Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making and BioMed Central.

Open Access Research article

Impact of a chronic kidney disease registry and provider education on guideline adherence – a cluster randomized controlled trial

Paul E Drawz123*, R Tyler Miller12, Simran Singh2, Brook Watts2 and Elizabeth Kern4

Author Affiliations

1 Nephrology & Hypertension, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA

2 Medicine, Louis Stokes Cleveland VAMC, Cleveland, OH, USA

3 MetroHealth Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA

4 Department of Medicine, National Jewish Health, Denver, CO, USA

For all author emails, please log on.

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2012, 12:62  doi:10.1186/1472-6947-12-62

Published: 5 July 2012

Abstract

Background

Low adherence to chronic kidney disease (CKD) guidelines may be due to unrecognized CKD and lack of guideline awareness on the part of providers. The goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of provider education and access to a CKD registry on guideline adherence.

Methods

We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial at the Louis Stokes Cleveland VAMC. One of two primary care clinics was randomized to intervention. Providers from both clinics received a lecture on CKD guidelines at study initiation. Providers in the intervention clinic were given access to and shown how to use a CKD registry, which identifies patients with CKD and is automatically updated daily. Eligible patients had at least one primary care visit in the last year, had CKD based on eGFR, and had not received renal replacement therapy. The primary outcome was parathyroid hormone (PTH) adherence, defined by at least one PTH measurement during the 12 month study. Secondary outcomes were measurement of phosphorus, hemoglobin, proteinuria, achievement of goal blood pressure, and treatment with a diuretic or renin-angiotensin system blocker.

Results

There were 418 and 363 eligible patients seen during the study in the control and intervention clinics, respectively. Compared to pre-intervention, measurement of PTH increased in both clinics (control clinic: 16% to 23%; intervention clinic: 13% to 28%). Patients in the intervention clinic were more likely to have a PTH measured during the study (adjusted odds ratio = 1.53; 95% CI (1.01, 2.30); P = 0.04). However, the intervention was not associated with a consistent improvement in secondary outcomes. Only 5 of the 37 providers in the intervention clinic accessed the registry.

Conclusions

An intervention that included education on CKD guidelines and access to a CKD patient registry marginally improved guideline adherence over education alone. Adherence to the primary process measure improved in both clinics, but no improvement was seen in intermediate clinical outcomes. Improving the care of patients with CKD will likely require a multifaceted approach including system redesign.

ClinicalTrials.Gov registration number

NCT00921687

Keywords:
Chronic kidney disease; Randomized controlled trial; Health services research; Electronic health records