Abstract
Background and Aims
Anaemia is a common complication of chronic kidney disease (CKD) that is associated with fatigue, shortness of breath, and lethargy. CKD anaemia is commonly treated with oral or intravenous (IV) iron and IV or subcutaneous (SC) erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs). The objectives of this study were to understand patients’ experiences with CKD anaemia and their preferences related to treatment.
Method
Qualitative 60-minute semi-structured interviews were conducted with ESA-treated adult CKD patients with anaemia, either non–dialysis-dependent (ND) or dialysis-dependent (DD), and with practicing nephrologists in France, Germany, Spain, the UK, and Japan. The patients’ interviews, appropriately tailored for ND and DD patients, comprised three sections: 1) patients’ views on the burden of the disease and its treatment; 2) discussion of vignettes describing different treatment options; and 3) non-experimental choice questions between two hypothetical treatments including mode of administration, need for iron supplement, and risk of adverse events (AEs).
Results
A total of 51 patients were enrolled (ND, n=6 per country except for France [n=7]; DD [haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis], n=4 per country). Two nephrologists per country were interviewed. The most commonly reported symptoms associated with anaemia were tiredness (ND, 77%; DD, 85%) and shortness of breath (ND, 42%; DD, 30%); these two symptoms were also reported by nephrologists, who considered clinical efficacy the most important aspect of treatment. In Japan, dizziness was the most common (n=5/6, 83%) symptom among ND patients. Anaemia symptoms were reported to negatively affect different aspects of patients’ lives, including the ability to carry out daily activities (ND, 61%; DD, 65%), work (ND, 42%; DD, 50%), and exercise (ND, 26%; DD, 30%). ESA treatments were perceived to be effective in improving patients’ symptoms and quality of life. Many patients had not experienced AEs associated with treatment and were not concerned about them, however patients who had experienced gastrointestinal (GI) AEs due to oral iron were sensitive to the risk of GI effects. Out of 23 ND patients who were asked, 19 (83%) preferred an oral treatment due to the convenience of administration, and to avoid injection pain and drug storage requirements associated with SC administration. Self-administering SC ESAs was a concern among Japanese ND patients, who often had a healthcare professional administer the medication. Haemodialysis patients (n=12), who often receive IV ESAs during their dialysis sessions, were less likely to prefer oral treatments due to lack of perceived convenience. Peritoneal dialysis patients (n=8), who often receive home dialysis and SC ESAs, preferred oral treatment to avoid self-administration and storage requirements, and to make travel easier. Limitations of the study included the small number of participants and amendments to the eligibility criteria implemented during data collection, including more relaxed requirements for blood pressure, blood transfusion, and insulin use.
Conclusion
Patients considered the available treatment options to effectively treat CKD anaemia. Besides efficacy, patients’ primary concern was the mode of administration of their medication, rather than safety considerations.
A Review of Brooke Army Medical Center Chaplaincy Service During the SARS-COV2 Pandemic: Implications for Service Structure and Patient Needs
