Late referral for assessment of renal failure

It has been recommended that adult patients with a serum creatinine above 150 µmol/l should be referred to a nephrologist for specialist assessment. This study ascertained all patients in Northern Ireland with creatinine above this concentration in 2001 (n?=?19 286 ) to see if this triggered referral within the subsequent year. After exclusion of those who were already known to a nephrologist and those who had acute renal failure, it was found that younger patients and diabetic patients were more likely to be referred. There was no difference in referral rates between male and female patients. However, only 6.5% of all non-diabetic subjects and 19% of diabetic patients were referred within 12 months after a first increased serum creatinine test.

Are gatekeepers to renal services referring patients equitably?

Objective: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) benefit from specialist interventions to retard progression of renal failure and prevent cardiovascular events. Certain patient groups have poor access to specialist renal services when dialysis is required. This study used a population-based laboratory database to investigate access to and timeliness of referral to renal specialists relatively early in the course of the disease.

Methods: All tests for serum creatinine and haemoglobin (Hb) A1c in Northern Ireland in a two-year period (2001 and 2002) were retrieved for 345,441 adults. Of these, 16,856 patients had at least one serum creatinine level above 150 µmol/L in 2001 not deemed to be due to acute renal failure (crude prevalence 1.42%). This cohort was followed until the end of 2002 and the differences in the time to referral to a specialist were assessed using Cox's proportional hazards regression.

Results: Diabetic patients, older patients and those living in deprived areas were significantly more likely to have serum creatinine testing, compared with non-diabetic, younger and those living in more affluent areas. Delays in referral to renal specialists for patients with raised serum creatinine levels were significantly shorter among diabetic patients, women, younger individuals, those living in rural areas, those living close to renal centres and those living in deprived areas. Overall, only 19% of diabetic patients and 6% of non-diabetic patients who had CKD had seen a renal specialist within 12 months of their index creatinine test.

Conclusion: Contrary to other diseases, disadvantaged patients do not seem to be under-investigated for renal disease compared with their more affluent neighbours and are generally referred earlier for specialist assessment. However, the absolute rate of timely specialist assessment is low. Recent changes in referral criteria for CKD will result in more referrals and will have serious resource implications. Opportunities for health gain among patients with declining renal function are being missed, particularly among the old and those living furthest from specialist centres.

The experience of individuals with renal failure participating in home haemodialysis: An interpretative phenomenological analysis.

This study explored the experience of individuals with renal failure undertaking home haemodialysis (HHD). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with six participants who were active HHD users in a UK region. Participants’ accounts were transcribed verbatim and analysed using an interpretative phenomenological approach. Three main themes were identified: (1) embracing treatment and lifestyle freedom and flexibility; (2) re-establishing a sense of self and preferred self-identity; and (3) integrating aspects of active engagement and aspects of supported, life-sustaining dependence. A ‘good fit’ between the HHD user (an independent, self-determined health participant) and the healthcare provision (personalized, enabling) is proposed.

Comparison of the acute renal and peripheral vascular responses to frusemide and bumetanide at low and high dose

1. The effects of equipotent doses of frusemide (10 mg and 100 mg) and bumetanide (250 micrograms and 2.5 mg) upon renal and peripheral vascular responses, urinary prostaglandin excretion, plasma renin activity, angiotensin II and noradrenaline were compared in nine healthy volunteers. 2. Frusemide (10 mg and 100 mg) and bumetanide (2.5 mg) increased renal blood flow acutely compared with placebo but bumetanide (250 micrograms) had no effect. The changes in peripheral vascular responses were not significantly different from placebo. 3. Urinary prostaglandin metabolite excretion was acutely increased by all treatments, with no inter-treatment difference. Plasma renin activity was increased acutely by both doses of frusemide and by bumetanide (2.5 mg) compared with placebo and to bumetanide (250 micrograms). There were no differences between the latter two treatments. Angiotensin II was increased significantly 30 min after frusemide 100 mg and bumetanide 2.5 mg, and by all four treatments at 50 min when compared with placebo. There were no significant differences between either of the low doses or the higher doses. Plasma noradrenaline was unchanged by all treatments. 4. Frusemide 100 mg and bumetanide 2.5 mg have the same effects on the renal vasculature and the renin-angiotensin-prostaglandin system. Under the conditions of this study, frusemide 10 mg had different effects on plasma renin activity than bumetanide 250 micrograms.