Esmee M. van der Willik

Objectives: This study aimed to assess construct validity against commonly used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), test–retest reliability and responsiveness of seven Dutch-Flemish Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) computerised adaptive testing (CATs) in Dutch adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D), and assess their acceptability in healthcare providers and people with T2D. Design: A cross-sectional observational study in people with T2D and qualitative study involving both people with T2D and healthcare professionals. Setting: Participants with T2D were recruited from the ongoing Hoorn Diabetes Care System cohort in the West-Friesland area of the Netherlands. Additionally, people with T2D and advanced chronic kidney disease were recruited at the outpatient clinics of Amsterdam University Medical Centre and ‘Niercentrum aan de Amstel’, both in the Amsterdam area of the Netherlands. The healthcare professionals involved in the qualitative part were recruited at the Amsterdam University Medical Centre. Participants: 314 people with T2D (age 64.0±10.8 years, 63.7% men). Primary and secondary outcome measures: Participants completed seven PROMIS CATs (assessing (1) Physical Function, (2) Pain Interference, (3) Fatigue, (4) Sleep Disturbance, (5) Anxiety, (6) Depression and (7) Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities), and PROMs measuring similar constructs. After 2 weeks and 6 months, participants completed the CATs measures again, together with seven Global Rating Scales (GRS) on perceived change in each domain. Construct validity was assessed using Pearson’s correlations. Test–retest reliability was assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Measurement error was assessed by the standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC). Responsiveness was assessed by correlations between change scores on the PROMIS CAT and GRS. Acceptability was assessed through focus groups and interviews in healthcare providers and people with T2D. Results: Except for Fatigue, all PROMIS CAT domains demonstrated sufficient construct validity, since ≥75% of the results was in accordance with a priori hypotheses. All seven PROMIS CATs showed sufficient test–retest reliability (ICCs 0.73–0.91). SEM and MDC ranged from 2.1 to 2.7 and from 5.7 to 7.4, respectively. Responsiveness was rated as insufficient in this study design as there was almost no change in participants’ own rating of their health compared with 6 months ago according to a global rating of change. During the focus groups and interviews, healthcare providers and people with T2D agreed that CATs could serve as a conversation starter in routine care, but should never replace personal consultations with a doctor. If implemented, participants would be willing to spend 15 min to complete the PROMIS CATs. Conclusions: The PROMIS CATs showed sufficient construct validity and test–retest reliability in most domains in people with T2D. Responsiveness needs to be evaluated in a population with poorer diabetes control or in a study design with longer follow-up. The CATs are well accepted to be used in care to identify relevant topics, but should not replace personal contact with the doctor.

Introduction Patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) are increasingly prevalent in healthcare and used for shared decision-making and healthcare quality evaluation. However, the extent to which patients with varying health literacy levels can complete PROMs is often overlooked. This may lead to biased aggregated data and patients being excluded from studies or other PROM collection initiatives. This cross-sectional study evaluates the comprehensibility of 157 well-known and widely used PROM scales using a comprehensibility checklist. Methods Pairs of two independent raters scored 157 PROM scales designed for adults included in the 35 sets of outcome information developed as part of the Dutch Outcome-Based Healthcare Program. The PROM scales were scored on the eight comprehensibility domains of the Pharos Checklist for Questionnaires in Healthcare (PCQH). Interrater agreement of domain ratings was assessed using Intraclass Correlation Coefficients or Cohen’s kappa. Subsequently, final ratings were established through discussion and used to evaluate the domain-specific comprehensibility rating for each PROM scale. Results Comprehensibility of a large number of PROM scales (n = 157), which cover a wide range of diseases and conditions across Dutch medical specialist care, was assessed. While most PROM scales were written at an accessible language level, with minimal use of medical terms, instruction clarity, number of questions, and response options emerged as significant issues, affecting a substantial proportion of PROM scales. Interrater agreement was high for most domains of the PCQH. Conclusion This study highlights the need for greater attention to the comprehensibility of PROMs to ensure their accessibility to all patients, including those with low health literacy. The PCQH can be a valuable tool in PROM development in addition to qualitative methods and in selection processes enabling comparison of comprehensibility between PROMs. However, the PCQH needs further development and validation for these purposes. Enhancing the comprehensibility of PROMs is essential for their effective incorporation in healthcare evaluation and decision-making processes.

Chronic kidney disease–associated pruritus (CKD-aP) is common in dialysis patients, and is associated with lower quality of life and increased risk of death. We investigated the association between residual estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), dialysis adequacy or serum phosphate level and CKD-aP in incident dialysis patients. A total of 1256 incident hemodialysis (HD) and 670 peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients (>18 years) from the Netherlands Cooperative Study on the Adequacy of Dialysis (NECOSAD) study were included (1997–2007) and followed until death, transplantation or a maximum of 10 years. CKD-aP was measured using a single item of the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Instrument-36. The associations were studied by logistic and linear regression analyses, adjusted for potential baseline confounders. At baseline mean (standard deviation) age was 60 (16) years, 62% were men and median (interquartile range) residual eGFR was 3.4 (1.7; 5.3) mL/min/1.73 m². The prevalence of CKD-aP (∼70%) was similar in HD and PD. It was observed that 12 months after starting dialysis (after multivariable adjustment) each 1 mL/min/1.73 m² higher residual eGFR, one unit higher total weekly Kt/V, or 1 mmol/L lower serum phosphate level was associated with lower burden of CKD-aP in HD and PD patients of –0.05 (95% CI –0.09; –0.02) and –0.09 (95% CI –0.13; –0.05), –0.15 (95% CI –0.26; –0.05) and –0.35 (95% CI –0.54; –0.16), and of –0.34 (95%CI: –0.51; –0.17) and –0.45 (95%CI: –0.71; –0.19), respectively. We found no association between dialysis Kt/V and CKD-aP. Higher residual eGFR and lower serum phosphate level, but not the dialysis dose, were related with lower burden of CKD-aP in dialysis patients.

Objectives Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide insight into patients’ experienced health and needs, and can improve patient–professional communication. However, little is known about how to discuss PROM results. This study aimed to provide in-depth knowledge of patients’ and healthcare professionals’ experiences with and perspectives on discussing PROM results as part of routine dialysis care. Design A qualitative study was performed using an interpretive description approach. Individual semistructured interviews were conducted with 22 patients and healthcare professionals. Interviews focused on general and specific situations (eg, addressing sensitive topics or when no medical treatment is available). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed inductively using thematic analysis. Setting Participants were purposively sampled from eight dialysis centres across the Netherlands. Participants Interviews were conducted with 10 patients receiving dialysis treatment and 12 healthcare professionals (nephrologists and nurses). Results Patients and healthcare professionals provided practical guidance for optimal discussion about PROM results. First, patients and healthcare professionals emphasised that PROM results should always be discussed and indicated how to create a suitable setting, adequately prepare, deal with time constraints and use PROMs as a tool for personalised holistic consultations. Second, patients should actively participate and healthcare professionals should take a guiding role. A trusting patient–professional relationship was considered a prerequisite and patient–professional interaction was described as a collaboration in which both contribute their knowledge, experiences and ideas. Third, follow-up after discussing PROM results was considered important, including evaluations and actions (eg, symptom management) structurally embedded into the multidisciplinary treatment process. These general themes also applied to the specific situations, for example: results should also be discussed when no medical treatment is available. Though, healthcare professionals were expected to take more initiative and a leading role when discussing sensitive topics. Conclusions This study provides insight into how to organise and conduct conversations about PROM results and lays the foundation for training healthcare professionals to optimally discuss PROM results in routine nephrology care. Further research is needed to provide guidance on follow-up actions in response to specific PROM results.

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS^®) has been recommended for computerized adaptive testing (CAT) of health-related quality of life. This study compared the content, validity, and reliability of seven PROMIS CATs to the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. Adult patients with chronic kidney disease and an estimated glomerular filtration rate under 30 mL/min/1.73 m² who were not receiving dialysis treatment completed seven PROMIS CATs (assessing physical function, pain interference, fatigue, sleep disturbance, anxiety, depression, and the ability to participate in social roles and activities), the SF-12, and the PROMIS Pain Intensity single item and Dialysis Symptom Index at inclusion and 2 weeks. A content comparison was performed between PROMIS CATs and the SF-12. Construct validity of PROMIS CATs was assessed using Pearson's correlations. We assessed the test-retest reliability of all patient-reported outcome measures by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient and minimal detectable change. In total, 207 patients participated in the study. A median of 45 items (10 minutes) were completed for PROMIS CATs. All PROMIS CATs showed evidence of sufficient construct validity. PROMIS CATs, most SF-12 domains and summary scores, and Dialysis Symptom Index showed sufficient test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥ 0.70). PROMIS CATs had a lower minimal detectable change compared with the SF-12 (range, 5.7–7.4 compared with 11.3–21.7 across domains, respectively). PROMIS CATs showed sufficient construct validity and test-retest reliability in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. PROMIS CATs required more items but showed better reliability than the SF-12. Future research is needed to investigate the feasibility of PROMIS CATs for routine nephrology care.

Background: Itching (pruritus) is common in dialysis patients, but little is known about its impact on health-related quality of life (HRQOL), sleep problems and psychological symptoms. This study investigates the impact of itching in dialysis patients by looking into the persistence of itching, the effect of itching on the course of HRQOL and the combined effect of itching with sleep problems and with psychological symptoms on HRQOL. Methods: Data were obtained from the RENINE/PROMs registry and included 2978 dialysis patients who completed patient-reported outcome measures between 2018 and 2020. Itching, sleep problems and psychological symptoms were assessed with the Dialysis Symptom Index (DSI) and HRQOL with the 12-item Short Form Health Survey. Effects of itching on HRQOL and interactions with sleep problems and psychological symptoms were investigated cross-sectionally and longitudinally using linear regression and linear mixed models. Results: Half of the patients experienced itching and in 70% of them, itching was persistent. Itching was associated with a lower physical and mental HRQOL {−3.35 [95% confidence interval (CI) −4.12 to −2.59) and −3.79 [95% CI −4.56 to −3.03]}. HRQOL remained stable during 2 years and trajectories did not differ between patients with or without itching. Sleep problems (70% versus 52%) and psychological symptoms (36% versus 19%) were more common in patients with itching. These symptoms had an additional negative effect on HRQOL but did not interact with itching. Conclusions: The persistence of itching, its impact on HRQOL over time and the additional effect on HRQOL of sleep problems and psychological symptoms emphasize the need for recognition and effective treatment of itching to reduce symptom burden and improve HRQOL.

Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly being used in nephrology care. However, in contrast to well‐known clinical measures such as blood pressure, health‐care professionals are less familiar with PROMs and the interpretation of PROM scores is therefore perceived as challenging. In this paper, we provide insight into the interpretation of PROM scores by introducing the different types and characteristics of PROMs, and the most relevant concepts for the interpretation of PROM scores. Concepts such as minimal detectable change, minimal important change and response shift are explained and illustrated with examples from nephrology care.

Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) can affect hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), with estimates ranging between 0.5% and 40%. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting incidence, mortality and risk factors for AKI in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.Methods: We systematically searched 11 electronic databases until 29 May 2020 for studies in English reporting original data on AKI and kidney replacement therapy (KRT) in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Incidences of AKI and KRT and risk ratios for mortality associated with AKI were pooled using generalized linear mixed and random-effects models. Potential risk factors for AKI were assessed using meta-regression. Incidences were stratified by geographic location and disease severity.Results: A total of 3042 articles were identified, of which 142 studies were included, with 49 048 hospitalized COVID-19 patients including 5152 AKI events. The risk of bias of included studies was generally low. The pooled incidence of AKI was 28.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 19.8–39.5] among hospitalized COVID-19 patients from the USA and Europe (20 studies) and 5.5% (95% CI 4.1–7.4) among patients from China (62 studies), whereas the pooled incidence of KRT was 7.7% (95% CI 5.1–11.4; 18 studies) and 2.2% (95% CI 1.5–3.3; 52 studies), respectively. Among patients admitted to the intensive care unit, the incidence of KRT was 20.6% (95% CI 15.7–26.7; 38 studies). Meta-regression analyses showed that age, male sex, cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, hypertension and chronic kidney disease were associated with the occurrence of AKI; in itself, AKI was associated with an increased risk of mortality, with a pooled risk ratio of 4.6 (95% CI 3.3–6.5).Conclusions: AKI and KRT are common events in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, with estimates varying across geographic locations. Additional studies are needed to better understand the underlying mechanisms and optimal treatment of AKI in these patients.

A funnel plot is a graphical method to evaluate health‐care quality by comparing hospital performances on certain outcomes. So far, in nephrology, this method has been applied to clinical outcomes like mortality and complications. However, patient‐reported outcomes (PROs; eg, health‐related quality of life [HRQOL]) are becoming increasingly important and should be incorporated into this quality assessment. Using funnel plots has several advantages, including clearly visualized precision, detection of volume‐effects, discouragement of ranking hospitals and easy interpretation of results. However, without sufficient knowledge of underlying methods, it is easy to stumble into pitfalls, such as overinterpretation of standardized scores, incorrect direct comparisons of hospitals and assuming a hospital to be in‐control (ie, to perform as expected) based on underpowered comparisons. Furthermore, application of funnel plots to PROs is accompanied by additional challenges related to the multidimensional nature of PROs and difficulties with measuring PROs. Before using funnel plots for PROs, high and consistent response rates, adequate case mix correction and high‐quality PRO measures are required. In this article, we aim to provide insight into the use and interpretation of funnel plots by presenting an overview of the basic principles, pitfalls and considerations when applied to PROs, using examples from Dutch routine dialysis care.

Background: The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is becoming increasingly important in healthcare. However, incorporation of PROMs into routine nephrological care is challenging. This study describes the first experience with PROMs in Dutch routine dialysis care.Methods: A pilot study was conducted in dialysis patients in 16 centres. Patients were invited to complete PROMs at baseline and 3 and 6 months. PROMs consisted of the 12-item short-form and Dialysis Symptom Index to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and symptom burden. Response rates, HRQoL and symptom burden scores were analysed. Qualitative research methods were used to gain insight into patients’ views on using PROMs in clinical practice.Results: In total, 512 patients (36%) completed 908 PROMs (24%) across three time points. Response rates varied from 6 to 70% among centres. Mean scores for physical and mental HRQoL were 35.6 [standard deviation (SD) 10.2] and 47.7 (SD 10.6), respectively. Patients experienced on average 10.8 (SD 6.1) symptoms with a symptom burden score of 30.7 (SD 22.0). Only 1–3% of the variation in PROM scores can be explained by differences between centres. Patients perceived discussing their HRQoL and symptom scores as insightful and valuable. Individual feedback on results was considered crucial.Conclusions: The first results show low average response rates with high variability among centres. Dialysis patients experienced a high symptom burden and poor HRQoL. Using PROMs at the individual patient level is suitable and may improve patient–professional communication and shared decision making. Further research is needed to investigate how the collection and the use of PROMs can be successfully integrated into routine care to improve healthcare quality and outcomes.