Who should be responsible for the care of advanced chronic kidney disease? Do the guidelines point to the end of nephrology follow-up of advanced CKD or are they the starting point for a new approach?
Abstract The editorial comments on a recently published study in which 242 patients, with “stable” chronic kidney disease, recruited during a hospital stay, were randomised either to receiving support from nephrologists (co-management by primary care physicians and nephrologists), or to be managed b...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2020-07-01
|
Series: | BMC Nephrology |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12882-020-01908-4 |
id |
doaj-7477d095356e4de38d82bd96d357a976 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-7477d095356e4de38d82bd96d357a9762020-11-25T02:58:34ZengBMCBMC Nephrology1471-23692020-07-012111410.1186/s12882-020-01908-4Who should be responsible for the care of advanced chronic kidney disease? Do the guidelines point to the end of nephrology follow-up of advanced CKD or are they the starting point for a new approach?Giorgina Barbara Piccoli0Department of Clinical and Biological Sciences, University of TorinoAbstract The editorial comments on a recently published study in which 242 patients, with “stable” chronic kidney disease, recruited during a hospital stay, were randomised either to receiving support from nephrologists (co-management by primary care physicians and nephrologists), or to be managed by primary care physicians with written instructions and nephrology consultations on demand. After a mean follow-up of 4 years, the results in terms of dialysis start, hospitalisation and death were similar for both groups. This study gave the possibility to discuss about the options of follow-up of CKD patients, including on one side the advantage of a greater involvement of primary care physicians, who could oversee care by applying a common set of simplified guidelines, and on the other one the importance of a direct and deep involvement of the specialists that seems necessary in particular if personalised approaches have to be pursuit. The data of the present study are somehow in disagreement with the literature, usually suggesting better outcomes in intensive treatment, in which specialists are directly involved. The literature is heterogeneous, the goals vary and the populations are differently selected. The compliance issue is probably one of the missing pieces of the puzzle, and specific interventions should also be tailored to “reluctant” patients. Guidelines should probably be staring points for improvement, and not the standard of care; the study herein discussed may suggest that primary care physicians may be of great help in granting a good standard of care, hopefully as a baseline for further improvement, and personalised care.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12882-020-01908-4Chronic kidney diseaseChronic careCompliancePrimary care physiciansNephrologyGuidelines |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Giorgina Barbara Piccoli |
spellingShingle |
Giorgina Barbara Piccoli Who should be responsible for the care of advanced chronic kidney disease? Do the guidelines point to the end of nephrology follow-up of advanced CKD or are they the starting point for a new approach? BMC Nephrology Chronic kidney disease Chronic care Compliance Primary care physicians Nephrology Guidelines |
author_facet |
Giorgina Barbara Piccoli |
author_sort |
Giorgina Barbara Piccoli |
title |
Who should be responsible for the care of advanced chronic kidney disease? Do the guidelines point to the end of nephrology follow-up of advanced CKD or are they the starting point for a new approach? |
title_short |
Who should be responsible for the care of advanced chronic kidney disease? Do the guidelines point to the end of nephrology follow-up of advanced CKD or are they the starting point for a new approach? |
title_full |
Who should be responsible for the care of advanced chronic kidney disease? Do the guidelines point to the end of nephrology follow-up of advanced CKD or are they the starting point for a new approach? |
title_fullStr |
Who should be responsible for the care of advanced chronic kidney disease? Do the guidelines point to the end of nephrology follow-up of advanced CKD or are they the starting point for a new approach? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Who should be responsible for the care of advanced chronic kidney disease? Do the guidelines point to the end of nephrology follow-up of advanced CKD or are they the starting point for a new approach? |
title_sort |
who should be responsible for the care of advanced chronic kidney disease? do the guidelines point to the end of nephrology follow-up of advanced ckd or are they the starting point for a new approach? |
publisher |
BMC |
series |
BMC Nephrology |
issn |
1471-2369 |
publishDate |
2020-07-01 |
description |
Abstract The editorial comments on a recently published study in which 242 patients, with “stable” chronic kidney disease, recruited during a hospital stay, were randomised either to receiving support from nephrologists (co-management by primary care physicians and nephrologists), or to be managed by primary care physicians with written instructions and nephrology consultations on demand. After a mean follow-up of 4 years, the results in terms of dialysis start, hospitalisation and death were similar for both groups. This study gave the possibility to discuss about the options of follow-up of CKD patients, including on one side the advantage of a greater involvement of primary care physicians, who could oversee care by applying a common set of simplified guidelines, and on the other one the importance of a direct and deep involvement of the specialists that seems necessary in particular if personalised approaches have to be pursuit. The data of the present study are somehow in disagreement with the literature, usually suggesting better outcomes in intensive treatment, in which specialists are directly involved. The literature is heterogeneous, the goals vary and the populations are differently selected. The compliance issue is probably one of the missing pieces of the puzzle, and specific interventions should also be tailored to “reluctant” patients. Guidelines should probably be staring points for improvement, and not the standard of care; the study herein discussed may suggest that primary care physicians may be of great help in granting a good standard of care, hopefully as a baseline for further improvement, and personalised care. |
topic |
Chronic kidney disease Chronic care Compliance Primary care physicians Nephrology Guidelines |
url |
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12882-020-01908-4 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT giorginabarbarapiccoli whoshouldberesponsibleforthecareofadvancedchronickidneydiseasedotheguidelinespointtotheendofnephrologyfollowupofadvancedckdoraretheythestartingpointforanewapproach |
_version_ |
1724706464141934592 |