No abstract

No abstract

Background:Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at risk to progress to kidney failure. We previously developed the Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE) to predict progression to kidney failure in patients referred to nephrologists.Objective:The objective of this study was to determine the ability of the KFRE to discriminate which patients will progress to kidney failure in an unreferred population.Design:A retrospective cohort study was conducted using administrative databases.Setting:This study took place in Manitoba, Canada.Measurements:Age, sex, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR) were measured.Methods:We included patients from the Diagnostic Services of Manitoba database with an eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and ACR measured between October 2006 and March 2007. Five-year kidney failure risk was predicted using the 4-variable KFRE and compared with treated kidney failure events from the Manitoba Renal Program database. Sensitivity and specificity for KFRE risk thresholds (3% and 10% over 5 years) were compared with eGFR thresholds (30 and 45 mL/min/1.73 m2).Results:Of 1512 included patients, 151 developed kidney failure over the 5-year follow-up period. The 4-variable KFRE showed a superior prognostic discrimination compared with eGFR alone (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC] values, 0.90 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.88-0.92] for KFRE vs 0.78 [95% CI: 0.74-0.83] for eGFR). At a 3% threshold over 5 years, the KFRE had a sensitivity of 97% and a specificity of 62%. At 10% risk, sensitivity was 86%, and specificity was 80%.Limitations:Only 11.7% of stage 3-5 CKD patients had simultaneous ACR measurement. The KFRE does not account for other indications for referral such as suspected glomerulonephritis, polycystic kidney disease, and recurrent stone disease.Conclusions:The KFRE has been validated in a population with a demographic and referral profile heretofore untested and performs well at predicting 5-year risk of kidney failure in a population-based sample of Manitobans with CKD stages 3 to 5. Thresholds of 3% and 10% over 5 years are sensitive, specific, and can be used in clinical decision making. Further testing of the 4-variable KFRE and these thresholds in clinical practice should be considered.

No abstract

BackgroundPreoperative frailty predicts adverse postoperative outcomes. Despite the advantages of incorporating frailty assessment into surgical settings, there is limited research on surgical healthcare professionals’ use of frailty assessment for perioperative care.MethodsHealthcare professionals caring for patients enrolled at a Canadian teaching hospital were surveyed to assess their perceptions of frailty, as well as attitudes towards and practices for frail patients. The survey contained open-ended and 5-point Likert scale questions. Responses were compared across professions using independent sample t-tests and correlations between survey items were analyzed.ResultsNurses and allied health professionals were more likely than surgeons to think frailty should play a role in planning a patient’s care (nurses vs. surgeons p = 0.008, allied health vs. surgeons p = 0.014). Very few respondents (17.5%) reported that they ‘always used’ a frailty assessment tool. Results from qualitative data analysis identified four main barriers to frailty assessment: institutional, healthcare system, professional knowledge, and patient/family barriers.ConclusionAcross all disciplines, the lack of knowledge about frailty issues was a prominent barrier to the use of frailty assessments in practice, despite clinicians’ understanding that frailty affects their patients’ outcomes. Confidence in frailty assessment tool use through education and addressing barriers to implementation may increase use and improve patient care. Healthcare professionals agree that frailty assessments should play a role in perioperative care. However, few perform them in practice. Lack of knowledge about frailty is a key barrier in the use of frailty assessments and the majority of respondents agreed that they would benefit from further training.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12871-017-0390-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

Background and Aims:The Liver Frailty Index (LFI) is a well-studied tool that evaluates frailty in patients with cirrhosis. Consisting of grip strength, chair stands, and balance testing, the LFI has been associated with increased mortality in patients awaiting liver transplant. We aimed to extend our understanding of frailty in cirrhosis by exploring the relationship between the LFI and the risk of (1) cirrhosis progression, (2) mortality, and (3) unplanned hospitalizations, in both compensated and decompensated disease. Approach and Results: Adult patients with cirrhosis from four centers inNorth America and one in India were included. Frailty was measured at baseline using the LFI and categorized as robust (LFI < 3.2), prefrail (LFI 3.2-4.5), and frail (LFI > 4.5). Progression of cirrhosis was defined by an increase in clinical stage, ranging from 1 to 5, from baseline using the D'Amico classification. Factors associated with progression, mortality, and hospitalizations were evaluated using multivariate regression models, with transplant as a competing risk. In total, 822 patients with cirrhosis were included. Average Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score was 15.5 ± 6.0. In patients with compensated cirrhosis, being frail versus robust was associated with increased risk of progression to the next cirrhosis stage or to death (HR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.14-5.29) and with an increased risk of unplanned hospitalizations (2.32; 95% CI, 1.13-4.79), after adjusting for age, sex, and MELD score. Similar HRs were observed in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. Conclusions:Frailty was an independent predictor of cirrhosis progression or death and unplanned hospitalization across patients with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis. Future studies are needed to evaluate the possibility of slowing cirrhosis disease progression by reversing or preventing frailty.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with cirrhosis experience a worsened quality of life; this may be quantified by the use of health-related QoL (HRQoL) constructs, such as the chronic liver disease questionnaire (CLDQ) and EuroQoL Group—visual analog scale (EQ-VAS). In this multicenter prospective study, we aimed to evaluate HRQoL as a predictor of unplanned hospital admission/early mortality, identify HRQoL domains most affected in cirrhosis, and identify predictors of low HRQoL in patients with cirrhosis. METHODS: Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine independent association of HRQoL with primary outcome and identify predictors of low HRQoL. HRQoL was also compared with population norms. RESULTS: In this cohort of 402 patients with cirrhosis, mean model for end-stage liver disease was 12.5 (4.9). More than 50% of the cohort had low HRQoL, considerably lower than population norms. HRQoL (measured by either CLDQ or EQ-VAS) was independently associated with the primary outcome of short-term unplanned hospitalization/mortality. Every 1-point increase in the CLDQ and every 10-point increase in the EQ-VAS reduced the risk of reaching this outcome by 30% and 13%, respectively. Patients with cirrhosis had lower HRQoL scores than population norms across all domains of the CLDQ. Younger age, female sex, current smoker, lower serum albumin, frailty, and ascites were independently associated with low CLDQ. DISCUSSION: Patients with cirrhosis experience poor HRQoL. HRQoL is independently associated with increased mortality/unplanned hospitalizations in patients with cirrhosis and could be an easy-to-use prognostic screen that patients could complete in the waiting room before their appointment.