Primary care physicians' perceptions of barriers and facilitators to management of chronic kidney disease: A mixed methods study.

BackgroundGiven the high prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD), primary care physicians (PCPs) frequently manage early stage CKD. Nonetheless, there are challenges in providing optimal CKD care in the primary care setting. This study sought to understand PCPs' perceptions of barriers and facilitators to the optimal management of CKD.Study designMixed methods study.Settings and participantsCommunity-based PCPs in four US cities: Baltimore, MD; St. Louis, MO; Raleigh, NC and San Francisco, CA.MethodologyWe used a self-administered questionnaire and conducted 4 focus groups of PCPs (n = 8 PCPs/focus group) in each city to identify key barriers and facilitators to management of patients with CKD in primary care.Analytic approachWe conducted descriptive analyses of the survey data. Major themes were identified from audio-recorded interviews that were transcribed and coded by the research team.ResultsOf 32 participating PCPs, 31 (97%) had been in practice for >10 years, and 29 (91%) practiced in a non-academic setting. PCPs identified multiple barriers to managing CKD in primary care including at the level of the patient (e.g., low awareness of CKD, poor adherence to treatment recommendations), the provider (e.g., staying current with CKD guidelines), and the health care system (e.g., inflexible electronic medical record, limited time and resources). PCPs desired electronic prompts and lab decision support, concise guidelines, and healthcare financing reform to improve CKD care.ConclusionsPCPs face substantial but modifiable barriers in providing care to patients with CKD. Interventions that address these barriers and promote facilitative tools may improve PCPs' effectiveness and capacity to care for patients with CKD

Low birth weight is associated with chronic kidney disease only in men

The association of low birth weight and chronic kidney disease was examined in a screened volunteer population by the National Kidney Foundation's Kidney Early Evaluation Program. This is a free, community-based health program enrolling individuals aged 18 years or older with diabetes, hypertension, or a family history of kidney disease, diabetes, or hypertension. Self-reported birth weight was categorized and chronic kidney disease defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 60 ml per min per 1.73 m2 or a urine albumin/creatinine ratio ≥30 mg/g. Among 12 364 participants, 15% reported a birth weight less than 2500 g. In men, significant corresponding odds ratios were found after adjustment for demographic characteristics and health conditions to this low birth weight and chronic kidney disease, but there was no association among women. There was no significant interaction between birth weight and race for either gender. Efforts to clinically understand the etiology of this association and potential means of prevention are essential to improving public health

Comparison of quality-of-care measures in U.S. patients with end-stage renal disease secondary to lupus nephritis vs. other causes

BACKGROUND: Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) due to lupus nephritis (LN-ESRD) may be followed by multiple providers (nephrologists and rheumatologists) and have greater opportunities to receive recommended ESRD-related care. We aimed to examine whether LN-ESRD patients have better quality of ESRD care compared to other ESRD patients. METHODS: Among incident patients (7/05–9/11) with ESRD due to LN (n = 6,594) vs. other causes (n = 617,758), identified using a national surveillance cohort (United States Renal Data System), we determined the association between attributed cause of ESRD and quality-of-care measures (pre-ESRD nephrology care, placement on the deceased donor kidney transplant waitlist, and placement of permanent vascular access). Multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs). RESULTS: LN-ESRD patients were more likely than other ESRD patients to receive pre-ESRD care (71% vs. 66%; OR = 1.68, 95% CI 1.57-1.78) and be placed on the transplant waitlist in the first year (206 vs. 86 per 1000 patient-years; HR = 1.42, 95% CI 1.34–1.52). However, only 24% had a permanent vascular access (fistula or graft) in place at dialysis start (vs. 36%; OR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.59–0.67). CONCLUSIONS: LN-ESRD patients are more likely to receive pre-ESRD care and have better access to transplant, but are less likely to have a permanent vascular access for dialysis, than other ESRD patients. Further studies are warranted to examine barriers to permanent vascular access placement, as well as morbidity and mortality associated with temporary access, in patients with LN-ESRD

Early chronic kidney disease: diagnosis, management and models of care

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is prevalent in many countries, and the costs associated with the care of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are estimated to exceed US$1 trillion globally. The clinical and economic rationale for the design of timely and appropriate health system responses to limit the progression of CKD to ESRD is clear. Clinical care might improve if early-stage CKD with risk of progression to ESRD is differentiated from early-stage CKD that is unlikely to advance. The diagnostic tests that are currently used for CKD exhibit key limitations; therefore, additional research is required to increase awareness of the risk factors for CKD progression. Systems modelling can be used to evaluate the impact of different care models on CKD outcomes and costs. The US Indian Health Service has demonstrated that an integrated, system-wide approach can produce notable benefits on cardiovascular and renal health outcomes. Economic and clinical improvements might, therefore, be possible if CKD is reconceptualized as a part of primary care. This Review discusses which early CKD interventions are appropriate, the optimum time to provide clinical care, and the most suitable model of care to adopt

Integrating mindfulness into a routine schedule: the role of mobile-health mindfulness applications

With the increasing popularity of both mindfulness-based interventions and smartphone apps focusing on (mental) health, the question arises if mindfulness apps are a useful way of teaching mindfulness. We explore this question by reviewing the advantages and disadvantages of administering mindfulness via apps and by challenging the view that mindfulness can only be taught in face-to-face formats. Additionally, we review randomized-controlled studies which provide evidence that mindfulness apps can bring about positive effects on a range of outcomes. Because of the sparse literature on mindfulness apps—especially regarding health behaviors—we conclude by delineating some future directions for exploring the use and efficacy of mindfulness apps