Guidance for post-discharge care following acute kidney injury: an appropriateness ratings evaluation

Abstract

Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is associated with poor health outcomes, including increased mortality and rehospitalisation. National policy and patient safety drivers have targeted AKI as an example to ensure safer transitions of care. Aim: To establish guidance to promote high-quality transitions of care for adults following episodes of illness complicated by AKI. Design & setting: An appropriateness ratings evaluation was undertaken using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM). The Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) AKI working group developed a range of clinical scenarios to help identify the necessary steps to be taken following discharge of a patient from secondary care into primary care in the UK. Method: A 10-person expert panel was convened to rate 819 clinical scenarios, testing the most appropriate time and action following hospital discharge. Specifically, the scenarios focused on determining the appropriateness and urgency for planning: an initial medication review; monitoring of kidney function; and assessment for albuminuria. Results: Taking no action (that is, no medication review; no kidney monitoring; or no albuminuria testing) was rated inappropriate in all cases. In most scenarios, there was consensus that both the initial medication review and kidney function monitoring should take place within 1–2 weeks or 1 month, depending on clinical context. However, patients with heart failure and poor kidney recovery were rated to require expedited review. There was consensus that assessment for albuminuria should take place at 3 months after discharge following AKI. Conclusion: Systems to support tailored and timely post-AKI discharge care are required, especially in high-risk populations, such as people with heart failure.

Keywords

• acute kidney injury
• heart failure
• patient discharge
• primary health care
• general practice