BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We conducted a pilot, pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial to evaluate feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of screening for CKD using a triple-marker approach (creatinine, cystatin C, and albumin/creatinine ratio), followed by education and guidance, to improve care of hypertensive veterans in primary care. We used the electronic health record for identification, enrollment, intervention delivery, and outcome ascertainment. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We randomized 1819 veterans without diabetes but with hypertension (41 clusters) into three arms: (1) CKD screening followed by patient and provider education; (2) screening, education, plus pharmacist comanagement; or (3) usual care. The primary clinical outcome was BP change over 1 year. Implementation and process measures included proportion screened; CKD detection rate; and total and new use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and diuretics. RESULTS:Median age was 68 years, 55% were white, 1658 (91%) had a prior creatinine measure, but only 172 (9%) had prior urine albumin/creatinine ratio, and 83 (5%) had a prior cystatin C measure. Among those in the intervention, 527 of 1215 (43%) were identified with upcoming appointments to have CKD screening. Of these, 367 (69%) completed testing. Among those tested, 77 (21%) persons had newly diagnosed CKD. After 1 year, change in systolic BP was -1 mm Hg (interquartile range, -11 to 11) in usual care, -2 mm Hg (-11 to 11) in the screen-educate arm, and -2 mm Hg (-13 to 10) in the screen-educate plus pharmacist arm; P=0.49. There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes in intention-to-treat analyses. In as-treated analyses, higher proportions of participants in the intervention arms initiated a renin-angiotensin system inhibitor (15% and 12% versus 7% in usual care, P=0.01) or diuretic (9% and 12% versus 4%, P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The pragmatic design made identification, enrollment, and intervention delivery highly efficient. The limited ability to identify appointments resulted in inadequate between-arm differences in CKD testing rates to determine whether screening improves clinical outcomes.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We conducted a pilot, pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial to evaluate feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of screening for CKD using a triple-marker approach (creatinine, cystatin C, and albumin/creatinine ratio), followed by education and guidance, to improve care of hypertensive veterans in primary care. We used the electronic health record for identification, enrollment, intervention delivery, and outcome ascertainment. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We randomized 1819 veterans without diabetes but with hypertension (41 clusters) into three arms: (1) CKD screening followed by patient and provider education; (2) screening, education, plus pharmacist comanagement; or (3) usual care. The primary clinical outcome was BP change over 1 year. Implementation and process measures included proportion screened; CKD detection rate; and total and new use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and diuretics. RESULTS: Median age was 68 years, 55% were white, 1658 (91%) had a prior creatinine measure, but only 172 (9%) had prior urine albumin/creatinine ratio, and 83 (5%) had a prior cystatin C measure. Among those in the intervention, 527 of 1215 (43%) were identified with upcoming appointments to have CKD screening. Of these, 367 (69%) completed testing. Among those tested, 77 (21%) persons had newly diagnosed CKD. After 1 year, change in systolic BP was -1 mm Hg (interquartile range, -11 to 11) in usual care, -2 mm Hg (-11 to 11) in the screen-educate arm, and -2 mm Hg (-13 to 10) in the screen-educate plus pharmacist arm; P=0.49. There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes in intention-to-treat analyses. In as-treated analyses, higher proportions of participants in the intervention arms initiated a renin-angiotensin system inhibitor (15% and 12% versus 7% in usual care, P=0.01) or diuretic (9% and 12% versus 4%, P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The pragmatic design made identification, enrollment, and intervention delivery highly efficient. The limited ability to identify appointments resulted in inadequate between-arm differences in CKD testing rates to determine whether screening improves clinical outcomes.
Authors: Sankar D Navaneethan; Stacey E Jolly; Jesse D Schold; Susana Arrigain; Georges Nakhoul; Victoria Konig; Jennifer Hyland; Yvette K Burrucker; Priscilla Davis Dann; Barbara H Tucky; John Sharp; Joseph V Nally Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2017-08-04 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Kevin T Stroupe; Bridget M Smith; Lauren Bailey; Jamal Adas; Walid F Gellad; Katie Suda; Zhiping Huo; Sean Tully; Muriel Burk; Francesca Cunningham Journal: Am J Health Syst Pharm Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 2.637
Authors: Laura M Dember; Eduardo Lacson; Steven M Brunelli; Jesse Y Hsu; Alfred K Cheung; John T Daugirdas; Tom Greene; Csaba P Kovesdy; Dana C Miskulin; Ravi I Thadhani; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Susan S Ellenberg; Denise Cifelli; Rosemary Madigan; Amy Young; Michael Angeletti; Rebecca L Wingard; Christina Kahn; Allen R Nissenson; Franklin W Maddux; Kevin C Abbott; J Richard Landis Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2019-04-18 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Josef Coresh; Elizabeth Selvin; Lesley A Stevens; Jane Manzi; John W Kusek; Paul Eggers; Frederick Van Lente; Andrew S Levey Journal: JAMA Date: 2007-11-07 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ian H de Boer; Csaba P Kovesdy; Sankar D Navaneethan; Carmen A Peralta; Delphine S Tuot; Miguel A Vazquez; Deidra C Crews Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-06-09 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Paul K Whelton; Robert M Carey; Wilbert S Aronow; Donald E Casey; Karen J Collins; Cheryl Dennison Himmelfarb; Sondra M DePalma; Samuel Gidding; Kenneth A Jamerson; Daniel W Jones; Eric J MacLaughlin; Paul Muntner; Bruce Ovbiagele; Sidney C Smith; Crystal C Spencer; Randall S Stafford; Sandra J Taler; Randal J Thomas; Kim A Williams; Jeff D Williamson; Jackson T Wright Journal: Hypertension Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 9.897
Authors: Danielle Cooney; Helen Moon; Yang Liu; Richard Tyler Miller; Adam Perzynski; Brook Watts; Paul E Drawz Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2015-04-16 Impact factor: 2.388
Authors: Navdeep Tangri; Amit X Garg; Thomas W Ferguson; Stephanie Dixon; Claudio Rigatto; Selina Allu; Elaine Chau; Paul Komenda; David Naimark; Gihad E Nesrallah; Steven D Soroka; Monica Beaulieu; Ahsan Alam; S Joseph Kim; Manish M Sood; Braden Manns Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2021-04-15 Impact factor: 14.978
Authors: Julio A Lamprea-Montealegre; Priya Joshi; Abigail S Shapiro; Erin Madden; Krista Navarra; O Alison Potok; L Parker Gregg; Tanya Podchiyska; Amy Robinson; Mary K Goldstein; Carmen A Peralta; Simerjot K Jassal; Sankar D Navaneethan; Dena E Rifkin; Virginia Wang; Michael G Shlipak; Michelle M Estrella Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2022-10-12 Impact factor: 2.585
Authors: Van C Willis; Kelly Jean Thomas Craig; Yalda Jabbarpour; Elisabeth L Scheufele; Yull E Arriaga; Monica Ajinkya; Kyu B Rhee; Andrew Bazemore Journal: JMIR Med Inform Date: 2022-01-21