Establishing Core Outcome Domains in Hemodialysis: Report of the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) Consensus Workshop

Evidence-informed decision making in clinical care and policy in nephrology is undermined by trials that selectively report a large number of heterogeneous outcomes, many of which are not patient centered. The Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) Initiative convened an international consensus workshop on November 7, 2015, to discuss the identification and implementation of a potential core outcome set for all trials in hemodialysis. The purpose of this article is to report qualitative analyses of the workshop discussions, describing the key aspects to consider when establishing core outcomes in trials involving patients on hemodialysis therapy. Key stakeholders including 8 patients/caregivers and 47 health professionals (nephrologists, policymakers, industry, and researchers) attended the workshop. Attendees suggested that identifying core outcomes required equitable stakeholder engagement to ensure relevance across patient populations, flexibility to consider evolving priorities over time, deconstruction of language and meaning for conceptual consistency and clarity, understanding of potential overlap and associations between outcomes, and an assessment of applicability to the range of interventions in hemodialysis. For implementation, they proposed that core outcomes must have simple, inexpensive, and validated outcome measures that could be used in clinical care (quality indicators) and trials (including pragmatic trials) and endorsement by regulatory agencies. Integrating these recommendations may foster acceptance and optimize the uptake and translation of core outcomes in hemodialysis, leading to more informative research, for better treatment and improved patient outcomes

A922 Sequential measurement of 1 hour creatinine clearance (1-CRCL) in critically ill patients at risk of acute kidney injury (AKI)

Meeting abstrac

Establishing Core Outcome Domains in Hemodialysis: Report of the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) Consensus Workshop

International audienceEvidence-informed decision making in clinical care and policy in nephrology is undermined by trials that selectively report a large number of heterogeneous outcomes, many of which are not patient centered. The Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) Initiative convened an international consensus workshop on November 7, 2015, to discuss the identification and implementation of a potential core outcome set for all trials in hemodialysis. The purpose of this article is to report qualitative analyses of the workshop discussions, describing the key aspects to consider when establishing core outcomes in trials involving patients on hemodialysis therapy. Key stakeholders including 8 patients/caregivers and 47 health professionals (nephrologists, policymakers, industry, and researchers) attended the workshop. Attendees suggested that identifying core outcomes required equitable stakeholder engagement to ensure relevance across patient populations, flexibility to consider evolving priorities over time, deconstruction of language and meaning for conceptual consistency and clarity, understanding of potential overlap and associations between outcomes, and an assessment of applicability to the range of interventions in hemodialysis. For implementation, they proposed that core outcomes must have simple, inexpensive, and validated outcome measures that could be used in clinical care (quality indicators) and trials (including pragmatic trials) and endorsement by regulatory agencies. Integrating these recommendations may foster acceptance and optimize the uptake and translation of core outcomes in hemodialysis, leading to more informative research, for better treatment and improved patient outcomes

Establishing Core Cardiovascular Outcome Measures for Trials in Hemodialysis: Report of an International Consensus Workshop

International audienceCardiovascular disease (CVD) affects more than two-thirds of patients receiving hemodialysis and is the leading cause of death in this population, yet CVD outcomes are infrequently and inconsistently reported in trials in patients receiving hemodialysis. As part of the Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology-Haemodialysis (SONG-HD) initiative, we convened a consensus workshop to discuss the potential use of myocardial infarction and sudden cardiac death as core outcome measures for CVD for use in all trials in people receiving hemodialysis. Eight patients or caregivers and 46 health professionals from 15 countries discussed selection and implementation of the proposed core outcome measures. Five main themes were identified: capturing specific relevance to the hemodialysis population (acknowledging prevalence, risk, severity, unique symptomology, and pathophysiology), the dilemmas in using composite outcomes, addressing challenges in outcome definitions (establishing a common definition and addressing uncertainty in the utility of biomarkers in hemodialysis), selecting a meaningful metric for decision making (to facilitate comparison across trials), and enabling and incentivizing implementation (by ensuring that cardiologists are involved in the development and integration of the outcome measure into registries, trial design, and reporting guidelines). Based on these themes, participants supported the use of myocardial infarction and sudden cardiac death as core outcome measures of CVD to be reported in all hemodialysis trials

Report of the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) Consensus Workshop on Establishing a Core Outcome Measure for~Hemodialysis Vascular Access

International audienceVascular access outcomes in hemodialysis are critically important for patients and clinicians, but frequently are neither patient relevant nor measured consistently in randomized trials. A Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) consensus workshop was convened to discuss the development of a core outcome measure for vascular access. 13 patients/caregivers and 46 professionals (clinicians, policy makers, industry representatives, and researchers) attended. Participants advocated for vascular access function to be a core outcome based on the broad applicability of function regardless of access type, involvement of a multidisciplinary team in achieving a functioning access, and the impact of access function on quality of life, survival, and other access-related outcomes. A core outcome measure for vascular access required demonstrable feasibility for implementation across different clinical and trial settings. Participants advocated for a practical and flexible outcome measure with a simple actionable definition. Integrating patients' values and preferences was warranted to enhance the relevance of the measure. Proposed outcome measures for function included "uninterrupted use of the access without the need for interventions" and "ability to receive prescribed dialysis," but not "access blood flow," which was deemed too expensive and unreliable. These recommendations will inform the definition and implementation of a core outcome measure for vascular access function in hemodialysis trials