José Espejo-Guerrero, Luis Salar-Ibáñez, Eduardo Satué-de-Velasco, Lourdes Martínez-Berganza-Asensio, Noemí Pérez-León
{"title":"社区药房慢性肾脏病筛查:crierface项目。","authors":"José Espejo-Guerrero, Luis Salar-Ibáñez, Eduardo Satué-de-Velasco, Lourdes Martínez-Berganza-Asensio, Noemí Pérez-León","doi":"10.1093/ijpp/riaf088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the outcomes of chronic kidney disease (CKD) screening in community pharmacies through creatinine measurement and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation in patients meeting specific risk criteria.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a multicenter observational study. People who entered participating pharmacies for any reason and met the inclusion criterion of not having a CKD diagnosis were invited to participate in the study. If they agreed, the pharmacist conducted a point-of-care blood creatinine test, and the GFR was calculated using the CKD-EPI formula. Those with a positive CKD indicator (<45 ml/min/1.73 m2) were referred to their general practitioner (GP) for evaluation. People with a GFR > 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 were not considered to have CKD. Those with a GFR between 45 and 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 were asked to return for reassessment 1 month later. Those with a GFR 45 < ml/min/1.73 m2 were then considered CKD-positive and referred to the GP. All the data were recorded by the pharmacist.</p><p><strong>Key findings: </strong>One hundred and forty-one community pharmacies from 40 provinces of Spain enrolled 2116 patients. In the first analysis, 1428 (67.5%) were negative, 165 (7.8%) were positive, and 523 (24.7%) needed a second analysis. In the second analysis, 164 (7.8%) were negative, 243 (11.5%) were positive, and 116 (5.5%) did not reattend. In summary, by intention to treat, 1592 (75.2%) were negative and 408 (19.3%) tested positive and were referred to their GP.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results of CKD detection in community pharmacies are in line with screening in other healthcare settings, confirming they could be a reliable resource in future population-screening strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":14284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Screening for chronic kidney disease in community pharmacy: Crierfac project.\",\"authors\":\"José Espejo-Guerrero, Luis Salar-Ibáñez, Eduardo Satué-de-Velasco, Lourdes Martínez-Berganza-Asensio, Noemí Pérez-León\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ijpp/riaf088\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the outcomes of chronic kidney disease (CKD) screening in community pharmacies through creatinine measurement and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation in patients meeting specific risk criteria.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a multicenter observational study. People who entered participating pharmacies for any reason and met the inclusion criterion of not having a CKD diagnosis were invited to participate in the study. If they agreed, the pharmacist conducted a point-of-care blood creatinine test, and the GFR was calculated using the CKD-EPI formula. Those with a positive CKD indicator (<45 ml/min/1.73 m2) were referred to their general practitioner (GP) for evaluation. People with a GFR > 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 were not considered to have CKD. Those with a GFR between 45 and 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 were asked to return for reassessment 1 month later. Those with a GFR 45 < ml/min/1.73 m2 were then considered CKD-positive and referred to the GP. All the data were recorded by the pharmacist.</p><p><strong>Key findings: </strong>One hundred and forty-one community pharmacies from 40 provinces of Spain enrolled 2116 patients. In the first analysis, 1428 (67.5%) were negative, 165 (7.8%) were positive, and 523 (24.7%) needed a second analysis. In the second analysis, 164 (7.8%) were negative, 243 (11.5%) were positive, and 116 (5.5%) did not reattend. In summary, by intention to treat, 1592 (75.2%) were negative and 408 (19.3%) tested positive and were referred to their GP.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results of CKD detection in community pharmacies are in line with screening in other healthcare settings, confirming they could be a reliable resource in future population-screening strategies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14284,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpp/riaf088\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpp/riaf088","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Screening for chronic kidney disease in community pharmacy: Crierfac project.
Objectives: To evaluate the outcomes of chronic kidney disease (CKD) screening in community pharmacies through creatinine measurement and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation in patients meeting specific risk criteria.
Methods: This was a multicenter observational study. People who entered participating pharmacies for any reason and met the inclusion criterion of not having a CKD diagnosis were invited to participate in the study. If they agreed, the pharmacist conducted a point-of-care blood creatinine test, and the GFR was calculated using the CKD-EPI formula. Those with a positive CKD indicator (<45 ml/min/1.73 m2) were referred to their general practitioner (GP) for evaluation. People with a GFR > 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 were not considered to have CKD. Those with a GFR between 45 and 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 were asked to return for reassessment 1 month later. Those with a GFR 45 < ml/min/1.73 m2 were then considered CKD-positive and referred to the GP. All the data were recorded by the pharmacist.
Key findings: One hundred and forty-one community pharmacies from 40 provinces of Spain enrolled 2116 patients. In the first analysis, 1428 (67.5%) were negative, 165 (7.8%) were positive, and 523 (24.7%) needed a second analysis. In the second analysis, 164 (7.8%) were negative, 243 (11.5%) were positive, and 116 (5.5%) did not reattend. In summary, by intention to treat, 1592 (75.2%) were negative and 408 (19.3%) tested positive and were referred to their GP.
Conclusions: The results of CKD detection in community pharmacies are in line with screening in other healthcare settings, confirming they could be a reliable resource in future population-screening strategies.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Pharmacy Practice (IJPP) is a Medline-indexed, peer reviewed, international journal. It is one of the leading journals publishing health services research in the context of pharmacy, pharmaceutical care, medicines and medicines management. Regular sections in the journal include, editorials, literature reviews, original research, personal opinion and short communications. Topics covered include: medicines utilisation, medicine management, medicines distribution, supply and administration, pharmaceutical services, professional and patient/lay perspectives, public health (including, e.g. health promotion, needs assessment, health protection) evidence based practice, pharmacy education. Methods include both evaluative and exploratory work including, randomised controlled trials, surveys, epidemiological approaches, case studies, observational studies, and qualitative methods such as interviews and focus groups. Application of methods drawn from other disciplines e.g. psychology, health economics, morbidity are especially welcome as are developments of new methodologies.