Chronic kidney disease Urological and Genital Diseases Chronic kidney disease
Conditions
Interventions
Reporting of eGFR graphs by pathology laboratories to primary care. The intervention takes the information on pathology computer systems and automatically generates a graph of kidney function over tim
Sponsors
Kidney Research UK
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: 1. Patients 65 years with eGFR <40 ml/min/1.73m2
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Participants not fulfilling inclusion criteria.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Incidence of late presentation for renal replacement therapy, defined as any patient first seen by renal services within 90 days of starting renal replacement therapy. These data will aggregate into six-month time periods, two per calendar year (Jan to June; July to December). | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| 1. The use of temporary vascular access for starting dialysis 2. Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) measured within two weeks of start of renal replacement therapy (RRT) 3. Mortality at 6 months from start of RRT in new RRT patients 4. The incident rate of end-stage renal disease, measured annually All outcomes measures are routinely collected by the UK Renal Registry with the exception of vascular access, which is collected annually as part of the Registry’s Multisite Dialysis Access Audit. Routinely collected baseline data will be provided by the UK Renal Registry and baseline referral rates supplied by participating centres. Outcomes will be measured before and during intervention roll-out at each site. The number of new patient referrals (per quarter) will be recorded as a balancing measure. These data are readily extractable from renal centre appointment systems. A qualitative evaluation will also be performed with: 1. Semi-structured interviews with laboratory staff, renal centre staff and service commissioners, in order to find out about the drivers and enablers to the intervention being implemented and also to find out what these groups think the effect of the intervention might be 2. Online survey of GPs receiving the intervention, that is, asking GPs how useful the graph is in identifying people at risk of progressive disease, and how helpful it is in providing education about what to do next 3. Focus groups of primary care staff, where questions will examine in more detail the implementation of the intervention (what happens once the graph arrives in the Practice) and what potential difference the graphs make to patient care | — |
Countries
England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, United Kingdom, Wales
Contacts
Public ContactRowena Sampson
Outcome results
None listed