Rationale & Objective Conservative kidney management (CKM) is a viable treatment option for many patients with chronic kidney disease. However, CKM practices and resources in the United States are not well described. We undertook this study to gain a better understanding of factors influencing uptake of CKM by describing: (1) characteristics of patients who choose CKM, (2) provider practice patterns relevant to CKM, and (3) CKM resources available to providers. Study Design Cross-sectional study. Setting & Participants This study is a cross-sectional analysis of data from US nephrology clinics enrolled in the chronic kidney disease Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (CKDopps) collected between 2014 and 2020. Data for this study includes chart-abstracted characteristics of patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤30mL/min/1.73m2 (n=1018) and available information on whether a decision had been made to pursue CKM at the time of kidney failure, patient (n=407) reports of discussions about forgoing dialysis, and provider (n=26) responses about CKM delivery and available resources in their health systems. Analytical Approach Descriptive statistics were used to report patient demographics, clinical information, provider demographics, and clinic characteristics. Results Among data from 1018 patients, 68 (7%) were recorded as planning for CKM. These patients were older, had more comorbidities, and were more likely to require assistance with transfers. Of the 407 patient surveys, 18% reported a conversation about forgoing dialysis with their nephrologist. A majority of providers felt comfortable discussing CKM; however, no clinics had a dedicated clinic or protocol for CKM. Limitations Inconsistent survey terminology and unlinked patient and provider responses. Conclusions Few patients reported discussion of forgoing dialysis with their providers and even fewer anticipated a choice of CKM on reaching kidney failure. Most providers were comfortable discussing CKM, but practiced in clinics that lacked dedicated resources. Further research is needed to improve the implementation of a CKM pathway. Plain-Language Summary For older comorbid adults with kidney failure, conservative kidney management (CKM) can be an appropriate treatment choice. CKM is a holistic approach with treatment goals of maximizing quality of life and preventing progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD) without initiation of dialysis. We investigated US CKM practices and found that among 1018 people with CKD, only 7% were planning for CKM. Of 407 surveyed patients, 18% reported a conversation with their provider about forgoing dialysis. In contrast, most providers felt comfortable discussing CKM; however, none reported working in an environment with a dedicated CKM clinic or protocol. Our data show the need for further CKM education in the United States as well as dedicated resources for its delivery.

Levamisole is a known immunomodulating agent frequently used as a cutting agent in cocaine consumed in the United States today. Numerous cases of anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA) vasculitis connected with the use of levamisole-adulterated cocaine have previously been reported in the literature, classically characterized by a retiform purpuric rash. We report a case of a crack-cocaine user without cutaneous abnormalities who developed ANCA-associated glomerulonephritis that progressed to renal failure. This case demonstrates the difficulties in solidifying the diagnosis of levamisole-induced vasculitis in the absence of cutaneous findings and the need to pursue more testing to establish causality in ANCA-associated vasculitis that has potential for severe end-organ damage in patients who continue to use cocaine.

Background: Both dialysis facilities and hospitals are accountable for 30-day hospital readmissions among U.S. hemodialysis patients. We examined the association of post-hospitalization processes of care at hemodialysis facilities with pulmonary edema-related and other readmissions. Methods: In a retrospective cohort comprised of electronic medical record (EMR) data linked with national registry data, we identified unique patient index admissions (n = 1056; 2/1/10-7/31/15) that were followed by ≥3 in-center hemodialysis sessions within 10 days, among patients treated at 19 Southeastern dialysis facilities. Indicators of processes of care were defined as present vs. absent in the dialysis facility EMR. Readmissions were defined as admissions within 30 days of the index discharge; pulmonary edema-related vs. other readmissions defined by discharge codes for pulmonary edema, fluid overload, and/or congestive heart failure. Multinomial logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) for pulmonary edema-related and other vs. no readmissions. Results: Overall, 17.7% of patients were readmitted, and 8.0% had pulmonary edema-related readmissions (44.9% of all readmissions). Documentation of the index admission (OR = 2.03, 95% CI 1.07-3.85), congestive heart failure (OR = 1.87, 95% CI 1.07-3.27), and home medications stopped (OR = 1.81, 95% CI 1.08-3.05) or changed (OR = 1.69, 95% CI 1.06-2.70) in the EMR post-hospitalization were all associated with higher risk of pulmonary edema-related vs. no readmission; lower post-dialysis weight (by ≥0.5 kg) after vs. before hospitalization was associated with 40% lower risk (OR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.37-0.96). Conclusions: Our results suggest that some interventions performed at the dialysis facility in the post-hospitalization period may be associated with reduced readmission risk, while others may provide a potential existing means of identifying patients at higher risk for readmissions, to whom such interventions could be efficiently targeted.

Rationale & Objective Suboptimal care coordination between dialysis facilities and hospitals is an important driver of 30-day hospital readmissions among patients receiving dialysis. We examined whether the introduction of web-based communications platform (“DialysisConnect”) was associated with reduced hospital readmissions. Study Design Pilot pre-post study. Setting & Participants A total of 4,994 index admissions at a single hospital (representing 2,419 patients receiving dialysis) during the study period (January 1, 2019-May 31, 2021). Intervention DialysisConnect was available to providers at the hospital and 4 affiliated dialysis facilities (=intervention facilities) during the pilot period (November 1, 2020-May 31, 2021). Outcomes The primary outcome was 30-day readmission; secondary outcomes included 30-day emergency department visits and observation stays. Interrupted time series and linear models with generalized estimating equations were used to assess pilot versus prepilot differences in outcomes; difference-in-difference analyses were performed to compare these differences between intervention versus control facilities. Sensitivity analyses included a third, prepilot/COVID-19 period (March 1, 2020-October 31, 2020). Results There was no statistically significant difference in the monthly trends in the 30-day readmissions pilot versus prepilot periods (−0.60 vs -0.13, P = 0.85) for intervention facility admissions; the difference-in-difference estimate was also not statistically significant (0.54 percentage points, P = 0.83). Similar analyses including the prepilot/COVID-19 period showed that, despite a substantial drop in admissions at the start of the pandemic, there were no statistically significant differences across the 3 periods. The age-, sex-, race-, and comorbid condition-adjusted, absolute pilot versus prepilot difference in readmissions rate was 1.8% (−3.7% to 7.3%); similar results were found for other outcomes. Limitations Potential loss to follow-up and pandemic effects. Conclusions In this pilot, the introduction of DialysisConnect was not associated with reduced hospital readmissions. Tailored care coordination solutions should be further explored in future, multisite studies to improve the communications gap between dialysis facilities and hospitals.

Background: We piloted a web-based, provider-driven mobile app (DialysisConnect) to fill the communication and care coordination gap between hospitals and dialysis facilities. Objective: This study aimed to describe the development and pilot implementation of DialysisConnect. Methods: DialysisConnect was developed iteratively with focus group and user testing feedback and was made available to 120 potential users at 1 hospital (hospitalists, advanced practice providers [APPs], and care coordinators) and 4 affiliated dialysis facilities (nephrologists, APPs, nurses and nurse managers, social workers, and administrative personnel) before the start of the pilot (November 1, 2020, to May 31, 2021). Midpilot and end-of-pilot web-based surveys of potential users were also conducted. Descriptive statistics were used to describe system use patterns, ratings of multiple satisfaction items (1=not at all; 3=to a great extent), and provider-selected motivators of and barriers to using DialysisConnect. Results: The pilot version of DialysisConnect included clinical information that was automatically uploaded from dialysis facilities, forms for entering critical admission and discharge information, and a direct communication channel. Although physicians comprised most of the potential users of DialysisConnect, APPs and dialysis nurses were the most active users. Activities were unevenly distributed; for example, 1 hospital-based APP recorded most of the admissions (280/309, 90.6%) among patients treated at the pilot dialysis facilities. End-of-pilot ratings of DialysisConnect were generally higher for users versus nonusers (eg, “I can see the potential value of DialysisConnect for my work with dialysis patients”: mean 2.8, SD 0.4, vs mean 2.3, SD 0.6; P=.02). Providers most commonly selected reduced time and energy spent gathering information as a motivator (11/26, 42%) and a lack of time to use the system as a barrier (8/26, 31%) at the end of the pilot. Conclusions: This pilot study found that APPs and nurses were most likely to engage with the system. Survey participants generally viewed the system favorably while identifying substantial barriers to its use. These results inform how best to motivate providers to use this system and similar systems and inform future pragmatic research in care coordination among this and other populations.

BACKGROUND: Readmission within 30 days of hospital discharge is common and costly among end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. Little is known about long-term outcomes after readmission. We estimated the association between hospital admissions and readmissions in the first year of dialysis and outcomes in the second year. METHODS: Data on incident dialysis patients with Medicare coverage were obtained from the United States Renal Data System (USRDS). Readmission patterns were summarized as no admissions in the first year of dialysis (Admit-), at least one admission but no readmissions within 30 days (Admit+/Readmit-), and admissions with at least one readmission within 30 days (Admit+/Readmit+).We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the association between readmission pattern and mortality, hospitalization, and kidney transplantation, accounting for demographic and clinical covariates. RESULTS: Among the 128,593 Medicare ESRD patients included in the study, 18.5% were Admit+/Readmit+, 30.5% were Admit+/Readmit-, and 51.0% were Admit-. Readmit+/Admit+ patients had substantially higher long-term risk of mortality (HR = 3.32 (95% CI, 3.21-3.44)), hospitalization (HR = 4.46 (95% CI, 4.36-4.56)), and lower likelihood of kidney transplantation (HR = 0.52 (95% CI, 0.44-0.62)) compared to Admit- patients; these associations were stronger than those among Admit+/Readmit- patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with readmissions in the first year of dialysis were at substantially higher risk of poor outcomes than either patients who had no admissions or patients who had hospital admissions but no readmissions. Identifying strategies to both prevent readmission and mitigate risk among patients who had a readmission may improve outcomes among this substantial, high-risk group of ESRD patients.