19 research outputs found
Special Feature CKD as a Model for Improving Chronic Disease Care through Electronic Health Records
Abstract Electronic health records have the potential to improve the care of patients with chronic medical conditions. CKD provides a unique opportunity to show this potential: the disease is common in the United States, there is significant room to improve CKD detection and management, CKD and its related conditions are defined primarily by objective laboratory data, CKD care requires collaboration by a diverse team of health care professionals, and improved access to CKD-related data would enable identification of a group of patients at high risk for multiple adverse outcomes. However, to realize the potential for improvement in CKD-related care, electronic health records will need to provide optimal functionality for providers and patients and interoperability across multiple health care settings. The goal of the National Kidney Disease Education Program Health Information Technology Working Group is to enable and support the widespread interoperability of data related to kidney health among health care software applications to optimize CKD detection and management. Over the course of the last 2 years, group members met to identify general strategies for using electronic health records to improve care for patients with CKD. This paper discusses these strategies and provides general goals for appropriate incorporation of CKD-related data into electronic health records and corresponding design features that may facilitate (1) optimal care of individual patients with CKD through improved access to clinical information and decision support, (2) clinical quality improvement through enhanced population management capabilities, (3) CKD surveillance to improve public health through wider availability of population-level CKD data, and (4) research to improve CKD management practices through efficiencies in study recruitment and data collection. Although these strategies may be most effectively applied in the setting of CKD, because it is primarily defined by laboratory abnormalities and therefore, an ideal computable electronic health record phenotype, they may also apply to other chronic diseases
Challenges in conducting clinical trials in nephrology:conclusions from a Kidney Disease—Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference
Factors Associated with Revision Surgery after Internal Fixation of Hip Fractures
Background: Femoral neck fractures are associated with high rates of revision surgery after management with internal fixation. Using data from the Fixation using Alternative Implants for the Treatment of Hip fractures (FAITH) trial evaluating methods of internal fixation in patients with femoral neck fractures, we investigated associations between baseline and surgical factors and the need for revision surgery to promote healing, relieve pain, treat infection or improve function over 24 months postsurgery. Additionally, we investigated factors associated with (1) hardware removal and (2) implant exchange from cancellous screws (CS) or sliding hip screw (SHS) to total hip arthroplasty, hemiarthroplasty, or another internal fixation device. Methods: We identified 15 potential factors a priori that may be associated with revision surgery, 7 with hardware removal, and 14 with implant exchange. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses in our investigation. Results: Factors associated with increased risk of revision surgery included: female sex, [hazard ratio (HR) 1.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-2.50; P = 0.001], higher body mass index (fo
IND safety reporting: final results and best practices, from the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative IND Safety Advancement Project.
Recommended from our members
Recommendations for data monitoring committees from the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative.
Background/aims Use of data monitoring committees to oversee clinical trials was first proposed nearly 50 years ago. Since then, data monitoring committee use in clinical trials has increased and evolved. Nonetheless, there are no well-defined criteria for determining the need for a data monitoring committee, and considerable variability exists in data monitoring committee composition and conduct. To understand and describe the role and function of data monitoring committees, and establish best practices for data monitoring committee trial oversight, the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative-a public-private partnership to improve clinical trials-launched a multi-stakeholder project. Methods The data monitoring committee project team included 16 individuals charged with (1) clarifying the purpose of data monitoring committees, (2) identifying best practices for independent data monitoring committee conduct, (3) describing effective communication practices, and (4) developing strategies for training data monitoring committee members. Evidence gathering included a survey, a series of focus group discussions, and a 2-day expert meeting aimed at achieving consensus opinions that form the foundation of our data monitoring committee recommendations. Results We define the role of the data monitoring committee as an advisor to the research sponsor on whether to continue, modify, or terminate a trial based on periodic assessment of trial data. Data monitoring committees should remain independent from the sponsor and be composed of members with no relevant conflicts of interest. Representation on a data monitoring committee generally should include at least one clinician with expertise in the therapeutic area being studied, a biostatistician, and a designated chairperson who has experience with clinical trials and data monitoring. Data monitoring committee meetings are held periodically to evaluate the unmasked data from ongoing trials, but the content and conduct of meetings may vary depending on specific goals or topics for deliberation. To guide data monitoring committee conduct and communication plans, a charter consistent with the protocols research design and statistical analysis plan should be developed and agreed upon by the sponsor and the data monitoring committee prior to patient enrollment. We recommend concise and flexible charters that explain roles, responsibilities, operational issues, and how data monitoring committee recommendations are generated and communicated. The demand for data monitoring committee members appears to exceed the current pool of qualified individuals. To prepare a new generation of trained data monitoring committee members, we encourage a combination of didactic educational programs, practical experience, and skill development through apprenticeships and mentoring by experienced data monitoring committee members. Conclusion Our recommendations address data monitoring committee use, conduct, communication practices, and member preparation and training. Furthermore recommendations form the foundation for ongoing efforts to improve clinical trial oversight and enhance the safety and integrity of clinical research. These recommendations serve as a call to action for implementation of best practices that benefit study participants, study sponsors, and society
Pragmatic Trials in Maintenance Dialysis: Perspectives from the Kidney Health Initiative
Overcoming Barriers in Kidney Health-Forging a Platform for Innovation
Innovation in kidney diseases is not commensurate with the effect of these diseases on human health and mortality or innovation in other key therapeutic areas. A primary cause of the dearth in innovation is that kidney diseases disproportionately affect a demographic that is largely disenfranchised, lacking sufficient advocacy, public attention, and funding. A secondary and likely consequent cause is that the existing infrastructure supporting nephrology research pales in comparison with those for other internal medicine specialties, especially cardiology and oncology. Citing such inequities, however, is not enough. Changing the status quo will require a coordinated effort to identify and redress the existing deficits. Specifically, these deficits relate to the need to further develop and improve the following: understanding of the disease mechanisms and pathophysiology, patient engagement and activism, clinical trial infrastructure, and investigational clinical trial designs as well as coordinated efforts among critical stakeholders. This paper identifies potential solutions to these barriers, some of which are already underway through the Kidney Health Initiative. The Kidney Health Initiative is unique and will serve as a current and future platform from which to overcome these barriers to innovation in nephrology