The prognostic reasoning system for chronic kidney disease progression (PROGRES-CKD) may help improve waiting list management for outpatient nephrology services in a second-level public hospital in Italy.

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Journal of Nephrology Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-27 DOI:10.1007/s40620-025-02222-8
Paolo Fabbrini, Federico Pieruzzi, Francesco Bellocchio, Raul Casana Eslava, Jordi Silvestre Llopis, Kevin Morillo Navarro, Paola Ferraresi, Len Usvyat, John Larkin, Jaroslav Rosemberg, Stefano Stuard, Luca Neri
{"title":"The prognostic reasoning system for chronic kidney disease progression (PROGRES-CKD) may help improve waiting list management for outpatient nephrology services in a second-level public hospital in Italy.","authors":"Paolo Fabbrini, Federico Pieruzzi, Francesco Bellocchio, Raul Casana Eslava, Jordi Silvestre Llopis, Kevin Morillo Navarro, Paola Ferraresi, Len Usvyat, John Larkin, Jaroslav Rosemberg, Stefano Stuard, Luca Neri","doi":"10.1007/s40620-025-02222-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The management of patients with non-dialysis dependent chronic kidney disease (NDD-CKD) is challenging due to coexisting diseases, competing risks and uncertainties around optimal transition planning. Such clinical challenges are further exacerbated by physician shortage, coupled with rising service demands, which may hinder timely medical access due to long waiting times. Accurate progression risk assessment may help optimize resource allocation and adapting care based on individual patients' needs. This study validated the Prognostic Reasoning System for Chronic Kidney Disease Progression (PROGRES-CKD) in an Italian public hospital and compared its potential impact on waiting list optimization against physician-based protocols.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>First we first validated PROGRES-CKD by assessing its accuracy in predicting kidney replacement therapy (KRT) initiation within 6 months and 24 months in a historical cohort of patients treated at the San Gerardo Hospital (Italy) between 01-01-2015 and 31-12-2019. In a second study we compared PROGRES-CKD to attending nephrologists' prognostic ratings and simulated their potential impact on a waiting list management protocol.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 2005 patients who underwent 11,757 outpatient nephrology visits in 4 years. Most visits occurred for NDD-CKD stage 4 patients; the incidence of KRT onset was 10.8 and 9.32/100 patient-years at the 6 and 24-month prediction horizon cohorts, respectively. PROGRES-CKD demonstrated high accuracy in predicting KRT initiation at 6 and 24 months (AUROC = 0.88 and AUROC = 0.85, respectively). Nephrologists' prognostic performance was highly operator-dependent, albeit always significantly lower than PROGRES-CKD. In the simulation exercise, allocation based on PROGRES-CKD resulted in more follow-up visits for patients progressing to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and fewer visits for non-progressing patients, compared to allocation determined by nephrologists' prognosis.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PROGRES-CKD showed high accuracy in a real-world application. Waiting list simulation suggests that PROGRES-CKD may enable more efficient allocation of resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":16542,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":"1219-1227"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40620-025-02222-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The management of patients with non-dialysis dependent chronic kidney disease (NDD-CKD) is challenging due to coexisting diseases, competing risks and uncertainties around optimal transition planning. Such clinical challenges are further exacerbated by physician shortage, coupled with rising service demands, which may hinder timely medical access due to long waiting times. Accurate progression risk assessment may help optimize resource allocation and adapting care based on individual patients' needs. This study validated the Prognostic Reasoning System for Chronic Kidney Disease Progression (PROGRES-CKD) in an Italian public hospital and compared its potential impact on waiting list optimization against physician-based protocols.

Methods: First we first validated PROGRES-CKD by assessing its accuracy in predicting kidney replacement therapy (KRT) initiation within 6 months and 24 months in a historical cohort of patients treated at the San Gerardo Hospital (Italy) between 01-01-2015 and 31-12-2019. In a second study we compared PROGRES-CKD to attending nephrologists' prognostic ratings and simulated their potential impact on a waiting list management protocol.

Results: We included 2005 patients who underwent 11,757 outpatient nephrology visits in 4 years. Most visits occurred for NDD-CKD stage 4 patients; the incidence of KRT onset was 10.8 and 9.32/100 patient-years at the 6 and 24-month prediction horizon cohorts, respectively. PROGRES-CKD demonstrated high accuracy in predicting KRT initiation at 6 and 24 months (AUROC = 0.88 and AUROC = 0.85, respectively). Nephrologists' prognostic performance was highly operator-dependent, albeit always significantly lower than PROGRES-CKD. In the simulation exercise, allocation based on PROGRES-CKD resulted in more follow-up visits for patients progressing to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and fewer visits for non-progressing patients, compared to allocation determined by nephrologists' prognosis.

Conclusions: PROGRES-CKD showed high accuracy in a real-world application. Waiting list simulation suggests that PROGRES-CKD may enable more efficient allocation of resources.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
慢性肾脏疾病进展的预后推理系统(progress - ckd)可能有助于改善意大利二级公立医院门诊肾脏病服务的等候名单管理。
背景:非透析依赖性慢性肾脏疾病(NDD-CKD)患者的管理是具有挑战性的,因为共存的疾病,竞争的风险和围绕最佳过渡计划的不确定性。由于医生短缺,加上服务需求不断增加,由于等待时间过长,可能妨碍及时获得医疗服务,这进一步加剧了这种临床挑战。准确的进展风险评估可能有助于优化资源分配,并根据个别患者的需要调整护理。本研究验证了意大利一家公立医院的慢性肾脏疾病进展预后推理系统(progress - ckd),并比较了其对候诊名单优化和基于医生的方案的潜在影响。方法:首先,我们通过评估progress - ckd在2015年1月1日至2019年12月31日期间在意大利圣吉拉尔多医院(San Gerardo Hospital)治疗的患者的6个月和24个月内预测肾脏替代治疗(KRT)开始的准确性来验证其有效性。在第二项研究中,我们比较了progress - ckd和主治肾病学家的预后评分,并模拟了它们对等待名单管理方案的潜在影响。结果:我们纳入了2005名患者,在4年内进行了11,757次门诊肾脏病就诊。大多数就诊发生在NDD-CKD 4期患者;在6个月和24个月的预测水平队列中,KRT发病发生率分别为10.8和9.32/100患者-年。progress - ckd在预测KRT在6个月和24个月开始时具有很高的准确性(AUROC分别为0.88和0.85)。肾科医生的预后表现高度依赖于手术,尽管总是明显低于progress - ckd。在模拟试验中,与由肾病学家的预后决定的分配相比,基于progress - ckd的分配导致进展到终末期肾病(ESKD)的患者随访次数更多,而非进展的患者随访次数更少。结论:progress - ckd在实际应用中具有较高的准确性。等待名单模拟表明,progress - ckd可以更有效地分配资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Nephrology
Journal of Nephrology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
5.90%
发文量
289
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Nephrology is a bimonthly journal that considers publication of peer reviewed original manuscripts dealing with both clinical and laboratory investigations of relevance to the broad fields of Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation. It is the Official Journal of the Italian Society of Nephrology (SIN).
期刊最新文献
Impact of chronic kidney disease on sexual health: a survey of dialysis and transplant patients at Strasbourg University Hospital. Transforming chronic kidney disease care with telemedicine: expert consensus recommendations from the Italian Society of Nephrology. Delayed graft function in kidney transplantation: a review of contemporary challenges and updates. Ambrisentan as adjunctive therapy for IgA nephropathy: a retrospective single-center analysis. The impact of pre-transplant atherosclerosis and coronary artery disease on cardiovascular and graft outcomes in kidney transplant recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1