定义转诊肾移植评估作为质量指标:一项基于人群的队列研究。

IF 1.5 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease Pub Date : 2025-03-21 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20543581251317009
Kyla L Naylor, S Joseph Kim, Bin Luo, Carol Wang, Amit X Garg, Seychelle Yohanna, Darin Treleaven, Susan McKenzie, Jane Ip, Rebecca Cooper, Nadiyah Rehman, Gregory Knoll
{"title":"定义转诊肾移植评估作为质量指标:一项基于人群的队列研究。","authors":"Kyla L Naylor, S Joseph Kim, Bin Luo, Carol Wang, Amit X Garg, Seychelle Yohanna, Darin Treleaven, Susan McKenzie, Jane Ip, Rebecca Cooper, Nadiyah Rehman, Gregory Knoll","doi":"10.1177/20543581251317009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Quality indicators are required to identify gaps in care and to improve equitable access to kidney transplants. Referral to a transplant center for an evaluation is the first step toward receiving a kidney transplant, yet widespread reporting on this metric is lacking.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective was to use administrative health care databases to examine multiple ways to define referral for a kidney transplant evaluation by varying clinical inclusion criteria, definitions for end of follow-up, and statistical methodologies.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This is a population-based cohort study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>This study linked administrative health care databases in Ontario, Canada.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Adults from Ontario, Canada, with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) between April 1, 2017, and March 31, 2018.</p><p><strong>Measurements: </strong>The primary outcome was the 1-year cumulative incidence of kidney transplant referral.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We created several patient cohort definitions, varying patient transplant eligibility by health status (eg, whether patients had a recorded contraindication to transplant). We presented results by advanced CKD status (ie, patients approaching the need for dialysis vs receiving maintenance dialysis) and by method of cohort entry (ie, incident only vs prevalent and incident patients combined), resulting in 12 unique cohorts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sample size varied substantially from 414 to 4128 depending on the patient cohort definition, with the largest reduction in cohort size occurring when we restricted to a \"healthy\" (eg, no evidence of cardiovascular disease) group of patients. The 1-year cumulative incidence of transplant referral varied widely across cohorts. For example, in the incident maintenance dialysis population, the cumulative incidence varied more than 2-fold from 16.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 15.0%-17.7%) using our most inclusive cohort definition to 40.0% (95% CI = 36.0%-44.5%) using our most restrictive \"healthy\" cohort of patients.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Administrative data may have misclassified individuals' eligibility for kidney transplant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These results can be used by jurisdictions to measure transplant referral, a necessary step in kidney transplantation that is not equitable for all patients. Adoption of these indicators should drive quality improvement efforts that increase the number of patients referred for transplantation and ensure equitable access for all patient groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":9426,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease","volume":"12 ","pages":"20543581251317009"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11938484/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defining Referral for a Kidney Transplant Evaluation as a Quality Indicator: A Population-Based Cohort Study.\",\"authors\":\"Kyla L Naylor, S Joseph Kim, Bin Luo, Carol Wang, Amit X Garg, Seychelle Yohanna, Darin Treleaven, Susan McKenzie, Jane Ip, Rebecca Cooper, Nadiyah Rehman, Gregory Knoll\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20543581251317009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Quality indicators are required to identify gaps in care and to improve equitable access to kidney transplants. Referral to a transplant center for an evaluation is the first step toward receiving a kidney transplant, yet widespread reporting on this metric is lacking.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective was to use administrative health care databases to examine multiple ways to define referral for a kidney transplant evaluation by varying clinical inclusion criteria, definitions for end of follow-up, and statistical methodologies.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This is a population-based cohort study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>This study linked administrative health care databases in Ontario, Canada.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Adults from Ontario, Canada, with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) between April 1, 2017, and March 31, 2018.</p><p><strong>Measurements: </strong>The primary outcome was the 1-year cumulative incidence of kidney transplant referral.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We created several patient cohort definitions, varying patient transplant eligibility by health status (eg, whether patients had a recorded contraindication to transplant). We presented results by advanced CKD status (ie, patients approaching the need for dialysis vs receiving maintenance dialysis) and by method of cohort entry (ie, incident only vs prevalent and incident patients combined), resulting in 12 unique cohorts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sample size varied substantially from 414 to 4128 depending on the patient cohort definition, with the largest reduction in cohort size occurring when we restricted to a \\\"healthy\\\" (eg, no evidence of cardiovascular disease) group of patients. The 1-year cumulative incidence of transplant referral varied widely across cohorts. For example, in the incident maintenance dialysis population, the cumulative incidence varied more than 2-fold from 16.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 15.0%-17.7%) using our most inclusive cohort definition to 40.0% (95% CI = 36.0%-44.5%) using our most restrictive \\\"healthy\\\" cohort of patients.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Administrative data may have misclassified individuals' eligibility for kidney transplant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These results can be used by jurisdictions to measure transplant referral, a necessary step in kidney transplantation that is not equitable for all patients. Adoption of these indicators should drive quality improvement efforts that increase the number of patients referred for transplantation and ensure equitable access for all patient groups.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9426,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease\",\"volume\":\"12 \",\"pages\":\"20543581251317009\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11938484/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20543581251317009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20543581251317009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:需要质量指标来确定护理方面的差距,并改善肾脏移植的公平获取。转介到移植中心进行评估是接受肾脏移植的第一步,但缺乏关于这一指标的广泛报道。目的:目的是使用行政卫生保健数据库,通过不同的临床纳入标准、随访结束的定义和统计方法,检查多种方法来定义肾移植评估的转诊。设计:这是一项基于人群的队列研究。背景:本研究连接了加拿大安大略省的行政卫生保健数据库。患者:来自加拿大安大略省,2017年4月1日至2018年3月31日期间患有晚期慢性肾病(CKD)的成年人。测量:主要结果是1年肾脏移植转诊的累积发生率。方法:我们创建了几个患者队列定义,根据健康状况改变患者移植资格(例如,患者是否有移植禁忌症)。我们根据CKD晚期状态(即接近需要透析的患者vs接受维持性透析的患者)和队列输入(即仅发生事件vs普遍发生事件患者和合并发生事件患者)提出了结果,得出了12个独特的队列。结果:根据患者队列定义,样本量在414至4128之间变化很大,当我们限制在“健康”(例如,无心血管疾病证据)患者组时,队列大小减少最大。移植转诊的1年累积发生率在不同队列中差异很大。例如,在事件维持性透析人群中,累积发病率变化超过2倍,从最具包容性的队列定义的16.3%(95%置信区间[CI] = 15.0%-17.7%)到最具限制性的“健康”患者队列的40.0% (95% CI = 36.0%-44.5%)。局限性:管理数据可能对个人的肾移植资格进行了错误的分类。结论:这些结果可用于司法管辖区衡量移植转诊,这是肾移植的必要步骤,但并非对所有患者都公平。采用这些指标应推动质量改进工作,增加转诊移植患者的数量,并确保所有患者群体都能公平获得移植。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Defining Referral for a Kidney Transplant Evaluation as a Quality Indicator: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

Background: Quality indicators are required to identify gaps in care and to improve equitable access to kidney transplants. Referral to a transplant center for an evaluation is the first step toward receiving a kidney transplant, yet widespread reporting on this metric is lacking.

Objective: The objective was to use administrative health care databases to examine multiple ways to define referral for a kidney transplant evaluation by varying clinical inclusion criteria, definitions for end of follow-up, and statistical methodologies.

Design: This is a population-based cohort study.

Setting: This study linked administrative health care databases in Ontario, Canada.

Patients: Adults from Ontario, Canada, with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) between April 1, 2017, and March 31, 2018.

Measurements: The primary outcome was the 1-year cumulative incidence of kidney transplant referral.

Methods: We created several patient cohort definitions, varying patient transplant eligibility by health status (eg, whether patients had a recorded contraindication to transplant). We presented results by advanced CKD status (ie, patients approaching the need for dialysis vs receiving maintenance dialysis) and by method of cohort entry (ie, incident only vs prevalent and incident patients combined), resulting in 12 unique cohorts.

Results: Sample size varied substantially from 414 to 4128 depending on the patient cohort definition, with the largest reduction in cohort size occurring when we restricted to a "healthy" (eg, no evidence of cardiovascular disease) group of patients. The 1-year cumulative incidence of transplant referral varied widely across cohorts. For example, in the incident maintenance dialysis population, the cumulative incidence varied more than 2-fold from 16.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 15.0%-17.7%) using our most inclusive cohort definition to 40.0% (95% CI = 36.0%-44.5%) using our most restrictive "healthy" cohort of patients.

Limitations: Administrative data may have misclassified individuals' eligibility for kidney transplant.

Conclusions: These results can be used by jurisdictions to measure transplant referral, a necessary step in kidney transplantation that is not equitable for all patients. Adoption of these indicators should drive quality improvement efforts that increase the number of patients referred for transplantation and ensure equitable access for all patient groups.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.90%
发文量
84
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Canadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease, the official journal of the Canadian Society of Nephrology, is an open access, peer-reviewed online journal that encourages high quality submissions focused on clinical, translational and health services delivery research in the field of chronic kidney disease, dialysis, kidney transplantation and organ donation. Our mandate is to promote and advocate for kidney health as it impacts national and international communities. Basic science, translational studies and clinical studies will be peer reviewed and processed by an Editorial Board comprised of geographically diverse Canadian and international nephrologists, internists and allied health professionals; this Editorial Board is mandated to ensure highest quality publications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信