The details of the search strategy.

PurposeAcute kidney injury (AKI) is frequent among in-hospital patients with high incidence and mortality. Implementing a series of evidence-based AKI care bundles may improve patient outcomes by reducing changeable standards of care. The aim of this meta-analysis was therefore to appraise the influences of AKI care bundles on patient outcomes.Materials and methodsWe explored three international databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and two Chinese databases (Wanfang Data and China National Knowledge Infrastructure) for studies from databases inception until November 30, 2022, comparing the impact of different AKI care bundles with usual standards of care in patients with or at risk for AKI. The study quality of non-randomized controlled trials and randomized controlled trials was evaluated by the NIH Study Quality Assessment Tool and the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Heterogeneity between studies was appraised by Cochran’s Q test and I2 statistics. The possible origins of heterogeneity between studies were assessed adopting Meta-regression and subgroup analyses. Funnel plot asymmetry and Egger regression and Begg correlation tests were performed to discover potential publication bias. Data analysis was completed by software (RevMan 5.3 and Stata 15.0). The primary outcome was short- or long-term mortality. The secondary outcomes involved the incidence and severity of AKI.ResultsSixteen studies containing 25,690 patients and 25,903 AKI episodes were included. In high-risk AKI patients determined by novel biomarkers, electronic alert or risk prediction score, the application of AKI care bundles significantly reduced the AKI incidence (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53–0.96; p = 0.02; I2 = 84%) and AKI severity (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39–0.89; p = 0.01; I2 = 65%). No strong evidence is available to prove that care bundles can significantly reduce mortality (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.58–2.30; p = 0.68; I2 = 97%).ConclusionsThe introduction of AKI care bundles in routine clinical practice can effectively improve the outcomes of patients with or at-risk of AKI. However, the accumulated evidence is limited and not strong enough to make definite conclusions.</div

The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess risk of bias for the randomized, controlled trials.

Red, high risk of bias; Green, low risk of bias; Yellow, uncertain risk of bias.</p

Sub-analysis of both studies with randomized controlled trials and non-randomized controlled.

Sub-analysis of both studies with randomized controlled trials and non-randomized controlled.</p

PRISMA 2020 flow diagram of study selection.

PurposeAcute kidney injury (AKI) is frequent among in-hospital patients with high incidence and mortality. Implementing a series of evidence-based AKI care bundles may improve patient outcomes by reducing changeable standards of care. The aim of this meta-analysis was therefore to appraise the influences of AKI care bundles on patient outcomes.Materials and methodsWe explored three international databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and two Chinese databases (Wanfang Data and China National Knowledge Infrastructure) for studies from databases inception until November 30, 2022, comparing the impact of different AKI care bundles with usual standards of care in patients with or at risk for AKI. The study quality of non-randomized controlled trials and randomized controlled trials was evaluated by the NIH Study Quality Assessment Tool and the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Heterogeneity between studies was appraised by Cochran’s Q test and I2 statistics. The possible origins of heterogeneity between studies were assessed adopting Meta-regression and subgroup analyses. Funnel plot asymmetry and Egger regression and Begg correlation tests were performed to discover potential publication bias. Data analysis was completed by software (RevMan 5.3 and Stata 15.0). The primary outcome was short- or long-term mortality. The secondary outcomes involved the incidence and severity of AKI.ResultsSixteen studies containing 25,690 patients and 25,903 AKI episodes were included. In high-risk AKI patients determined by novel biomarkers, electronic alert or risk prediction score, the application of AKI care bundles significantly reduced the AKI incidence (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53–0.96; p = 0.02; I2 = 84%) and AKI severity (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39–0.89; p = 0.01; I2 = 65%). No strong evidence is available to prove that care bundles can significantly reduce mortality (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.58–2.30; p = 0.68; I2 = 97%).ConclusionsThe introduction of AKI care bundles in routine clinical practice can effectively improve the outcomes of patients with or at-risk of AKI. However, the accumulated evidence is limited and not strong enough to make definite conclusions.</div

The Newcastle–Ottawa Scales were used to assess risk of bias for the cohort studies.

Each domain was rated on a scale of zero or one star, except comparability, which can be awarded up to two stars. 0, High or unclear risk of bias; 1 or 2, low risk of bias (scores ≥ 7–9, 4–6, <4 are considered low, intermediate, and high risk, respectively).</p

Baseline characteristics of the included studies.

PurposeAcute kidney injury (AKI) is frequent among in-hospital patients with high incidence and mortality. Implementing a series of evidence-based AKI care bundles may improve patient outcomes by reducing changeable standards of care. The aim of this meta-analysis was therefore to appraise the influences of AKI care bundles on patient outcomes.Materials and methodsWe explored three international databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and two Chinese databases (Wanfang Data and China National Knowledge Infrastructure) for studies from databases inception until November 30, 2022, comparing the impact of different AKI care bundles with usual standards of care in patients with or at risk for AKI. The study quality of non-randomized controlled trials and randomized controlled trials was evaluated by the NIH Study Quality Assessment Tool and the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Heterogeneity between studies was appraised by Cochran’s Q test and I2 statistics. The possible origins of heterogeneity between studies were assessed adopting Meta-regression and subgroup analyses. Funnel plot asymmetry and Egger regression and Begg correlation tests were performed to discover potential publication bias. Data analysis was completed by software (RevMan 5.3 and Stata 15.0). The primary outcome was short- or long-term mortality. The secondary outcomes involved the incidence and severity of AKI.ResultsSixteen studies containing 25,690 patients and 25,903 AKI episodes were included. In high-risk AKI patients determined by novel biomarkers, electronic alert or risk prediction score, the application of AKI care bundles significantly reduced the AKI incidence (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53–0.96; p = 0.02; I2 = 84%) and AKI severity (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39–0.89; p = 0.01; I2 = 65%). No strong evidence is available to prove that care bundles can significantly reduce mortality (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.58–2.30; p = 0.68; I2 = 97%).ConclusionsThe introduction of AKI care bundles in routine clinical practice can effectively improve the outcomes of patients with or at-risk of AKI. However, the accumulated evidence is limited and not strong enough to make definite conclusions.</div

Begg’s funnel plot of AKI incidence after using AKI care bundles.

Begg’s funnel plot of AKI incidence after using AKI care bundles.</p

AKI severity with and without AKI care bundles.

PurposeAcute kidney injury (AKI) is frequent among in-hospital patients with high incidence and mortality. Implementing a series of evidence-based AKI care bundles may improve patient outcomes by reducing changeable standards of care. The aim of this meta-analysis was therefore to appraise the influences of AKI care bundles on patient outcomes.Materials and methodsWe explored three international databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and two Chinese databases (Wanfang Data and China National Knowledge Infrastructure) for studies from databases inception until November 30, 2022, comparing the impact of different AKI care bundles with usual standards of care in patients with or at risk for AKI. The study quality of non-randomized controlled trials and randomized controlled trials was evaluated by the NIH Study Quality Assessment Tool and the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Heterogeneity between studies was appraised by Cochran’s Q test and I2 statistics. The possible origins of heterogeneity between studies were assessed adopting Meta-regression and subgroup analyses. Funnel plot asymmetry and Egger regression and Begg correlation tests were performed to discover potential publication bias. Data analysis was completed by software (RevMan 5.3 and Stata 15.0). The primary outcome was short- or long-term mortality. The secondary outcomes involved the incidence and severity of AKI.ResultsSixteen studies containing 25,690 patients and 25,903 AKI episodes were included. In high-risk AKI patients determined by novel biomarkers, electronic alert or risk prediction score, the application of AKI care bundles significantly reduced the AKI incidence (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53–0.96; p = 0.02; I2 = 84%) and AKI severity (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39–0.89; p = 0.01; I2 = 65%). No strong evidence is available to prove that care bundles can significantly reduce mortality (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.58–2.30; p = 0.68; I2 = 97%).ConclusionsThe introduction of AKI care bundles in routine clinical practice can effectively improve the outcomes of patients with or at-risk of AKI. However, the accumulated evidence is limited and not strong enough to make definite conclusions.</div

Short- and long-term mortality with and without AKI care bundles.

Short- and long-term mortality with and without AKI care bundles.</p

The ROBINS-I were used to assess risk of bias for the cohort studies.

The ROBINS-I were used to assess risk of bias for the cohort studies.</p