Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) is an important public health issue that requires early and close medical monitoring to start Renal Replacement Therapy (RRT) in the best conditions. However, in France, about 1/3 of patients start dialysis in emergency, despite the existence of CKD management guidelines. Using both quantitative and qualitative methods, we wanted to analyze the pre-dialysis care trajectory of patients with CKD and document the causes of Emergency dialysis Start (ES). To this aim, we designed a convergent mixed-method study. The quantitative component will analyze individual healthcare consumption and clinical data to identify the risk factors of ES by comparing the trajectories of patients who started dialysis in emergency in 2015 in France with those of patients who started in a planned manner and with the national recommendations. The qualitative component will explore the patients’ trajectories and identify barriers to a planned start using semi-structured interviews with patients who started dialysis in emergency and with their general practitioners and nephrologists. Using the strengths of a mixed methodology, this study will bring robust and valuable findings to improve the care of CKD patients.

Kidney transplantation is the best renal replacement therapy (medically and economically) for eligible patients with end-stage kidney disease. Studies in some French regions and in other countries suggest a lower access to the kidney transplant waiting listing and also to kidney transplantation, once waitlisted, for women. Using a mixed methods approach, this study aims to precisely understand these potential sex disparities and their causes. The quantitative study will explore the geographic disparities, compare the determinants of access to the waiting list and to kidney transplantation, and compare the reasons and duration of inactive status on the waiting list in women and men at different scales (national, regional, departmental, and census-block). The qualitative study will allow describing and comparing women’s and men’s views about their disease and transplantation, as well as nephrologists’ practices relative to the French national guidelines on waiting list registration. This type of study is important in the current societal context in which the reduction of sex/gender-based inequalities is a major social expectation.

RésuméL'hôpital fait face à de nombreux changements dans un contexte économique mouvant. Nous ferons référence ici principalement au changement d'ordre organisationnel qu'est l'instauration des pôles d'activités médicales. Nous nous intéresserons dans cet article aux modalités d'institutionnalisation de cette nouvelle structure. Il s'agira alors d'étudier quels sont les mécanismes à l'oeuvre. La théorie néo-institutionnelle (TNI) en ce qu'elle s'intéresse aux mécanismes socio-cognitifs nous apporte un éclairage utile à la compréhension de ces transformations.Cependant, la TNI essentiellement focalisée autour des mécanismes discursifs de création de règles, de normes et autres routines, ne nous donne guère d'indication quant à la conduite opératoire du changement. Nous mobiliserons alors une approche par les projets afin d'analyser de manière plus pragmatique le processus à l'oeuvre. Nous adoptons la perspective actionniste pour laquelle les objets loin d'être neutres permettent de faire émerger le collectif au travers des interactions qui le recompose.

Background: Effective collaboration between general practitioners (GP) and nephrologists is crucial in CKD care. We aimed to analyse GPs’ and nephrologists’ presence and involvement in CKD care and assess how they intertwine to shape patients’ trajectories. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study that included all patients with CKD who started dialysis in France in 2015 (the REIN registry) and a sample of nephrologists and GPs. We quantified professionals’ presence through patients’ reimbursed healthcare from the French National Health Data System, 2 years before and 1 year after dialysis start. Involvement in CKD care was derived from the nephrologists’ and GPs’ interviews. Results: Among 8856 patients included, nephrologists’ presence progressively increased from 29% to 67% of patients with a contact during the 2 years before dialysis start. However, this was partly dependent on the GPs’ referral practices. Interviews revealed that GPs initially controlled the therapeutic strategy on their own. Although unease grew with CKD’s management complexity, reducing their involvement in favour of nephrologists, GPs’ presence remained frequent throughout the pre-dialysis period. Upon dialysis start, nephrologists’ presence and involvement became total, while GPs’ greatly decreased (48% of patients with a contact at month 12 after dialysis start). Collaboration was smooth when GPs maintained contact with patients and could contribute to their care through aspects of their specialty they valued. Conclusions: This mixed-methods study shows presences and forms of involvement of GPs and nephrologists in CKD care adjusting along the course of CKD and unveils the mechanisms at play in their collaboration.