Search

Abstract Background Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) causes significant mortality and morbidity in people with impaired kidney function. Previous observational research has demonstrated reduced use of invasive management strategies and inferior outcomes in this population. Studies from the USA have suggested that disparities in care have reduced over time. It is unclear whether these findings extend to Europe and the UK. Methods Linked data from four national healthcare datasets were used to investigate management and outcomes of AMI by estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) category in England. Multivariable logistic and Cox regression models compared management strategies and outcomes by eGFR category among people with kidney impairment hospitalised for AMI between 2015–2017. Results In a cohort of 5 835 people, we found reduced odds of invasive management in people with eGFR

Background: People with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have significantly higher morbidity and mortality following myocardial infarction (MI) than the general population. Despite this, they are less likely to receive invasive management and guideline-directed medications than those without kidney disease. It is unclear why this treatment variation exists and whether or not it reflects equal and appropriate access to care for the high-risk CKD population. Aims: The aims are to (1) understand how management decisions following an MI are made for, and with, people with CKD, and (2) describe the experiences of people with CKD who have recently received MI care in England. Method: We will recruit 15–20 patients with CKD and previous MI, and 15–20 clinical staff who are involved in treatment decision-making, from 3–5 NHS hospital trusts in the UK. Purposive sampling will be used to ensure diversity in participants with respect to age, gender, ethnicity and, where relevant, profession or degree of kidney impairment. We will undertake semi-structured interviews following flexible topic guides developed for patients and clinical staff. Interviews will be audio-recorded and transcribed. Transcripts will be analysed using the six steps outlined in Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis, within an interpretivist, constructionist approach. Analysis will be primarily inductive. We will label sections of text with codes to reflect semantic or latent meaning and cluster similar codes together to derive themes which we will define and name. We will produce a report comprising themes central to MI treatment decision-making in people with CKD, illustrated with examples of data and analytic commentary, and demonstrate where our research stands within the context of the literature and wider context.

Objectives Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) case ascertainment improves for the UK general population using linked health data sets. Because care pathways for people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) change based on disease severity, AMI case ascertainment for these people may differ compared with the general population. We aimed to determine the association between CKD severity and AMI case ascertainment in two secondary care data sets, and the agreement in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) between the same data sets.Methods We used a cohort study design. Primary care records for people with CKD or risk factors for CKD, identified using the National CKD Audit (2015–2017), were linked to the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP, 2007–2017) and Hospital Episode Statistics (HES, 2007–2017) secondary care registries. People with an AMI recorded in either MINAP, HES or both were included in the study cohort. CKD status was defined using eGFR, derived from the most recent serum creatinine value recorded in primary care. Moderate–severe CKD was defined as eGFR

Abstract Background The risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) attributable to renin angiotensin aldosterone (RAAS) inhibitors and diuretics remains unclear. Methods We conducted a prospective cohort study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (2008–2015) linked to Hospital Episode Statistics – Admitted Patient Care and Office for National Statistics mortality data. Patients were included if they had one or more chronic diagnoses requiring medication. Exposed patients had a first ever prescription for RAAS inhibitors/diuretics during the study period. AKI risk associated with exposure was determined by multivariable Cox regression, propensity score-adjusted Cox regression and a prior event rate ratio (PERR) analysis. Results One hundred forty thousand nine hundred fifty-two individuals were included. Increased AKI risk in the exposed group was demonstrated in both the multivariable and propensity score-adjusted cox regressions (HR 1.23 (95% CI 1.04–1.45) and HR 1.24 (1.05–1.47) respectively). The PERR analysis provided a similar overall hazard ratio with a wider confidence interval (HR 1.29 (0.94–1.63)). The increased AKI risk in the exposed group was present only in those receiving two or more antihypertensives. Absolute AKI risk was small. Conclusions RAAS inhibitors/diuretics result in an increased risk of AKI. The absolute increase in AKI risk is small, however, and needs to be considered in the context of any potential benefits.

Objectives To determine the response process validity, feasibility of completion, acceptability and preferences for three patient-reported outcome measures that could be used in economic evaluation—the EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O—in people requiring kidney care.Design Participants were asked to ‘think-aloud’ while completing the EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O, followed by a semistructured interview. Five raters identified errors or struggles in completing the measures from the think-aloud component of the transcripts. Patient preferences for measures were extracted from the semistructured interview.Setting Eligible patients were identified through a large UK secondary care renal centre.Participants In total, 30 participants were included in the study, consisting of patients attending renal outpatients for chronic kidney disease (n=18), with a functioning kidney transplant (n=6) and receiving haemodialysis (n=6).Results Participants had few errors and struggles in completing the EQ-5D-5L (11% error rate, 3% struggle rate), ICECAP-A (2% error rate, 2% struggle rate) and ICECAP-O (4% error rate, 3% struggle rate). The main errors with the EQ-5D-5L were judgements that did not comply with the ‘your health today’ instruction. Comprehension errors were most prominent on ICECAP-O. Judgement errors were the only errors reported on ICECAP-A. Although the EQ-5D-5L had slightly more errors and struggles, it was the measure most preferred, with participants able to make a clearer link with EQ-5D-5L and their health condition.Conclusions The EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O are feasible for people requiring kidney care to complete and can be included in studies conducting economic evaluations of kidney care interventions. Further research is required to assess how health (eg, EQ-5D) and capability (eg, ICECAP) measures can be included in an economic evaluation simultaneously, as well as what ICECAP measure(s) to include when patient groups straddle the age ranges for ICECAP-A (18 years and older) and ICECAP-O (65 years and older).