Effectiveness of a chronic kidney disease clinic in achieving K/DOQI guideline targets at initiation of dialysis--a single-centre experience.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist about the effects of chronic kidney disease (CKD) clinics on quality-of-care indicators in patients before initiation of dialysis. METHODS: A single-centre retrospective chart review study was conducted on all patients who initiated dialysis at the Veterans Affairs Denver Healthcare System between 2000 and 2005. Patients initiating dialysis were evaluated at the start of dialysis and 12 months after dialysis initiation, as a function of care provided by nephrologists in training (renal-hypertension clinic) vs a trained renal nurse practitioner (CKD clinic). RESULTS: Data were available for 77 patients followed in the CKD clinic and 36 in the renal-hypertension clinic. There were no major demographic differences between the cohorts at the time of clinic referral. The length of follow-up before dialysis did not differ significantly between the cohorts (10.7+/-9.8 months for the patients in the CKD clinic cohort and 13.6+/-16.0 months for the patients in the renal-hypertension clinic cohort, P=0.3299). At the initiation of dialysis, patients followed in the CKD clinic had higher haemoglobin (11.6+/-1.5 vs 10.8+/-1.7 g/dl, P=0.0239) and serum albumin (3.4+/-0.5 vs 3.0+/-0.7 g/dl, P=0.0020) concentrations. More of the CKD clinic patients had a functioning permanent vascular access (P<0.0001). The number of all-cause hospitalizations in the 12 months after initiation of dialysis was significantly lower in the CKD clinic group (P=0.0024), but no significant differences were noted in all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that a single experienced renal nurse practitioner, working to a protocol, is more likely to adhere to guidelines than are multiple nephrology trainees rotating through a nephrology clinic.     

Physician access and early nephrology care in elderly patients with end-stage renal disease

Early nephrology care may improve treatment outcomes of patients with end-stage renal disease. We sought to examine if physician access affects early nephrology care defined as visiting a nephrologist 12 to 4 months before initiating dialysis. The study population consisted of elderly patients starting hemodialysis whose demographic characteristics and initial dialysis therapy were derived from form 2728 files of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Early nephrology care, chronic kidney disease and co-morbidities along with access to local non-nephrologist physicians and nephrologists were identified based on Medicare claims and/or United States 2000 Census data. About one-third of elderly patients received early nephrology care prior to initiating dialysis. Patients living in an area with a large number of non-nephrologist physicians or living relatively far away from a nephrologist had a lower likelihood of getting early nephrology care prior to initiating dialysis while those in an area with more practicing nephrologists were more likely to get early nephrology care. The study shows that physician access significantly influences the use of early nephrology care among elderly patients progressing to end-stage renal disease in the United States.     

Referral pattern fof hemodialysis patients to nephrologists

Objective: To determine the referral pattern of dialysis patients to nephrologists and the effects of late referral on clinical, hematological and biochemical parameters in patients presenting for the first-time to dialysis center. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Place and Duration: Hemodialysis Unit of Shalamar Hospital, Lahore, from June 2003 to October 2006. Patients and Methods: This study was conducted on all patients of end stage renal diseases presenting for the first-time for undergoing hemodialysis at our center. Patients with acute renal failure were excluded from the study. At presentation, a history was taken from all the patients regarding seeking of nephrology services and referral pattern. Early and late referral was defined as the time of first referral or admission to a nephrologists greater or less than six months respectively before initiation of hemodialysis. All the patients were examined and their blood sample was drawn at the same time for routine hematological, biochemical parameters (urea, creatinine, serum potassium, calcium, phosphate and albumin) and viral markers (Anti HCV and HbsAg). Results: In this study, 248 patients were enrolled, amongst them, 131 (52.8%) were male and 117 (47.2%) were female. Major causes of renal failure were diabetes mellitus, chronic glomerulonephritis and hypertension. Most of the patients were euvolemic and hypertensive. Sixty percent of patients were having very high urea ( > 200 mg/dl) and creatinine ( > 8.0 mg/dl). Most of the patients, 226 (91.1%), were anemic (Hemoglobin < 11gm/dl) and 224(90%) were hypoalbuminemic (serum albumin<4gm/dl) on first presentation. Majority of patients were hyperkalemic, 139 (56.0%), hypocalcemic, 168 (67.7%) and serum phosphate level was high in only 117 (47%) patients. Conclusion: All the patients presented in emergency room to nephrologists at very late stage (100% late referral), when disease was very much advanced. All of them did not have permanent vascular access for hemodialysis on first presentation to dialysis center. Reasons for late referral were non-availability of nephrologists and nephrology services, non-renal doctors biased, unawareness and training of medical professionals for these patients, patients' own denial for dialysis, fear and wrong perception about dialysis procedure, socioeconomic factors and use of non-evidenced based treatment modalities.     

Inadequate involvement of nephrologist/dialysis physicians in transplantation: based on the findings of a survey of transplant recipients

The number of kidney transplantations(KTx) performed annually in Japan remains small even after enactment of the "Organ Transplant" law. One of the reasons for this paucity of KTx might be because most nephrologists or dialysis physicians who provide medical care to potential transplant candidates have little knowledge of KTx and are seldom involved in the care of recipients and donors. The extent to which Japanese physicians participate in KTx has not been well studied. We sent questionnaires to the 212 kidney transplant recipients who have received an allograft at Tokyo Women's Medical University and conducted a survey to examine the extent to which nephrologists or dialysis physicians are involved in KTx. There were 149 recipients, consisting of 95 males and 54 females with an average age of 46.5 years, who responded to the questionnaire. Only 23% of the patients had considered KTx before dialysis access placement. Lack of information on KTx was suspected for this delay in considering KTx. In fact, only 18% of patients were informed about KTx by their nephrologists before starting dialysis and as many as 49% did not receive any information at all. Forty-eight percent of the patients were not provided with the information even on registration for a cadaveric transplant list by their physicians. Only 20% of the patients received some information about KTx through their nephrologists. On the other hand, nearly 100% of patients think it is essential for nephrologists or dialysis physicians to provide information on KTx especially before the initiation on dialysis access. In addition, almost all of the patients would prefer nephrologists or a dialysis physician to participate in the care of transplant patients from the stage of preoperative evaluation through the post-transplant follow-up period. In conclusion, nephrologists or dialysis physicians have not provided information on KTx to their patients appropriately and most of the transplant recipients expect them to participate in KTx. Nephrologists and dialysis physicians need fundamental knowledge about KTx so that they can provide appropriate information to patients with end-stage renal disease.     

Should Hemoglobin be Normalized in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease?

In the last decade the nephrology community has learned much about the impact of anemia on patients with kidney disease. Therapy of anemia can correct many of the symptoms which seriously compromise patient function. Despite the obvious benefits, controversy continues regarding the optimal target hemoglobin concentration both in patients prior to dialysis and in dialysis populations. In this editorial we review the clinical data that contribute to this controversy and the physiologic concepts underlying the treatment of anemia. Furthermore, we discuss the need to individualize hemoglobin targets for specific patient populations and the importance of early identification and treatment of anemia in patients with kidney disease. The economic impact of normalizing hemoglobin with the use of erythropoietin and intravenous or oral iron has affected clinical practice over the last decade. Current guidelines published by Kidney Disease Outcomes and Quality Initiative (KDOQI), the European Working Group on Anemia Management, and the Canadian Society of Nephrology all recommend target hemoglobin concentrations and thresholds for initiation of therapy and also suggest the need for reevaluation of current targets in light of new evidence. This editorial supports those guidelines and challenges the reader to critically evaluate current practice in the context of the accumulating data and the physiologic principles discussed herein. The therapy of anemia in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is becoming increasingly sophisticated and is an essential component of care in patients with CKD. However, the effects of therapy will be most impressive when accompanied by the optimal care of all hemodynamic and metabolic abnormalities that are associated with CKD.     

Interventional nephrology in Brazil: current and future status

The care of chronic kidney disease patients frequently involves many diagnostic and interventional procedures. Most of these procedures are currently performed by radiologists, vascular surgeons, and general surgeons. This has caused fragmented medical care, which has led many nephrologists to introduce a new paradigm, often referred as interventional nephrology (IN). The aim of this study was to establish the extent of involvement of the Brazilian nephrology community with regard to specific IN procedures. From October 2004 to February 2005, questionnaires were sent by e-mail to all 2500 nephrologists throughout Brazil. The enrollment questionnaire was composed of five sections, with questions about renal biopsy, specific training in ultrasonography, peritoneal dialysis access (insertion of peritoneal catheters guided or not by peritoneoscopy), hemodialysis vascular access (ability to place tunneled catheters, construction of arteriovenous fistulas, and other vascular access procedures), and the nephrologist's interest in being trained in IN. A total of 239 nephrologists answered the questionnaire. Only 18% of Brazilian nephrologists perform kidney biopsy guided by ultrasonography assisted by a radiologist. On the other hand, 42% of them reported that this procedure was done without any image support. Most of the respondents (85%) indicated that they were not formally trained to perform renal ultrasonography. When asked about peritoneal dialysis catheter placement, 66% of the respondents reported that they referred their patients to a surgeon for this procedure. The insertion of peritoneal dialysis catheters guided by peritoneoscopy was reported by 3% of the respondents. Similar to the results for peritoneal dialysis catheter placement, the majority of the respondents (77%) indicated no training in the insertion of tunneled catheters for temporary hemodialysis. Regarding the interest of nephrologists to participate in an IN program, the great majority (87%) responded that they would like to be trained in these procedures. Most nephrologists are not trained in IN procedures. Therefore, in Brazil, it will be necessary to develop training centers for IN that will allow nephrologists to optimize nephrology care.     

Predialyis Nephrology Care of Older Individuals Approaching End‐Stage Renal Disease

Many older patients with advanced CKD approaching ESRD do not receive timely nephrology care, although data suggest that the situation may be improving. In 2005–2008, 43% of older patients who initiated renal replacement therapy had experienced an outpatient nephrologist consultation more than 1 year before starting treatment. Earlier consultation with a nephrologist has been found to provide better access to peritoneal dialysis and kidney transplantation, better preparation for the chosen dialytic modality, and improved survival after start of dialysis or receipt of a kidney transplant. Recent data suggest that older individuals are less likely to receive treatment for ESRD compared with younger individuals in whom almost all receive dialysis treatment or transplantation. Little is known about the role nephrologists play in the decision whether to initiate dialysis or choose a conservative route among older adults with ESRD. Defining the appropriate role and involvement of nephrologists in the decision about initiating renal replacement therapy in older adults seems ripe for further investigation and discussion.     

The short- and long-term impact of multi-disciplinary clinics in addition to standard nephrology care on patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: This two country case control study of incident dialysis patients evaluates the outcomes of patients exposed to formalized multi-disciplinary clinic (MDC) programmes vs standard nephrologist care. METHODS: Patients commencing dialysis in two centres (Vancouver, Canada and Cremona, Italy) were evaluated at and after dialysis start, as a function of MDC exposure vs nephrologist care alone. Only chronic kidney disease patients, with longer than 3 months of exposure to nephrology care, who had not previously received kidney replacement therapy were included. Study outcomes included laboratory parameters and survival. The MDC was similar in both countries and average exposure was 6-8 h per patient-year, as compared to 2-4 h for standard care. All patients had equal access to resources prior to dialysis and with respect to dialysis start, as all had been referred to the same local nephrology practices. RESULTS: During the evaluation period 288 patients commenced dialysis after receiving more than 3 months nephrology care prior to dialysis. There were no major demographic differences between the cohorts. Mean duration of nephrology care prior to dialysis was 42 months, and dialysis was initiated at similar low glomerular filtration rate (GFR), though statistically significantly different (7.0 and 8.4 ml/min/m2, P = 0.001). The MDC patients had higher haemoglobin (102 vs 90 g/l, P<0.0001), albumin (37.0 vs 34.8 g/l, P = 0.002) and calcium levels (2.29 vs 2.16 mmol/l, P<0.0001) at dialysis start. Survival was significantly better in the MDC group demonstrated by Kaplan-Meier analysis (P = 0.01). Cox proportional hazards analysis demonstrated standard nephrology clinic vs MDC attendance was a statistically significant independent predictor of death (hazards ratio = 2.17, 95% confidence interval 1.11-4.28) after adjusting for other variables known to impact outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of outcomes in two different countries suggests that despite equal and long exposure to nephrology care prior to dialysis, there appears to be an association of survival advantage for those patients exposed to formalized clinic care in addition to standard nephrologist follow-up. While other known predictors of survival such as adequacy of dialysis and severity of illness measures were not included in the model, those parameters require time on dialysis to be accumulated. Thus, the data do suggest that knowledge of patient status at the time of dialysis start is important. Further research is needed to determine which specific components of care both prior to dialysis and after its commencement are most important with respect to outcomes.     

Factors associated with anemia among incident pre-dialysis patients managed within a French care network

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Despite guidelines concerning the management of renal anemia, the international literature reports that a large proportion of pre-dialysis patients have hemoglobin values lower than the recommended level. The present study analyzed the evolution of pre-dialysis Hb levels and erythropoietin use over a 4-year period and investigated factors associated with anemia. METHODS: A total of 1315 patients initiating dialysis in Lorraine, France, were enrolled since 2001-2004. For each year, anemia, defined by Hb <11 g/dl, and erythropoietin use were investigated in three groups: all patients, patients whose dialysis was planned and patients whose dialysis was unplanned. RESULTS: At initiation of dialysis, all groups showed increases over time in mean hemoglobin levels, proportion of patients without anemia and with erythropoietin therapy. Among patients whose first dialysis was planned in 2004, 43.8% had anemia and 67.9% had received erythropoietin, compared with 75.4% and 29.4%, respectively, when dialysis was unplanned. Patients receiving unplanned dialysis were more likely to have anemia (odds ratio (OR) = 2.6), as were those with a serum albumin level < 3.5 g/dl (OR = 2.1), body mass index < 30 kg/m2 (OR = 1.9) (all p < 0.001) or glomerular filtration rate < 10 ml/min/1.73 m2 (OR = 1.4, p = 0.04). The year of dialysis initiation was also associated with anemia (p = 0.024). CONCLUSION: The proportion ofpatients starting dialysis with anemia might be reduced by earlier nephrology referral leading to erythropoietin administration, planned first dialysis while residual renal function remains, and greater attention to nutritional status.     

Multidisciplinary chronic kidney disease management improves survival on dialysis

BACKGROUND: Delayed nephrology referral is associated with increased morbidity and mortality after patients begin dialysis. However, whether a pre-dialysis educational program (PEP) confers any survival advantage in comparison to unstructured specialist care is not established. METHODS: Cox's regression analysis was used to estimate the association between the type of pre-dialysis follow-up and mortality in all consecutive end-stage renal disease (ESRD) adults starting dialysis therapy in two centers, between 1 January 1999 and 30 June 2002, and followed until 30 June 2003. RESULTS: 229 patients participated in the study. The patients tended to be male (62%), elderly (median age 70 yrs) and to have cardiovascular diseases (60%). Median follow-up on dialysis was 37.8 months, with 624 patient-yrs at risk and a 0.15 yr(-1) mortality rate. Patients receiving regular unstructured care (22.7%) appeared to have similar risk for death as late referrals (36.7%), while PEP patients (40.6%) showed longer survival (hazard ratio 0.48 (95% CI 0.27, 0.87)), allowing for demographics, comorbidities, duration of the pre-dialysis follow-up and dialysis modality. Planned dialysis commencement, a better metabolic status at dialysis initiation and the previous use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors were the main factors associated with improved outcomes. The survival advantage associated with PEP was still present after late referrals or observation for < or = 1 yr were excluded, as well as when survival analysis was limited to the 1st year after dialysis initiation. CONCLUSION: A multidisciplinary approach to chronic kidney diseases seems more effective than just timely referral to nephrologists in improving patient survival on dialysis.     

Effect of an educational program on the predialysis period for patients with chronic renal failure

Background The purpose of the treatment and management of chronic renal failure during the predialysis period is mainly to retard the progression of the deterioration of renal function. Optimal dialysis initiation is important to improve the patient's outcome after therapy. We investigated whether providing information through an original educational program could facilitate dialysis initiation, with the patient in a better condition, and therefore greater cost-effectiveness. Methods One hundred and seventy-six patients who underwent dialysis initiation for chronic renal failure in our hospital between April 2002 and March 2005 were divided into two groups according to their participation or nonparticipation in an educational program. Participation in the education program was of their own free will. The instructors consisted of nephrologists, nursing staff, clinical engineering technologists, national registered dietitians, and medical social workers. We investigated whether the education program facilitated trouble-free dialysis initiation by comparing findings of blood tests at the start, the existence of heart-failure symptoms, type of blood access, percentage of scheduled initiation, and the number of days and cost of hospitalization as indices between participating and nonparticipating groups. Results The number of patients using a double-lumen dialysis catheter, and the duration and cost of hospitalization in training the participating group, were significantly less than those in the nonparticipating group. Although there was no significant difference in renal function at the initiation of renal replacement therapy (RRT) between the two groups, serum albumin, hemoglobin, and hematocrit in the participating group were significantly higher than those of the nonparticipating group. Conclusions This study suggests that providing sufficient information before dialysis initiation may be effective in both physical condition at dialysis initiation, and medical economic benefits through the understanding of the dialysis.     

How Australian nephrologists view home dialysis: results of a national survey

Aim: Australia's commitment to home dialysis therapies has been significant. However, there is marked regional variation in the uptake of home haemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) suggesting further scope for the expansion of these modalities. Methods: Between 1 April and 5 August 2009, Australian nephrologists were invited to complete an online survey. Seventy‐six questions were asked covering characteristics of the dialysis units, responders' experience, adequacy of facilities and support structures, attitudes to the use of home HD and PD and issues impeding the increased uptake of home dialysis. Results: Completed surveys were received and analysed from 71 respondents; 27 from Heads of Units (35% response rate) and 44 (16%) from other nephrologists. There was strong agreement that HD with long hours was advantageous and that this was most easily accomplished in the home. PD was not considered to be an inferior therapy. A ‘PD first’ policy existed in 34% of Renal Units. The most commonly reported impediments to expanding home dialysis services were financial disadvantage for home HD patients, and lack of physical infrastructure for training, support and education. Areas of concern for expanding home dialysis programmes included psychiatry support, access to respite care and home visits, and lack of support from medical administration and government. The majority of nephrologists would recommend home dialysis to more patients if these impediments could be overcome. Conclusion: This survey identified support from nephrologists for the expansion of home dialysis in Australia and highlighted important barriers to improving access to these therapies.     

Management of vascular access for dialysis: an Italian survey.

Background. To obtain information on the management of vascularaccess in Italy. Method. Questionnaire sent to all dialysis centres. The mainquestions were: (i) who is in charge of establishing vascularaccess? (ii) How is vascular access monitored? (iii) To whatextent is a continuous quality programme implemented? (iv) Whatproportion of patients are treated using central venous cathetersat the start of dialysis? (v) What proportion of patients aretreated using central venous catheters as a permanent access?(vi) What is the role of interventional radiology? Results. The response rate was 45%. All Italian regions wererepresented. In almost 80% of the dialysis centres vascularaccess is established by the nephrologist. Fistula functionis monitored by most nephrologists using a recirculation test,ultrasound and radiological imaging. An audit (continuous qualityprogramme) is implemented in 20% of the dialysis centres. Ahigh proportion of patients are submitted for dialysis withoutan internal AV fistula (in one quarter of the centres more than40% of the patients). Less than 10% of the patients are dialysedusing central venous catheters as a permanent access. Interventionalradiology for vascular access is used only in few centres. Comments. Because of the difficulty of coordinating differentprofessionals, most nephrologists manage vascular access bythemselves. Fistula function is usually monitored on a routinebasis, but a `Continuous Quality Programme' on established standardsand audit of outcome and process indicators is not followedin most centres. Late referral is a main obstacle to effectiveplanning of renal care, as indicated by the high frequency oftemporary access at the beginning of dialysis. On the whole,vascular access is properly managed by Italian nephrologists,but monitoring performance by audit would be desirable.     

Does predialysis nephrology care influence patient survival after initiation of dialysis?

BACKGROUND: Early nephrology referral of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) has been suggested to reduce mortality after initiation of dialysis. This retrospective cohort study of incident dialysis patients between 1995 and 1998 was performed to address the association between frequency of nephrology care during the 24 months before initiation of dialysis and first-year mortality after initiation of dialysis. METHODS: Patient data were obtained from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Patients who started dialysis between 1995 and 1998, and were Medicare-eligible for at least 24 months before initiation of dialysis, were included. One or more nephrology visits during a month was considered a month of nephrology care (MNC). RESULTS: Of the total 109,321 patients, only 50% had received nephrology care during the 24 months before initiation of dialysis. Overall, first-year mortality after initiation of dialysis was 36%. Cardiac disease was the major cause of mortality (46%). After adjusting for comorbidity, higher mortality was associated with increasing age (HR, 1.04 per year increase; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.04) and more frequent visits to generalists (HR, 1.009 per visit increase; 95% CI, 1.003 to 1.014) and specialists (HR, 1.012 per visit increase; 95% CI, 1.011 to 1.013). Compared to patients with >/=3 MNC in the six months before initiation of dialysis, higher mortality was observed among those with no MNC during the 24 months before initiation of dialysis (HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.45 to 1.58), no MNC during the six months before initiation of dialysis (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.20 to 1.36), and one or two MNC during the six months before initiation of dialysis (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.18 to 1.29). CONCLUSION: Nephrology care before dialysis is important, and consistency of care in the immediate six months before dialysis is a predictor of mortality. Consistent nephrology care may be more important than previously thought, particularly because the frequency and severity of CKD complications increase as patients approach dialysis.     

Mortality of Canadians treated by peritoneal dialysis in remote locations

Patients residing in remote locations may be more likely to initiate peritoneal dialysis when starting renal replacement therapy to avoid relocation. These patients may have reduced access to medical care, however. To examine the hypothesis that patients residing some distance from their nephrologists would be more likely to select peritoneal dialysis but have an increased risk of mortality, we used prospectively collected data in a random sample of 26,775 patients initiating dialysis in Canada between 1990 and 2000. The distance between the patient's residence at dialysis inception and the practice location of their nephrologists was calculated. We used Cox proportional hazard models to determine the adjusted relation between this distance and clinical outcomes over a mean follow-up period of 2.5 years up to 14 years. Remote-dwelling patients were more likely than urban dwellers to commence peritoneal dialysis in distances ranging from 50 to greater than 300 km than those residing within 50 km. The adjusted rates of death and the adjusted hazard ratio among patients initiating peritoneal dialysis was significantly higher in those living further from the nephrologists than those living within 50 km. Further study into the quality of care delivered to remote-dwelling patients on peritoneal dialysis is needed.     

What are the major parameters to follow for the management anaemia in dialysis patients? What is the frequency of survey and what are the guidelines?

Anaemia treatment in dialysis population is a permanent preoccupation for nephrologists. The erythropoiesis stimulating agents have disrupted its management. The international guidelines define the different parameters to follow and the periodicity of survey. It allows us to harmonize our practice and guaranty an optimization of anaemia treatment in the dialysis population.     

Prevalence, predictors, and consequences of late nephrology referral at a tertiary care center.

Despite improvements in dialysis care, mortality of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) remains high. One factor that has thus far received little attention, but might contribute to morbidity and mortality, is the timing of referral to the nephrologist. This study examines the hypothesis that late referral of patients to the nephrologist might lead to suboptimal pre-ESRD care. Clinical and laboratory data were obtained from the patient records and electronic databases of New England Medical Center, its affiliated dialysis unit (Dialysis Clinics, Inc., Boston), and the office records of the outpatient nephrology clinic. Early (ER) and late (LR) referral were defined by the time of first nephrology encounter greater than or less than 4 mo, respectively, before initiation of dialysis. Multivariate models were built to explore factors associated with LR, and whether LR is associated with hypoalbuminemia or late initiation of dialysis. Of the 135 patients, 30 (22%) were referred late. There were no differences in age, gender, race, and cause of ESRD between ER and LR patients. However, there were significant differences in insurance coverage between these two groups. In the multivariate analysis, patients covered by health maintenance organizations were more likely to be referred late (odds ratio = 4.5) than patients covered by Medicare. Compared to ER, LR patients were more likely to have hypoalbuminemia (56% versus 80%), hematocrit <28% (33% versus 55%), and predicted GFR <5 ml/min per 1.73 m2 (17% versus 40%) at the start of dialysis, and less likely to have received erythropoietin (40% versus 17%) or have a functioning permanent vascular access for the first hemodialysis (40% versus 4%). It is concluded that late referral to the nephrologist is common in the United States and is associated with poor pre-ESRD care. Pre-ESRD care of patients treated by nephrologists was also less than ideal. The patient-, physician-, and system-related factors behind this observation are unclear. Meanwhile, pre-ESRD educational efforts need to target patients, generalists, and nephrologists.     

Interventional nephrology: from episodic to coordinated vascular access care

In recent years, nephrologists have taken the initiative of performing vascular access-related procedures themselves. Because of their unique clinical perspective on dialysis access and better understanding of the intricacies of renal replacement therapy, nephrologists are ideally suited for this activity. This approach has minimized delays, decreased hospitalizations and decreased the use of temporary catheters, thereby improving medical care, decreasing costs and increasing patient convenience. Vascular access interventions commonly employed by nephrologists include vascular access education, vascular mapping, percutaneous balloon angioplasty, thrombectomy, intravascular coil and stent insertion and tunneled hemodialysis catheter-related procedures. While the performance of these procedures by nephrologists offers many advantages, appropriate training to develop the necessary procedural skills is critical. Recent data have emphasized that a nephrologist can be successfully trained to become a competent interventionalist. In addition to documenting excellent outcome data, multiple reports have demonstrated the safety and success of an interventional nephrology approach. The last decade has been a period of significant advances in this new field. This has been driven in part by the formation of the American Society of Diagnostic and Interventional Nephrology (ASDIN), whose mission includes training, quality assurance and certification. Recently, the ASDIN has published guidelines for training in nephrology-related procedures and has begun certifying physicians in specific procedures related to chronic kidney disease. It is anticipated that this will promote the skillful performance of these procedures by nephrologists and lead to substantial improvements in the care of renal patients. Challenges for the future include awareness of this subspecialty and development of training programs at academic centers on a larger scale.     

The role of physician assistants in improving renal care

Currently, nephrology PAs remain a small group. According to 2003 census data from The American Academy of Nephrology Physician Assistants, only 98 of 20,646 survey respondents identified themselves as practicing in nephrology. The future of PAs or nurse practitioners in nephrology is not only very bright, but is also an absolute necessity. We have known for many years that the number of individuals with kidney disease in the United States is increasing at a rate that outpaces our ability to develop and train nephrologists. This has resulted in an ever-increasing ratio of patients to clinical nephrologists. The workload for management of dialysis patients on a daily basis is becoming exhaustive and will not improve. The fastest growing segment of dialysis patients is now people in their 70s and 80s, and they bring with them multiple chronic health problems that are affected by dialysis and the treatment of their renal disease. The result is the need for closer monitoring, not less. The role of physician extenders can have a very positive impact for this patient population. Being the eyes, ears, nose, and fingers of our nephrologists can help in avoiding potential major problems in the outpatient arena. There is not a magic formula in caring for this patient population; it is a matter of spending time and becoming familiar with our patients, a premium most nephrologists do not have at present. It is not a matter of willingness; it is a matter of capability, of being in more than one place, and of having time to make the patient assessments. I think there is a great opportunity for nephrologists to create a new segment of providers to assist them in these endeavors. They can sponsor PAs as preceptors before graduation so that the students can have the opportunity to see what it takes to care for this population, the level of medicine they need to learn, and the responsibility they will need to accept. The nephrologist will benefit from working with a PA that has a good foundation of medical education that the nephrologist can tailor to his or her own method of practice in order to become comfortable in the relationship long-term. The future of care for our end-stage renal disease population needs all our efforts to succeed.