Implementation of the Kidney Failure Risk Equation in a United States Nephrology Clinic
Résumé fourni par la source
Introduction The kidney failure risk equation (KFRE) estimates a person's risk of kidney failure and has great potential utility in clinical care. Methods We used mixed methods to explore implementation of the KFRE in nephrology clinics. Results KFRE scores were integrated into the electronic health record at Johns Hopkins Medicine and were displayed to nephrology providers. Documentation of KFRE scores increased over time, reaching 25% of eligible outpatient nephrology clinic notes at month 11. Three providers documented KFRE scores in >75% of notes, whereas 25 documented scores in <10% of notes. Surveys and focus groups of nephrology providers were conducted to probe provider views on the KFRE. Survey respondents ( n = 25) reported variability in use of KFRE for decisions such as maintaining nephrology care, referring for transplant evaluation, or providing dialysis modality education. Provider perspectives on the use of KFRE, assessed in 2 focus groups of 4 providers each, included 3 common themes as follows: (i) KFRE scores may be most impactful in the care of specific subsets of people with chronic kidney disease (CKD); (ii) there is uncertainty about KFRE risk-based thresholds to guide clinical care; and (iii) education of patients, nephrology providers, and non-nephrology providers on appropriate interpretations of KFRE scores may help maximize their utility. Conclusion Implementation of the KFRE was limited by non-uniform provider adoption of its use, and limited knowledge about utilization of the KFRE in clinical decisions.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Implementation of the Kidney Failure Risk Equation in a United States Nephrology Clinic
- Date Crossref
- 01/12/2023
- Éditeur
- Elsevier BV
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.