scholarly journals Primary Care Detection of Chronic Kidney Disease in Adults with Type-2 Diabetes: The ADD-CKD Study (Awareness, Detection and Drug Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease)

PLoS ONE ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e110535 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynda A. Szczech ◽  
Rebecca C. Stewart ◽  
Hsu-Lin Su ◽  
Richard J. DeLoskey ◽  
Brad C. Astor ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Carrasco-Tenezaca Felipe ◽  
Barrera-Guarderas Francisco ◽  
De la Torre-Cisneros Katherine ◽  
Medina-Escudero Miguel ◽  
Venegas-Baca Oscar

BMJ ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 348 (jun18 5) ◽  
pp. g3780-g3780 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. E. Shipman ◽  
M. Jawad ◽  
K. M. Sullivan ◽  
C. Ford ◽  
R. Gama

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikita Stempniewicz ◽  
Joseph A. Vassalotti ◽  
John K. Cuddeback ◽  
Elizabeth Ciemins ◽  
Amy Storfer-Isser ◽  
...  

<b>Objective: </b>Clinical guidelines for people with diabetes recommend chronic kidney disease (CKD) testing at least annually using estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and urinary albumin-creatinine ratio (uACR). We aimed to understand CKD testing among people with type 2 diabetes in the United States. <p><b>Research Design and Methods:</b> Electronic health record data were analyzed from 513,165 adults with type 2 diabetes, receiving primary care from 24 health care organizations and 1,164 clinical practice sites. We assessed the percentage of patients with both ≥1 eGFR and ≥1 uACR, <a></a><a>and each test</a> individually, in the 1, 2, and 3 years ending September 2019, by health care organization and clinical practice site. Elevated albuminuria was defined by uACR ≥30 mg/g.</p> <p><strong>Results:</strong> The 1-year median testing rate across organizations was 51.6% for both uACR and eGFR, 89.5% for eGFR, and 52.9% for uACR. uACR testing varied (10<sup>th</sup>–90<sup>th</sup> percentile) from 44.7% to 63.3% across organizations and from 13.3% to 75.4% across sites. Over 3 years, the median testing rate for uACR across organizations was 73.7%. Overall, the prevalence of detected elevated albuminuria was 15%. The average prevalence of detected elevated albuminuria increased linearly with uACR testing rates at sites, with estimated prevalence of 6%, 15%, and 30%, at uACR testing rates of 20%, 50%, and 100%. </p> <p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> While eGFR testing rates are uniformly high among people with type 2 diabetes, testing rates for uACR are suboptimal and highly variable across and within the organizations examined. Guideline-recommended uACR testing should increase detection of CKD.</p>


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikita Stempniewicz ◽  
Joseph A. Vassalotti ◽  
John K. Cuddeback ◽  
Elizabeth Ciemins ◽  
Amy Storfer-Isser ◽  
...  

<b>Objective: </b>Clinical guidelines for people with diabetes recommend chronic kidney disease (CKD) testing at least annually using estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and urinary albumin-creatinine ratio (uACR). We aimed to understand CKD testing among people with type 2 diabetes in the United States. <p><b>Research Design and Methods:</b> Electronic health record data were analyzed from 513,165 adults with type 2 diabetes, receiving primary care from 24 health care organizations and 1,164 clinical practice sites. We assessed the percentage of patients with both ≥1 eGFR and ≥1 uACR, <a></a><a>and each test</a> individually, in the 1, 2, and 3 years ending September 2019, by health care organization and clinical practice site. Elevated albuminuria was defined by uACR ≥30 mg/g.</p> <p><strong>Results:</strong> The 1-year median testing rate across organizations was 51.6% for both uACR and eGFR, 89.5% for eGFR, and 52.9% for uACR. uACR testing varied (10<sup>th</sup>–90<sup>th</sup> percentile) from 44.7% to 63.3% across organizations and from 13.3% to 75.4% across sites. Over 3 years, the median testing rate for uACR across organizations was 73.7%. Overall, the prevalence of detected elevated albuminuria was 15%. The average prevalence of detected elevated albuminuria increased linearly with uACR testing rates at sites, with estimated prevalence of 6%, 15%, and 30%, at uACR testing rates of 20%, 50%, and 100%. </p> <p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> While eGFR testing rates are uniformly high among people with type 2 diabetes, testing rates for uACR are suboptimal and highly variable across and within the organizations examined. Guideline-recommended uACR testing should increase detection of CKD.</p>


Author(s):  
Geert Goderis ◽  
Bert Vaes ◽  
Pavlos Mamouris ◽  
Eline van Craeyveld ◽  
Chantal Mathieu

Abstract Aims This study aims to assess the prevalence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), heart failure (HF), chronic kidney disease (CKD), and their combined presence in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients in primary care for whom the 2019 ADA/EASD consensus update “Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes” recommends GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-I) as first-line medications after metformin. Methods Data were obtained in 2015 from Intego, a morbidity registration network of 111 general practitioners (GPs) working in 48 practices and including 123 261 registered patients. Results Of 123 261 patients, 9616 had T2D. Of these patients, 4200 (43.7%) presented with ASCVD and/or CKD and/or HF. Specifically, 3348 (34.8%) patients had ASCVD, 388 (4.0%) had heart failure, and 1402 (14.6%) had CKD. Compared to patients without any of these comorbidities, patients with at least 1 of these conditions were older (69.7 ±12.6 vs. 63.1±12.5 years), had higher LDL-C values (104.2±35.8 mg/dl vs. 97.2±37.7) and less frequently achieved the systolic blood pressure target of 140 mm Hg (53 vs. 61%) (all p<0.001). Comorbid patients also had significantly more other comorbidities, such as dementia or cancer; received more recommended medications, such as statins; and received less metformin. Most patients with HF (325; 3.4%) had ASCVD (114; 1.2%), CKD (76; 0.8%), or both (135; 1.4%). In total, 478 patients with CKD (5.0%) also had ASCVD. Conclusions At the primary care level, 44% of T2D patients suffer from ASCVD, CKD, and/or HF, and thus qualify for GLP-1RA or SGLT2-I therapy.


Diabetes Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. dc202715
Author(s):  
Nikita Stempniewicz ◽  
Joseph A. Vassalotti ◽  
John K. Cuddeback ◽  
Elizabeth Ciemins ◽  
Amy Storfer-Isser ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp19X703193
Author(s):  
Rita Patel ◽  
Martha Elwenspoek ◽  
Jessica Watson ◽  
Ed Mann ◽  
Katharine Alsop ◽  
...  

BackgroundRates of pathology testing are rising in the UK, with significant geographical variability. Around 50% of overall GP laboratory testing represents monitoring for chronic conditions such as high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, and chronic kidney disease (CKD). Overuse of tests for monitoring chronic conditions may be a potential source of harm; causing patient anxiety, downstream tests/referrals, overdiagnosis, increase GP workload and increase health service costs. On the other hand, failure to test may lead to missed diagnoses, complications, patient harm and litigation.AimThis study aims to use an open cohort to examine current variation in the use of tests for individuals with type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and CKD>2 across the UK.MethodClinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) data will be used to consider what tests have been ordered for people with these conditions and look at variation over time, and by region, age, sex, ethnicity, and socioeconomic position using age–sex-standardised utilisation rates, descriptive statistics, and multilevel Poisson regression.ResultsAn estimated 1.2 million patients within the CPRD database have previously been diagnosed with any of the chronic conditions with over 11 million tests. Some 1 029 496 patients have hypertension, 344 613 with diabetes, and 271 897 with CKD>2, with much overlap. The results from this study will help to find what tests are currently used among patients with these conditions and to quantify variation in testing.ConclusionThis work will be used to inform the development of testing algorithms for patients with these conditions in primary care.


2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaj Metsärinne ◽  
Anders Bröijersen ◽  
Ilkka Kantola ◽  
Leo Niskanen ◽  
Aila Rissanen ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document