Grove Birgith Engelst, Schougaard Liv Marit Valen, Mose Frank, Randers Else, Hjollund Niels Henrik, Ivarsen Per, De Thurah Annette
AmbuFlex - Centre for Patient-reported Outcomes, Gødstrup Hospital, Herning, Denmark.
Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Clin Kidney J. 2024 Jun 14;17(7):sfae176. doi: 10.1093/ckj/sfae176. eCollection 2024 Jul.
The increasing incidence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) is straining the capacity of outpatient clinics. Remote healthcare delivery might improve CKD follow-up compared with conventional face-to-face follow-up. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used to empower remote follow-up and patient engagement. The consequences of shifting from face-to-face follow-up to remote outpatient follow-up on kidney function, health resource utilisation and quality of life remain unknown.
We conducted a multicentre pragmatic non-inferiority trial at three outpatient clinics in the Central Denmark Region. A total of 152 incident outpatients with CKD were randomised (1:1:1) to either PRO-based, PRO-telephone follow-up or standard of care (SoC). The primary outcome was the annual change in kidney function measured by the slope of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The non-inferiority margin was an eGFR of 2.85 ml/min/1.73 m/year. Mean differences were estimated using intention-to-treat (ITT), per protocol and random coefficient models.
Mean eGFR slope differences between PRO-based and SoC were -0.97 ml/min/1.73 m/year [95% confidence interval (CI) -3.00-1.07] and -1.06 ml/min/1.73 m/year (95% CI -3.02-0.89) between PRO-telephone and SoC. Non-inferiority was only established in the per-protocol analysis due to CIs exceeding the margin in the ITT group. Both intervention groups had fewer outpatient visits: -4.95 (95% CI -5.82 to -4.08) for the PRO-based group and -5.21 (95% CI -5.95 to -4.46) for the PRO-telephone group. We found no significant differences in quality of life, illness perception or satisfaction.
Differences in the eGFR slope between groups were non-significant and results on non-inferiority were inconclusive. Thus, transitioning to remote PRO-based follow-up requires close monitoring of kidney function. Reducing patients' attendance in the outpatient clinic was possible without decreasing either quality of life or illness perception.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03847766.
慢性肾脏病(CKD)发病率不断上升,使门诊诊所不堪重负。与传统面对面随访相比,远程医疗服务可能会改善CKD的随访情况。患者报告结局(PROs)用于促进远程随访和患者参与。从面对面随访转向远程门诊随访对肾功能、卫生资源利用和生活质量的影响尚不清楚。
我们在丹麦中部地区的三家门诊诊所进行了一项多中心实用非劣效性试验。共有152例新发CKD门诊患者被随机分为(1:1:1)基于PRO的随访组、PRO电话随访组或标准治疗(SoC)组。主要结局是通过估计肾小球滤过率(eGFR)斜率测量的肾功能年度变化。非劣效性界值为eGFR每年2.85 ml/min/1.73m²。使用意向性分析(ITT)、符合方案分析和随机系数模型估计平均差异。
基于PRO的随访组与SoC组之间的平均eGFR斜率差异为-0.97 ml/min/1.73m²[95%置信区间(CI)-3.00至1.07],PRO电话随访组与SoC组之间的差异为-1.06 ml/min/1.73m²(95%CI -3.02至0.89)。由于ITT组的CI超过了界值,仅在符合方案分析中确立了非劣效性。两个干预组的门诊就诊次数均减少:基于PRO的随访组减少了-4.95次(95%CI -5.82至-4.08),PRO电话随访组减少了-5.21次(95%CI -5.95至-4.46)。我们发现生活质量、疾病认知或满意度方面没有显著差异。
各组之间eGFR斜率的差异不显著,非劣效性结果尚无定论。因此,转向基于PRO的远程随访需要密切监测肾功能。在不降低生活质量或疾病认知的情况下,减少患者在门诊诊所的就诊次数是可能的。ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT03847766。