Implementation of a Digitally Enabled Care Pathway (Part 1): Impact on Clinical Outcomes and Associated Health Care Costs

Background The development of acute kidney injury (AKI) in hospitalized patients is associated with adverse outcomes and increased health care costs. Simple automated e-alerts indicating its presence do not appear to improve outcomes, perhaps because of a lack of explicitly defined integration with a clinical response. Objective We sought to test this hypothesis by evaluating the impact of a digitally enabled intervention on clinical outcomes and health care costs associated with AKI in hospitalized patients. Methods We developed a care pathway comprising automated AKI detection, mobile clinician notification, in-app triage, and a protocolized specialist clinical response. We evaluated its impact by comparing data from pre- and postimplementation phases (May 2016 to January 2017 and May to September 2017, respectively) at the intervention site and another site not receiving the intervention. Clinical outcomes were analyzed using segmented regression analysis. The primary outcome was recovery of renal function to ≤120% of baseline by hospital discharge. Secondary clinical outcomes were mortality within 30 days of alert, progression of AKI stage, transfer to renal/intensive care units, hospital re-admission within 30 days of discharge, dependence on renal replacement therapy 30 days after discharge, and hospital-wide cardiac arrest rate. Time taken for specialist review of AKI alerts was measured. Impact on health care costs as defined by Patient-Level Information and Costing System data was evaluated using difference-in-differences (DID) analysis. Results The median time to AKI alert review by a specialist was 14.0 min (interquartile range 1.0-60.0 min). There was no impact on the primary outcome (estimated odds ratio [OR] 1.00, 95% CI 0.58-1.71; P=.99). Although the hospital-wide cardiac arrest rate fell significantly at the intervention site (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.38-0.76; P<.001), DID analysis with the comparator site was not significant (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.63-1.99; P=.69). There was no impact on other secondary clinical outcomes. Mean health care costs per patient were reduced by £2123 (95% CI −£4024 to −£222; P=.03), not including costs of providing the technology. Conclusions The digitally enabled clinical intervention to detect and treat AKI in hospitalized patients reduced health care costs and possibly reduced cardiac arrest rates. Its impact on other clinical outcomes and identification of the active components of the pathway requires clarification through evaluation across multiple sites.

[1]  John D. Williams,et al.  Seasonal pattern of incidence and outcome of Acute Kidney Injury: A national study of Welsh AKI electronic alerts , 2017, International journal of clinical practice.

[2]  Alistair Connell,et al.  Acute kidney injury. , 2015, Clinical medicine.

[3]  John A Kellum,et al.  Clinical Decision Support for In-Hospital AKI. , 2017, Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN.

[4]  A. Khwaja KDIGO Clinical Practice Guidelines for Acute Kidney Injury , 2012, Nephron Clinical Practice.

[5]  Glenn M. Chertow,et al.  The Economic Consequences of Acute Kidney Injury , 2017, Nephron.

[6]  Timothy L Lash,et al.  The predictive value of ICD-10 diagnostic coding used to assess Charlson comorbidity index conditions in the population-based Danish National Registry of Patients , 2011, BMC medical research methodology.

[7]  Laurie Tomlinson,et al.  Acute kidney injury—how does automated detection perform? , 2015, Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association.

[8]  Guideline Updates Team Acute kidney injury: prevention, detection and management , 2019 .

[9]  Chien-Te Lee,et al.  Incidence, Outcomes, and Risk Factors of Community-Acquired and Hospital-Acquired Acute Kidney Injury , 2016, Medicine.

[10]  Mark E. Thomas,et al.  Acute Kidney Outreach to Reduce Deterioration and Death (AKORDD) trial: the protocol for a large pilot study , 2016, BMJ Open.

[11]  P. Kimmel,et al.  The severity of acute kidney injury predicts progression to chronic kidney disease , 2011, Kidney international.

[12]  Harold I Feldman,et al.  Automated, electronic alerts for acute kidney injury: a single-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial , 2015, The Lancet.

[13]  Mustafa Suleyman,et al.  Implementation of a Digitally Enabled Care Pathway (Part 2): Qualitative Analysis of Experiences of Health Care Professionals , 2019, Journal of medical Internet research.

[14]  R. Evans National Institute for Health Research. , 2014, Nursing standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987).

[15]  Beverley Matthews,et al.  The economic impact of acute kidney injury in England. , 2014, Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association.

[16]  S. Bagshaw,et al.  Association between e‐alert implementation for detection of acute kidney injury and outcomes: a systematic review , 2017, Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association.

[17]  F. Caskey,et al.  Design and Rationale of ‘Tackling Acute Kidney Injury', a Multicentre Quality Improvement Study , 2016, Nephron.

[18]  Glenn M. Chertow,et al.  Acute Kidney Injury and Mortality in Hospitalized Patients , 2012, American Journal of Nephrology.

[19]  Geraint Rees,et al.  Service evaluation of the implementation of a digitally-enabled care pathway for the recognition and management of acute kidney injury , 2017, F1000Research.

[20]  K. Hayden,et al.  A Multifaceted Quality Improvement Programme to Improve Acute Kidney Injury Care and Outcomes in a Large Teaching Hospital , 2017, BMJ quality improvement reports.

[21]  G. Prescott,et al.  Acute renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy: incidence and outcome. , 2002, QJM : monthly journal of the Association of Physicians.

[22]  Asheesh Sharma,et al.  TO023STOP-AKIPROJECT: A STREAMLINED APPROACH TO AKI MANAGEMENT LEADS TO REDUCTION OFIN-HOSPITAL MORTALITY, LENGTH OF STAY AND AKI PROGRESSION , 2016 .

[23]  Sushrut S Waikar,et al.  Incidence, outcomes, and comparisons across definitions of AKI in hospitalized individuals. , 2014, Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN.

[24]  Soyeon Ahn,et al.  Impact of Electronic Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) Alerts With Automated Nephrologist Consultation on Detection and Severity of AKI: A Quality Improvement Study. , 2018, American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation.

[25]  Christopher N. Barnes,et al.  How to handle mortality when investigating length of hospital stay and time to clinical stability , 2011, BMC medical research methodology.

[26]  M. Rosner,et al.  Acute kidney injury. , 2009, Current drug targets.

[27]  L. Tennent,et al.  A whole system approach to improving mortality associated with acute kidney injury , 2017, QJM : monthly journal of the Association of Physicians.

[28]  Mark E. Thomas,et al.  The definition of acute kidney injury and its use in practice. , 2015, Kidney international.