Improving Evidence-Based Primary Care for Chronic Kidney Disease

Chronic Kidney Disease, Chronic Kidney Insufficiency, Chronic Renal Diseases, Chronic Renal Insufficiency, Kidney Insufficiency, Chronic

Chronic Kidney Disease, CKD, TRANSLATE, Practice Facilitation, Practice-based research, CKD Guidelines

Background: Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) is under-recognized and under-treated in primary care offices and primary care physicians are generally not familiar with treatment guidelines. Even when diagnosed properly, as a chronic condition CKD is frequently associated with co-morbidities that make effective treatment difficult due to complexity of care. Availability of Clinical Decision Support (CDS) for CKD may help promote effective, evidence-based care, but evidence suggests that CDS alone may not be sufficient for quality improvement and other interventions such as CDS plus practice facilitation may be needed. Purpose: The project aims to: 1) assess the viability of CDS in implementing evidence-based guidelines for Primary Care Practices (PCPs) and 2) to develop evidence-based practice guidelines that PCPs may use to enhance the care they provide to a difficult to manage segment of the healthcare population. Methods: This is a randomized controlled trial of point-of-care CDS plus full TRANSLATE model of practice change, versus CDS alone. The study aims to analyze differences in promoting evidence-based care in primary care practices. Thirty-six practices will be recruited for this study. Patient inclusion criteria: adult patients with estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) of \<60 and \>15ml/min/1.73m2 confirmed with repeat testing over three or more months. A process evaluation will be conducted between the CDS practices with facilitation and the CDS only practices to assess clinical outcomes of CKD progression and all-cause mortality. Lastly, a cost-effective analysis will compare the cost-to-benefit ratio of CDS alone to that of CDS plus TRANSLATE (i.e. practice facilitation) in relation to cost per quality adjusted years of life. This study is funded by NIH NIDDK under R01 mechanism starting on 07/01/2011 and ending on 06/30/2016.

The proposed trial tests the extent to which CDS plus facilitation promotes evidence-based care and improves the clinical outcomes of reduced disease progression and mortality in primary care practices. We also conduct an observational comparative effectiveness analysis of data from a larger database of electronic medical records in order to identify the most successful components of evidence-based care with respect to disease progression and all-cause mortality. Specific Aim 1: Conduct a group randomized controlled trial of point-of-care computer decision support plus the full TRANSLATE model of practice change, versus computer decision support alone in promoting evidence-based care in primary care practices for all patients with an eGFR \<60 and \> 15 ml/min/1.73m2 confirmed with repeat testing over three or more months. (CKD stages 3 and 4) Hypothesis 1.1: CDS practices using the TRANSLATE model will provide a greater degree of evidence-based guideline-concordant care for CKD than CDS only practices. Specific Aim 2: Conduct an intent-to-treat and process analysis between the CDS practices with facilitation versus the CDS only practices of the clinical outcomes of CKD progression and all-cause mortality. Hypothesis 2.1: Patients with stage 3 and 4 CKD in facilitated practices will have slower CKD progression than patients in CDS only practices. Hypothesis 2.2: Patients with stage 3 and 4 CKD in facilitated practices will have significantly lower all-cause mortality than stage 3 and 4 patients in CDS only practices. Hypothesis 2.3: The process evaluation will determine through qualitative methods the fidelity of the facilitated TRANSLATE program; find the challenges and enablers of the implementation process, the role of facilitation, and the contextual factors that contribute to TRANSLATE decisions and strategies; and translate lessons learned into pragmatic best practices for future facilitation and dissemination. Specific Aim 3: Conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis that will compare the benefit of the intervention of computer decision support alone against the intervention of computer decision support plus TRANSLATE (practice facilitation). Hypothesis 3.1 The intervention of computer decision support plus TRANSLATE is more cost-effectiveness than the intervention of computer decision support alone.

United States