Structural analysis of the factors pertaining to attitudes toward and consciousness of organ donation : Comparison between Japanese and Americans

The purpose of this study is to analyze the background factors relating to opinions on organ donation through factorial and structural comparisons between Japanese and Americans. The data were obtained from responses to a questionnaire (371 Japanese and 41 Americans). The main findings are as follows: 1. Most of the factors, ‘a will for organ donation depending on a recipient’, ‘view of remains’, ‘understanding of brain death’ and so on showed significant differences between Japanese and Americans. 2. Japanese had a better understanding of brain death. On the other hand, the ratio of Americans who were willing to donate an organ was higher than that of Japanese. 3. It was revealed that “the approval of organ donation for the third person, not only for one's family” had an impact for having donor card showing the approval for organ donation. Furthermore, as underlying factors generating differences on organ transplant opinions, differences were found among Japanese between “approval of organ transplant” and the attitude assuming that oneself or a member of one's family was the person concerned with organ transplantation. There were also differences between Japanese and Americans on ideas about a view for life and death such as soul existence or view of remains. The argument for transplantation in Japan should consider these structural differences

Status of care for end stage kidney disease in countries and regions worldwide:international cross sectional survey

ObjectiveTo determine the global capacity (availability, accessibility, quality, and affordability) to deliver kidney replacement therapy (dialysis and transplantation) and conservative kidney management.DesignInternational cross sectional survey.SettingInternational Society of Nephrology (ISN) survey of 182 countries from July to September 2018.ParticipantsKey stakeholders identified by ISN's national and regional leaders.Main outcome measuresMarkers of national capacity to deliver core components of kidney replacement therapy and conservative kidney management.ResultsResponses were received from 160 (87.9%) of 182 countries, comprising 97.8% (7338.5 million of 7501.3 million) of the world's population. A wide variation was found in capacity and structures for kidney replacement therapy and conservative kidney management-namely, funding mechanisms, health workforce, service delivery, and available technologies. Information on the prevalence of treated end stage kidney disease was available in 91 (42%) of 218 countries worldwide. Estimates varied more than 800-fold from 4 to 3392 per million population. Rwanda was the only low income country to report data on the prevalence of treated disease; 5 (<10%) of 53 African countries reported these data. Of 159 countries, 102 (64%) provided public funding for kidney replacement therapy. Sixty eight (43%) of 159 countries charged no fees at the point of care delivery and 34 (21%) made some charge. Haemodialysis was reported as available in 156 (100%) of 156 countries, peritoneal dialysis in 119 (76%) of 156 countries, and kidney transplantation in 114 (74%) of 155 countries. Dialysis and kidney transplantation were available to more than 50% of patients in only 108 (70%) and 45 (29%) of 154 countries that offered these services, respectively. Conservative kidney management was available in 124 (81%) of 154 countries. Worldwide, the median number of nephrologists was 9.96 per million population, which varied with income level.ConclusionsThese comprehensive data show the capacity of countries (including low income countries) to provide optimal care for patients with end stage kidney disease. They demonstrate substantial variability in the burden of such disease and capacity for kidney replacement therapy and conservative kidney management, which have implications for policy

A double-blind, randomized, crossover study of the local tolerability of erythropoietin alfa formulations in dialysis patients

AbstractObjectives: A double-blind, randomized, crossover study was conducted to compare the local tolerability of subcutaneous injections of epoetin alfa formulated with a citrate buffer (epoetin alfa-C) versus epoetin alfa formulated with a sodium phosphate buffer (epoetin alfa-P).Methods: The study utilized a 2-periocl, 2-treatment crossover design, with no washout period. Forty-eight dialysis patients were randomly assigned to receive 6 consecutive subcutaneous injections of epoetin alfa-C or epoetin alfa-P. After completing their first treatment period, patients were switched to the alternate therapy. The primary efficacy outcome was patient-evaluated pain assessed after each injection using a verbal descriptor scale (VDS) and a visual analog scale (VAS). The duration of injection-site discomfort and the degree of redness/and itching were also assessed.Results: At all evaluation time points, subjects rated pain consistently and significantly lower (e.g. VDS day 6, p=0.034; VAS day 6; p=0.023), and the duration of pain significantly shorter with epoetin alfa-P compared to epoetin alfa-C. However, further analysis detected a significant (p≤0.10) carryover effect in several time point comparisons, suggesting that these results be interpreted in light of possible carryover effects.Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that epoetin alfa-P is associated with less, and shorter, injection-site discomfort than epoetin alfa-C.RÉSUMÉObjectifs : Étude randomisée, à double insu avec permutation visant à comparer la tolérance locale des injections sous-cutanées d'époétine alfa préparée avec un tampon de citrate (époétine alfa-C) à celle de l'époétine alfa préparée avec un tampon de phosphate de sodium (époétine alfa-P).Méthodes : L'étude a été menée selon un modèle à deux temps, deux traitements avec permutation, sans période d'épuration thérapeutique. Au total de 48 patients ont été répartis au hasard pour recevoir six injections consécutives soit d'époétine alfa-C, soit d'époétine alfa-P. Après avoir complété leur première période de traitement, les patients ont simplement été permutés pour recevoir l'autre traitement. Le premier paramètre d'efficacité évalué a été la douleur telle que décrite par le patient après chaque injection, à l'aide de l'échelle de description verbale (VDS) et de l'échelle analogique visuelle (VAS). La durée de l'inconfort au point d'injection et le degré de la rougeur/des démangeaisons ont aussi été évalués.Résultats : Pour tous les points clans le temps qui ont été évaluées, les patients ont coté l'intensité de leurs douleurs (p. ex., VDS au jour 6 : p = 0,034; VAS au jour 6 : p = 0,023) la durée de leurs douleurs comme étant significativement et constamment moindre avec l'époétine alfa-P qu'avec l'époétine alfa-C. Cependant, des analyses plus poussées ont décelé un effet différé significatif (p ≤ 0,10) pour de nombreux points clans le temps qui ont été comparés, ce qui porte à croire que ces résultats doivent être interprétés à la lumière d'un probable effet différé.Conclusions : Les résultats de cette étude incliquent que l’époétine alfa-P est associée à un inconfort au point d'injection, d'intensité et de durée moindres qu'avec l'époétine alfa-C

Patient-Level Evaluation of Community-Based, Multifactorial Intervention to Prevent Diabetic Nephropathy in Northern Alberta, Canada

Objective : To examine whether patients with type 2 diabetes enrolled in community-based clinics uniformly benefit from interventions designed to achieve multiple risk factor targets. Methods : Using data from community-based clinics in Alberta, Canada, we examined whether patients achieved targets for blood pressure (<130/80 mm Hg), A1c (≤7%), low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (<2.5 mmol/L), weight reduction, exercising, smoking cessation, and meal plan management among 235 patients between 2004 to 2007 with a 1-year follow-up. The effectiveness of the clinics was assessed by the number of targets achieved by individual patients. Patients achieving different degrees of success (0-2, 3-4, and ≥5 targets) were compared. Results : Mean age of patients at baseline was 62 years (standard deviation [SD], 12 years), 43% were female, 77% had a history of cardiovascular disease, and mean diabetes duration was 9 years (SD, 9 years). Overall, 47 patients achieved 0 to 2 targets (group 1), 132 achieved 3 to 4 targets (group 2), and 56 achieved ≥5 targets (group 3) out of 7 targets. More patients in group 1 were male and had longer diabetes duration and were more likely to smoke or use insulin. Despite reductions in A1c in all groups and similar use of antihypertensives, there was no improvement in weight or systolic blood pressure (which actually increased) in group 1. Successful patients (group 3) were more likely to report adherence with exercise and a meal plan. Conclusions : Despite equally intensive, target-driven pharmacotherapy, this community-based multifactorial intervention was less effective among a subset of patients who did not adhere to lifestyle changes. Strategies to effectively address lifestyle factors will be important as this intervention is refined

Capacity of kidney care in Canada: Identifying barriers and opportunities

Background: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a significant health problem in Canada. Understanding the capacity of the Canadian health-care system to deliver kidney care is important to provide optimal care. Objective: To compare Canada’s position in relation to countries of similar economic standing. Design: Cross-sectional electronic survey. Setting: Member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that participated in the survey. Participants: Nephrologists, other physicians, policymakers, and other professionals with relevant expertise in kidney care. Measurements: Not applicable. Methods: A survey administered by the International Society of Nephrology assessed the global capacity of kidney care delivery. Data from participating OECD countries were analyzed using descriptive statistics to compare Canada’s position. Results: Of the participating countries, most funded kidney care services (non-medication) by government (transplantation: 85%, dialysis: 81%, acute kidney injury (AKI): 77%). Most countries covered medication. Canada reported a public funding model for kidney services and a mix of public and private sources for medication. Nephrologists and nephrology trainee densities were lower in Canada compared to the median (15.33 vs. 25.82 and 1.74 vs. 3.94, respectively). CKD was recognized as a health priority in five countries, but not in Canada. Registries for CKD did not exist in most (24/26) countries. Canada followed a national strategy for noncommunicable diseases, but this was not specific to CKD care, dialysis, or transplantation. Limitations: Risks of recall bias or social desirability bias are present. Differences in a number of factors could influence discrepancies among countries and were not explored. Responses reflected the existence of practices, policies, and strategies, and may not necessarily describe action or impact. Capacity of care is not equal across all regions and provinces within Canada; however, the findings are reported on a national level and therefore may not appropriately address variability. Conclusions: This study describes the capacity for kidney care at a national level within the context of the Canadian health system. The Canadian health-care system is well funded by the government; however, there are areas that could be improved to increase the optimization of kidney care provided

Ferric pyrophosphate citrate (Triferic™) administration via the dialysate maintains hemoglobin and iron balance in chronic hemodialysis patients

Background: Administration of ferric pyrophosphate citrate (FPC, Triferic™) via hemodialysate may allow replacement of ongoing uremic and hemodialysis-related iron losses. FPC donates iron directly to transferrin, bypassing the reticuloendothelial system and avoiding iron sequestration. Methods: Two identical Phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled trials (CRUISE 1 and 2) were conducted in 599 iron-replete chronic hemodialysis patients. Patients were dialyzed with dialysate containing 2 µM FPC-iron or standard dialysate (placebo) for up to 48 weeks. Oral or intravenous iron supplementation was prohibited, and doses of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents were held constant. The primary efficacy end point was the change in hemoglobin (Hgb) concentration from baseline to end of treatment (EoT). Secondary end points included reticulocyte hemoglobin content (CHr) and serum ferritin. Results: In both trials, Hgb concentration was maintained from baseline to EoT in the FPC group but decreased by 0.4 g/dL in the placebo group (P < 0.001, combined results; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.2–0.6). Placebo treatment resulted in significantly larger mean decreases from baseline in CHr (−0.9 pg versus −0.4 pg, P < 0.001) and serum ferritin (−133.1 µg/L versus −69.7 µg/L, P < 0.001) than FPC treatment. The proportions of patients with adverse and serious adverse events were similar in both treatment groups. Conclusions: FPC delivered via dialysate during hemodialysis replaces iron losses, maintains Hgb concentrations, does not increase iron stores and exhibits a safety profile similar to placebo. FPC administered by hemodialysis via dialysate represents a paradigm shift in delivering maintenance iron therapy to hemodialysis patients