Affiliations 

  • 1 Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Family Medicine, Malaysia
  • 2 Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Family Medicine, Malaysia. [email protected]
  • 3 Klinik Primer HCTM Cheras, Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz, Cheras, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • 4 Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Nephrology Unit, Malaysia
Med J Malaysia, 2023 Nov;78(6):721-732.
PMID: 38031213

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) rapid progression is associated with higher risk of end-stage kidney disease and higher mortality rate. Monitoring and recognition of CKD rapid progression is still lacking, however interventions have been shown to improve this. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of CKD-CHECK toolkit and preliminary measure the outcome of the CKD-CHECK toolkit in assisting primary care doctor to order further tests for CKD rapid progressors and trigger appropriate nephrology referral.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The CKD-CHECK (CKD-CHECK EGFR Chart in Kidney disease) is a toolkit that was developed to auto-generate patients' eGFR trend using a line graph, displaying the trend visually over a year. It identifies patients with rapid CKD progression, triggers the doctors to order appropriate tests (proteinuria quantification or renal imaging) and helps in decision making (continued monitoring at primary care level or referral to nephrologist). The toolkit was piloted among medical officers practising in a hospital-based primary care clinic treating patients with eGFR<60ml/min/1.73m2 using an interventional before-after study design from February to May 2022. In the preintervention period, the CKD patients were managed based on standard practice. The doctors then used the CKDCHECK toolkit on the same group of CKD patients during the intervention period. The feasibility and acceptability of the toolkit was assessed at the end of the study period using the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) and Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM) questionnaires. All patients' clinical data and referral rate were collected retrospectively through medical files and electronic data systems. Comparison between the pre- and post-intervention group were analysed using paired t-test and McNemar test, with statistical significance p value of <0.05.

RESULTS: A total of 25 medical officers used the toolkit on 60 CKD patients. The medical officers found the CKD-CHECK toolkit to be highly acceptable and feasible in primary care setting. The baseline characteristics of the patients were a mean age of 72 years old, predominantly females and Chinese ethnicity. Majority of the CKD patients had diabetes mellitus, hypertension and dyslipidemia. The numbers of CKD rapid progressors was similar (26.7% in the preintervention group vs 33.3% in the post-intervention group). There were no significant differences in terms of proteinuria assessment and ultrasound kidney for CKD rapid progressors before and after the intervention. However, a significant number of CKD rapid progressors were referred to nephrologists after the use of CKD-CHECK toolkit (p=0.016).

CONCLUSIONS: CKD-CHECK toolkit is acceptable and feasible to be used in primary care. Preliminary findings show that the CKD-CHECK toolkit improved the primary care doctor's referral of rapid CKD progressors to nephrologists.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.