Effect of Nephrology Care on Mortality in Incident Dialysis Patients: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Long-term and continuous nephrology care effects on post-dialysis mortality remain unclear. This study aims to systematically explore the causal effect of nephrology care on mortality for patients with dialysis initiation. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to include incident patients with dialysis for ≥ 3 months in Taiwan from 2004 through 2011. The continuous nephrology care of incident patients in the three years before their dialysis was measured every six months. Continuous nephrology care was determined by 0–6, 0–12, …, 0–36 months and their counterparts; and none, intermittent, 0–6 months, …, and 0–36 months. Simple and weighted hazards ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for one-year mortality were estimated after propensity score (PS) matching. We included a total of 44,698 patients (mean age 63.3 ± 14.2, male 51.9%). Receiving ≥ 1 year predialysis nephrology care was associated with a 22% lower post-dialysis mortality hazard. No different effects were found (ranges of PS matching HR: 0.77–0.80) when comparing the defined duration of nephrology care with their counterparts. Stepped survival benefits were newly identified in the intermittent care, which had slightly lower HRs (weighted HR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.79–0.97), followed by reviving care over six months to two years (ranges of weighted HR: 0.60–0.65), and reviving care over two years (ranges of weighted HR: 0.48–0.52). There was no existing critical period of nephrology care effect on post-dialysis, but there were extra survival benefits when extending nephrology care to >2 years, which suggests that continuous and long-term care during pre-dialysis/chronic kidney disease phase is required.

Specialised outpatient paediatric palliative care team–parent collaboration: narrative interviews with parents

ObjectiveIn Germany, children with life-limiting conditions and complex symptoms are eligible for specialised outpatient palliative care (SOPC). In the federal state of Hesse, SOPC for children (SOPPC) is delivered by teams with paediatric expertise. While burdened by the life-limiting condition of their child, parents must also fulfill their roles as main care providers and decision makers. Collaboration between parents and SOPPC teams is important, as the intermittent care and uncertainty it entails often lasts for several months or years. We explored parents’ experiences and their demands of collaboration with SOPPC teams.MethodsWe conducted nine narrative interviews with 13 parents of children and adolescents with life-limiting conditions and used a grounded theory approach to analyse interview data.ResultsParents stressed the importance of paediatric expertise, honesty, psychosocial support, an individualised approach, experience of self-efficacy and the need to be recognised as experts for their children. The narrative interviews showed that collaboration between parents and SOPPC teams was characterised by parents’ need for specialised professional assistance and their simultaneous empowerment by SOPPC teams.ConclusionsParents’ perceptions of what good collaboration with SOPPC teams entails are manifold. To meet these complex needs, SOPPC requires time and specialised expertise.

Patch validation: an observational study protocol for the evaluation of a multisignal wearable sensor in patients during anaesthesia and in the postanaesthesia care unit

IntroductionExcept for operating rooms, postanaesthesia care units and intensive care units, where the monitoring of vital signs is continuous, intermittent care is standard practice. However, at a time when only the patients with the most serious conditions are hospitalised and only a fraction of these patients are in intensive care units, this type of monitoring is no longer sufficient. Wireless monitoring has been proposed, but it requires rigorous validation. The aim of this observational study is to compare vital signs obtained from a precordial patch sensor to those obtained with conventional monitoring.Methods and analysisThis patch validation trial will be an observational, prospective, single-centre open study of 115 anaesthetised adult patients monitored with both a wireless sensor (myAngel VitalSigns, Devinnova, Montpellier, France) and a standard bedside monitor (Carescape Monitor B850, GE Healthcare, Chicago, Illinois). Both sensors will be used to record peripheral oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, heart rate, body temperature and blood pressure (systolic and diastolic). The main objective will be to assess the degree of agreement between the two systems during the patients’ stay in the postanaesthesia care unit, both at the raw signal level and at the clinical parameter level. The secondary objectives will be to assess the same performance under anaesthesia, the frequency of missing data or artefacts, the diagnostic performance of the systems, the influence of patients’ characteristics on agreement between the two systems, the adverse events and the acceptability of the patch to patients. Bland-Altman plots will be used in the main analysis to detect discrepancies and estimate the limits of agreement.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained from the Ethical Committee (Toulouse, France) on 10 April 2020. We are not yet recruiting subjects for this study. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT04344093.