 34) in Australia, Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, and United States. Transcripts were analyzed thematically.

Results

We identified the following 4 themes: empowered in autonomy (gaining confidence through understanding, taking ownership of disease and treatment, learning a positive health approach); overwhelmed by compounding treatment burdens (financially undermined and depleted, demoralized by side effects and harms, frustrated by fragmented and inflexible care, fear of possible drug harms); striving for stability and normalcy (making personal sacrifices, maximizing life participation, attentiveness to bodily signs, avoiding precarious health states, integrating medicines into routines); and necessity of health-sustaining relationships (buoyed by social support, fulfilling meaningful responsibilities, sharing and normalizing experiences, seeking a trusting and respectful alliance).

Conclusion

Patients with glomerular disease and their care partners value their capacity for autonomy and disease ownership, stability of their health, and relationships that support self-management. Strategies directed at strengthening these factors may increase self-efficacy and improve the care and outcomes for patients with glomerular disease.

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.