Achieving equity in dialysis care and outcomes: The role of policies

Socially disadvantaged persons, including racial and ethnic minorities, individuals with low incomes, homeless persons, and non-US citizens bear a disproportionate burden of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Inequities in nephrology referral, vascular access, use of home dialysis modalities, kidney transplantation, and mortality are prominent. Public policies, including the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, end-stage renal disease Quality Incentive Program, and the Prospective Payment System, were enacted to improve healthcare access and dialysis care. Here, we highlight inequities in dialysis care and outcomes, how current ESKD and other public policies may influence or exacerbate these inequities, and gaps in the literature needed to inform future policies toward achieving equity in ESKD. We give special attention to the 2019 Advancing American Kidney Health Executive Order, which has high potential to radically transform dialysis care.     

ATTENTION: Workforce shortages as a barrier to optimal dialysis

Providing optimal end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) management requires an adequately trained and sufficiently staffed workforce, including doctors, nurses, and patient care technicians (PCTs). The growing need for ESKD services for a surging population of dialysis-dependent patients has made obvious a workforce crisis affecting nephrology. For a multitude of reasons, the physician workforce supply available to provide dialysis care has failed to expand commensurate with patients need in recent years. Of most importance, fewer US trainees are choosing to enter nephrology, and fewer international medical graduates are available to fill training program rosters. Equally important but less frequently cited are occupational shortages of trained dialysis nurses and PCTs. This article brings attention to this complex workforce shortage and addresses the limited information available regarding how it might constitute a barrier to optimal dialysis care.     

Barriers to kidney transplantation in ESKD

Kidney transplantation is the ideal treatment option for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Since there is clear mortality benefit to receiving a transplant regardless of comorbidities and age, the gold standard of care should focus on attaining kidney transplantation and minimizing, or better yet eliminating, time on dialysis. Unfortunately, only a small percentage of patients with ESKD receive a kidney transplant. Several barriers to kidney transplantation have been identified. Barriers can largely be grouped into three categories: patient-related, physician/provider-related, and system-related. Several barriers fall into multiple categories and play a role at various levels within the healthcare system. Acknowledging and understanding these barriers will allow transplant centers and dialysis facilities to make the necessary interventions to mitigate these disparities, optimize the transplant evaluation process, and improve patient outcomes. This review will discuss these barriers and potential interventions to increase access to kidney transplantation.     

Preemptive kidney transplantation: Has it come of age?

The benefits of preemptive kidney transplantation are manifold. By avoiding complications associated with dialysis, preemptive kidney transplantation offers significant benefits in terms of patient welfare and societal cost-saving. Patients transplanted preemptively also tend to enjoy better patient and graft survival, especially when done with a living-donor organ. While dialysis exposure limited to 6 to 12 months may not significantly impact post-transplant outcomes, longer period of dialysis has been shown to increase the risk of mortality, delayed graft function, acute rejection, and death-censored graft loss. The benefits of preemptive transplantation also extend to different age groups and end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) diagnoses. However, multiple barriers have prevented wider adoption of preemptive transplantation as the primary treatment of ESKD around the world. Timely preparation for ESKD and identification of living donors should be encouraged in all patients with advanced chronic kidney disease to increase the chance of preemptive transplantation.     

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.     

Barriers to optimal vascular access for hemodialysis

Vascular access is the Achilles heel for hemodialysis (HD). An arteriovenous fistula (AVF), considered the optimal access for HD, rather than a graft or central venous catheter (CVC) caused the “Fistula First” initiative to dominate quality assessment. However, this initiative had the unintended consequence of increasing the proportion of less desirable catheters, leading to “Fistula First, Catheter Last”. But as the end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) population expanded with aging, sicker patients, individual assessment of the appropriate access changed the paradigm to KDOQI’s “Patient First: ESKD Life-Plan” to attain the “right access, in the right patient, at the right time, for the right reasons”. However, such a goal has proved elusive because the optimal vascular access does not currently exist. Thus, ESKD care providers attempting to offer the “right access” must weigh the barriers to achieving the most optimal access to suit each of their HD patients. The barriers are based on shortcomings related specifically to each of the three vascular accesses and to characteristics of each ESKD patient's demographics, physical factors, quality of life, and cost considerations. This article will describe these barriers so that clinicians caring for ESKD patients initiating or receiving HD provide the most optimal vascular access for that specific patient.     

Canadian survey of clinical status at dialysis initiation 1998-1999: a multicenter prospective survey

AIMS: The current growth in end-stage kidney disease populations has led to increased efforts to understand the impact of status at dialysis initiation on long-term outcomes. Our main objective was to improve the understanding of current Canadian nephrology practice between October 1998 and December 1999. METHODS: Fifteen nephrology centers in 7 provinces participated in a prospective data collection survey. The main outcome of interest was the clinical status at dialysis initiation determined by: residual kidney function, preparedness for chronic dialysis as measured by presence or absence of permanent peritoneal or hemodialysis access, hemoglobin and serum albumin. Uremic symptoms at dialysis initiation were also recorded, however, in some cases these symptom data were obtained retrospectively. RESULTS: Data on 251 patients during 1-month periods were collected. Patients commenced dialysis at mean calculated creatinine clearance levels of approximately 10 ml/min, with an average of 3 symptoms. 35% of patients starting dialysis had been known to nephrologists for less than 3 months. These patients are more likely to commence without permanent access and with lower hemoglobin and albumin levels. Even of those known to nephrologists, only 66% had permanent access in place. CONCLUSIONS: Patients commencing dialysis in Canada appear to be doing so in relative concordance with published guidelines with respect to timing of initiation. Despite an increased awareness of kidney disease, a substantial number of patients continues to commence dialysis without previous care by a nephrologist. Of those who are seen by nephrologists, clinical and laboratory parameters are suboptimal according to current guidelines. This survey serves as an important baseline for future comparisons after the implementation of educational strategies for referring physicians and nephrologists.     

Review of ethnic disparities in access to renal transplantation

Renal transplantation is the gold standard treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease and is associated with several advantages over dialysis, including increased quality of life, reduced morbidity and mortality, and lower healthcare costs. Barring the constraints of a limited organ supply, the goals of the patient care should focus on attaining renal transplantation while minimizing, or even eliminating, time spent on dialysis. Disparities in access to renal transplantation between African Americans and Caucasians have been extensively documented, with African Americans having significantly poorer access. There is a growing corpus of literature examining the determinants of reduced access among other racial ethnic minority groups, including Hispanics. These determinants include patient and physician preference, socioeconomic status, insurance type, patient education, and immunologic factors. We review these determinants in access to renal transplantation in the United States among all races and ethnicities.     

Neuromuscular Disease in the Dialysis Patient: An Update for the Nephrologist

Neuromuscular disease is an extremely common complication of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), manifesting in almost all dialysis patients, and leading to weakness, reduced exercise capacity, and disability. Recent studies have suggested that hyperkalemia may underlie the development of neuropathy. As such, maintenance of serum K⁺ within normal limits between periods of dialysis in ESKD patients manifesting early neuropathic symptoms may reduce neuropathy development and progression. For patients with more severe neuropathic syndromes, increased dialysis frequency or a switch to high-flux dialysis may prevent further deterioration, while ultimately, renal transplantation is required to improve and restore nerve function. Exercise training programs are beneficial for ESKD patients with muscle weakness due to neuropathy or myopathy, and are capable of improving exercise tolerance and quality of life. Specific treatments have recently been evaluated for symptoms of autonomic neuropathy, including sildenafil for impotence and midodrine for intra-dialytic hypotension, and have been shown to be effective and well tolerated. Other important management strategies for neuropathy include attention to foot care to prevent callus and ulceration, vitamin supplementation, and erythropoietin. Treatment with membrane-stabilizing agents, such as amitryptiline and gabapentin, are highly effective in patients with painful neuropathy.     

Immigration status and end-stage kidney disease: Role of policy and access to care

Immigration status is an important mitigating factor in determining the provision of dialysis and kidney-related care. Immigrants make up the largest uninsured group in the country. For immigrants with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), dialysis access varies by insurance type and by state, leading to great variability in the availability of kidney care. In some states, undocumented immigrants may only qualify for hemodialysis when critically ill (emergency hemodialysis), which is associated with higher mortality, hospital length of stay, and cost, in addition to an emotional burden on patients, their caregivers, and healthcare professionals. Barriers to effective care for immigrants with ESKD include immigration status, insurance access, and availability of pre-end stage kidney disease care, vascular access, and transplant. Effective strategies for improving dialysis care for immigrants include advocacy at the state and federal level, broadening definitions under Emergency Medicaid, and improving benefits for home therapies and transplantation options.     

Begin with the end in mind: the value of outcome-driven nephrology social work

The last decade has brought multiple changes in the delivery of care to patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), and the nephrology social worker, like other members of the dialysis care team, has changed in response to a new health care climate. This article reviews a disease course perspective of CKD and the outcome-driven nephrology social work model of practice. The outcome-driven model is strategic and works toward improving patient outcomes. In this model, the social worker identifies and isolates barriers to desired treatment outcomes such as survival, quality of life, and cost containment and develops focused psychosocial interventions to reduce barriers to positive treatment outcomes. Measurement is the key to refining interventions to meet patient and clinic needs. Once an intervention is fine tuned, it can become a standard intervention in a "tool kit" that can be used by the social worker on micro- and macrolevels. This model of nephrology social work practice can improve treatment outcomes in areas such as depression management, fluid management, care planning, missed treatments, rehabilitation, satisfaction with care, and reduced hospitalizations.     

Restricting cadaveric kidney transplantation based on age: the impact on efficiency and equity

BACKGROUND: Caring for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is resource intense, and health care costs for this small segment of the population continue to rise. When compared to long-term dialysis as a therapy for ESRD, kidney transplantation increases survival, improves quality of life, and is cost saving. METHODS: We used decision analytic techniques to determine if cadaveric kidney transplantation is cost-effective in all age groups. We then looked at the impact of a strategy of restricting access to transplantation to those under 60 years of age to determine the impact on overall clinical outcomes and costs, as well as the outcomes and costs within each age group. RESULTS: Equal access to cadaveric kidney transplantation resulted in an increase in expected life years (7.4 vs 6.7 years) and a significant cost savings ($376,577 vs $568,670 per patient) compared to a strategy of long-term dialysis therapy over a 25-year time horizon. This pattern was seen for the overall cohort, and for all four age groups individually. Restricting access to transplantation to patients under the age of 60 resulted in only a very small improvement in expected life years and small cost savings under base-case assumptions. As expected, older patients were adversely impacted by this strategy. CONCLUSION: We have shown that transplantation is cost-effective for all age groups. A strategy of restricting access to transplantation to younger patients does not result in large cost savings and provides only small improvements in expected life-years at the expense of significantly worse outcomes in older patients.     

The cost-effectiveness of increasing kidney transplantation and home-based dialysis

Background:   Renal replacement therapy (RRT) consumes sizable proportions of health budgets internationally, but there is considerable variability in choice of RRT modality among and within countries with major implications for health outcomes and costs. We aimed to quantify these implications for increasing kidney transplantation and improving the rate of home-based dialysis.
Methods:   A multiple cohort Markov model was used to assess costs and health outcomes of RRT for new end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients in Australia for 2005–2010, using a health-care funder perspective. Patient characteristics and current practice patterns were based on the ANZDATA Registry. Two proposed changes were modelled: (i) increasing kidney transplants by between 10% and 50% by 2010; and (ii) increasing home haemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) to the highest rates observed among Australian centres. We assessed costs (Australian dollars), survival and quality-adjusted survival, and cost-effectiveness.
Results:   The number of new ESKD patients in 2010 was estimated to be 2700, with annual RRT costs of about $A700 million; cumulative costs (2005–2010) were $A5 billion. Increasing transplants by 10–50% saves between $A5.8 and $A26.2 million, and increases quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) by 130–658 QALYs. Switching new patients from hospital HD to (i) home HD saves $A46.6 million by 2010; or (ii) PD saves $A122.1 million.
Conclusions:   These clinical practice changes reduce costs, improve patient quality of life and, in the case of transplantation, increase survival. Planning for RRT services should incorporate efforts to maximize rates of transplantation and to encourage home-based over hospital-based dialysis to optimize cost-effectiveness in RRT service delivery.     

Four years into MACRA: What has changed?

In 2015, Congress passed the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA), a policy intended to transition Medicare away from pure fee-for-service care to value-based care. MACRA does this by evaluating the cost and quality of providers, resulting in financial bonuses and penalties in Medicare reimbursement. MACRA offers two tracks for participation, the Merit-based Incentive Payment System and the Advanced Alternative Payment Models. Although the payment rules are different for each of the tracks, common to both is an emphasis on holding providers accountable for high-quality, cost-efficient care. Early data suggest that the End-stage renal disease Seamless Care Organizations, an Advanced Alternative Payment Model, resulted in cost-savings concurrent with improved care quality. Additionally, on July 10th 2019, the President signed an executive order that further attempts to improve kidney disease care by shifting its focus away from in-center hemodialysis toward chronic kidney disease care, home-based dialysis, kidney transplantation, and innovating new therapies for kidney disease. These changes to nephrology reimbursement present a unique opportunity to improve patient outcomes in a cost-effective way. A multidisciplinary effort among policy makers, nephrology providers, and patient advocacy groups is critical to ensure these changes in care delivery safeguard and improve patient health.     

Obesity as a barrier to kidney transplantation: Time to eliminate the body weight bias?

There is clear evidence that survival rates following transplantation far exceed those for remaining on dialysis, regardless of body size measured by body mass index (BMI). Studies over the past 15 years also suggest little to no difference in long‐term outcomes, including graft survival and mortality, irrespective of BMI, in contrast to earlier evidence. However, weight bias still exists, as access to kidney transplantation remains inequitable in centers using arbitrary BMI limits. Clinicians faced with the decision regarding listing based on body size are not helped by conflicting recommendations in national and international guidelines. Therefore, in clinical practice, obesity, and recommendations for weight loss, remain a controversial issue when assessing suitability for kidney transplantation. Obesity management interventions in end‐stage kidney disease (ESKD), whether for weight loss for transplantation listing or for slowing kidney disease progression, are under‐explored in trial settings. Bariatric surgery is the most successful treatment for obesity, but carries increased risk in the ESKD population, and the desired outcome of kidney transplant listing is not guaranteed. Centers that limit transplants to those meeting arbitrary levels of body mass, rather than adopting an individualized assessment approach, may be unfairly depriving many ESKD patients of the survival and quality of life benefits derived from kidney transplantation. However, robotic kidney transplantation surgery holds promise for reducing perioperative risks related to obesity, and may therefore represent an opportunity to remove listing criteria based on size.     

Health care transition for adolescents with CKD-the journey from pediatric to adult care

The design of Health Care Transition (HCT) services for adolescents and emerging adults with CKD or end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) needs to take into account patient cognition/developmental stage, family factors, and health resources within the hospital setting and community. Patient and family education is fundamental and teaching and learning tools must be literacy-accessible. Adolescents and emerging adults with CKD/ESDK have complex medical and dietary regimes, and therapeutic adherence is important for optimizing their health, quality of life, and longevity. Health providers need to identify ways of engaging them to become successful disease self-mangers. Interdisciplinary collaboration between the pediatric- and adult-focused health care teams and the services of a dedicated transition coordinator are paramount to ensure clear communication between the patient and the health professionals involved. Valid measurement tools to monitor and assess the HCT process and health outcomes need to be developed. The aims of planned HCT for adolescents and/or emerging adults with CKD/ESKD are anchored by the goals of optimizing health outcomes, health-related quality of life, and continuous quality improvement. The care of young people with CKD/ESKD can be both challenging and rewarding; we offer strategies for planned HCT services geared to these vulnerable patients.     

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.     

The promise of symptom-targeted intervention to manage depression in dialysis patients

Research with tens of thousands of dialysis patients has established a link between depression, health-related quality of life scores, survival, and hospitalizations. In fact, physical and mental functioning scores are as predictive of death and hospitalization as Kt/V and albumin. Some models for managing depression in the dialysis clinic have been developed. These models address barriers to accessing community mental health services. They also promote collaboration between the nephrology social worker and nephrologist to assurethat patients receive counseling and/or antidepressant medications when they need them. Part 1 of this article will introduce a promising new method designed for nephrology social workers to help patients manage depression. This method, known as symptom-targeted intervention (STI), can be used in brief intervals with patients while they are receiving dialysis treatments to help reduce depressive symptoms and improve quality of life. The second part of this article, which will appear in the June issue of Nephrology News & Issues, will report the outcomes of a 17-state pilot study in which more than 45 nephrology social workers used brief, focused STI methods with more than 75 patients in the dialysis clinic setting. The impact of STI on depression and quality of life in this sample will be explored as well as how those outcomes may impact hospitalizations, improve patient survival, and contain costs in a bundled reimbursement environment.     

The Overuse,Underuse, and Misuse of Dialysis in ESKD Patients with Dementia

The profile of patients on chronic dialysis has shifted. There is a growing group of older patients with comorbid dementia and ESKD, who are at risk of overuse, underuse, and misuse of dialysis. Policy is lacking to help guide treatment decisions in this group. This paper explores clinical considerations specific to patients with comorbid ESKD and dementia. These include: the impact of comorbid dementia on dialysis effectiveness and feasibility; burden of care issues that are specific to patients with dementia; and capacity, autonomy, and consent. A better understanding of these issues may help guide discussions and decision making about treatment. For some older patients with multiple comorbidities including dementia, dialysis does not provide survival or quality of life benefit compared to medical management. These patients also experience additional treatment burden due to a ‘dementia unfriendly’ environment. However, exceptions may include patients who are younger, more independent, and have fewer comorbidities. Patients with dementia are often inappropriately assumed to lack capacity to participate in treatment decision making, and are at risk of having their preferences overlooked. Many patients with mild‐to‐moderate dementia remain capable of reporting their preferences and quality of life, and should always be involved in treatment discussions where possible.