Sankar D Navaneethan1,2, Stacey E Jolly3, Jesse D Schold4,5, Susana Arrigain4, Georges Nakhoul5, Victoria Konig4, Jennifer Hyland5, Yvette K Burrucker5, Priscilla Davis Dann5, Barbara H Tucky5, John Sharp6, Joseph V Nally5. 1. Selzman Institute for Kidney Health, Section of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas; Sankar.navaneethan@bcm.edu. 2. Section of Nephrology, Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Houston, Texas. 3. Department of General Internal Medicine, Medicine Institute. 4. Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, and. 5. Department of Nephrology and Hypertension, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio; and. 6. Personal Connected Health Alliance of Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society, Cleveland, Ohio.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patient navigators and enhanced personal health records improve the quality of health care delivered in other disease states. We aimed to develop a navigator program for patients with CKD and an electronic health record-based enhanced personal health record to disseminate CKD stage-specific goals of care and education. We also conducted a pragmatic randomized clinical trial to compare the effect of a navigator program for patients with CKD with enhanced personal health record and compare their combination compared with usual care among patients with CKD stage 3b/4. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Two hundred and nine patients from six outpatient clinics (in both primary care and nephrology settings) were randomized in a 2×2 factorial design into four-study groups: (1) enhanced personal health record only, (2) patient navigator only, (3) both, and (4) usual care (control) group. Primary outcome measure was the change in eGFR over a 2-year follow-up period. Secondary outcome measures included acquisition of appropriate CKD-related laboratory measures, specialty referrals, and hospitalization rates. RESULTS:Median age of the study population was 68 years old, and 75% were white. At study entry, 54% of patients were followed by nephrologists, and 88% were on renin-angiotensin system blockers. After a 2-year follow-up, rate of decline in eGFR was similar across the four groups (P=0.19). Measurements of CKD-related laboratory parameters were not significantly different among the groups. Furthermore, referral for dialysis education and vascular access placement, emergency room visits, and hospitalization rates were not statistically significant different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully developed a patient navigator program and an enhanced personal health record for the CKD population. However, there were no differences in eGFR decline and other outcomes among the study groups. Larger and long-term studies along with cost-effectiveness analyses are needed to evaluate the role of patient navigators and patient education through an enhanced personal health record in those with CKD.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Patient navigators and enhanced personal health records improve the quality of health care delivered in other disease states. We aimed to develop a navigator program for patients with CKD and an electronic health record-based enhanced personal health record to disseminate CKD stage-specific goals of care and education. We also conducted a pragmatic randomized clinical trial to compare the effect of a navigator program for patients with CKD with enhanced personal health record and compare their combination compared with usual care among patients with CKD stage 3b/4. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Two hundred and nine patients from six outpatient clinics (in both primary care and nephrology settings) were randomized in a 2×2 factorial design into four-study groups: (1) enhanced personal health record only, (2) patient navigator only, (3) both, and (4) usual care (control) group. Primary outcome measure was the change in eGFR over a 2-year follow-up period. Secondary outcome measures included acquisition of appropriate CKD-related laboratory measures, specialty referrals, and hospitalization rates. RESULTS: Median age of the study population was 68 years old, and 75% were white. At study entry, 54% of patients were followed by nephrologists, and 88% were on renin-angiotensin system blockers. After a 2-year follow-up, rate of decline in eGFR was similar across the four groups (P=0.19). Measurements of CKD-related laboratory parameters were not significantly different among the groups. Furthermore, referral for dialysis education and vascular access placement, emergency room visits, and hospitalization rates were not statistically significant different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully developed a patient navigator program and an enhanced personal health record for the CKD population. However, there were no differences in eGFR decline and other outcomes among the study groups. Larger and long-term studies along with cost-effectiveness analyses are needed to evaluate the role of patient navigators and patient education through an enhanced personal health record in those with CKD.
Authors: Laura M Dember; Patrick Archdeacon; Mahesh Krishnan; Eduardo Lacson; Shari M Ling; Prabir Roy-Chaudhury; Kimberly A Smith; Michael F Flessner Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-07-11 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Delphine S Tuot; Clarissa Jonas Diamantidis; Cynthia F Corbett; L Ebony Boulware; Chester H Fox; Donna H Harwood; Robert A Star; Krystyna E Rys-Sikora; Andrew Narva Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2014-06-26 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Susan Freter; Katalin Koller; Michael Dunbar; Chris MacKnight; Kenneth Rockwood Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2016-11-22 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Jula K Inrig; Robert M Califf; Asba Tasneem; Radha K Vegunta; Christopher Molina; John W Stanifer; Karen Chiswell; Uptal D Patel Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2013-12-06 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Tracy A Battaglia; Linda Burhansstipanov; Samantha S Murrell; Andrea J Dwyer; Sarah E Caron Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Manisha Jhamb; Kerri L Cavanaugh; Aihua Bian; Guanhua Chen; T Alp Ikizler; Mark L Unruh; Khaled Abdel-Kader Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2015-10-22 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Delphine S Tuot; Alexandra Velasquez; Charles E McCulloch; Tanushree Banerjee; Yunnuo Zhu; Chi-yuan Hsu; Margaret Handley; Dean Schillinger; Neil R Powe Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2015-10-22 Impact factor: 2.388
Authors: Jessica K Stevenson; Zoe C Campbell; Angela C Webster; Clara K Chow; Allison Tong; Jonathan C Craig; Katrina L Campbell; Vincent Ws Lee Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-08-06
Authors: Lisa V Grossman; Ruth M Masterson Creber; Natalie C Benda; Drew Wright; David K Vawdrey; Jessica S Ancker Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Carmen A Peralta; Martin Frigaard; Leticia Rolon; Karen Seal; Delphine Tuot; Josh Senyak; Lowell Lo; Neil Powe; Rebecca Scherzer; Shirley Chao; Phillip Chiao; Kimberly Lui; Michael G Shlipak; Anna D Rubinsky Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2020-02-07 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Carmen A Peralta; Jennifer Livaudais-Toman; Marilyn Stebbins; Lowell Lo; Andrew Robinson; Sarita Pathak; Rebecca Scherzer; Leah S Karliner Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2020-07-22 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Jennifer E Flythe; Julia H Narendra; Christina Yule; Surya Manivannan; Shannon Murphy; Shoou-Yih D Lee; Tara S Strigo; Sarah Peskoe; Jane F Pendergast; L Ebony Boulware; Jamie A Green Journal: Kidney360 Date: 2021-02-26
Authors: Kerry A McBrien; Noah Ivers; Lianne Barnieh; Jacob J Bailey; Diane L Lorenzetti; David Nicholas; Marcello Tonelli; Brenda Hemmelgarn; Richard Lewanczuk; Alun Edwards; Ted Braun; Braden Manns Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-02-20 Impact factor: 3.240