The UK Renal Registry Advanced CKD Study: frequency of incorrect reporting of date of start of RRT

Daniel J. Ford, Damian G. Fogarty, Retha Steenkamp, Charles R. V. Tomson, Yoav Ben-Shlomo, David Ansell

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter (peer-reviewed)

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: A preliminary review of the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) pre-RRT study data revealed results suggesting that, for some patients, the date of start of renal replacement therapy (RRT), as reported to the UKRR, was incorrect and often significantly later than the true date of start. A more detailed study then aimed to validate a set of criteria to identify patients with an incorrect start date. Methods: Pre-RRT laboratory data were electronically extracted from 8,810 incident RRT patients from 9 UK renal centres. Any patient with a low urea (<15 mmol/L) at the start of RRT or with a substantial improvement in kidney function (either a fall in urea >10 mmol/L or rise in eGFR >2 ml/min/1.73 m) within the two months prior to RRT were considered to potentially have an incorrect date of start. In 4
selected centres, the electronic patient records of all patients flagged were reviewed to validate these criteria.
Results: Of 8,810 patients, 1,616 (18.3%) were flagged by the identification criteria as having a potentially incorrect date of start of RRT, although a single centre accounted for 41% of the total flagged cohort. Of these flagged patients, 61.7% had been assigned an incorrect date of start of haemodialysis (HD), 5.7% had evidence of acute RRT being given before the reported date of start of HD
and 9.2% had evidence of starting peritoneal dialysis exchanges prior to the reported date of start. Of
those flagged, 10.7% had a correct date of start of RRT.
Conclusions: Accurate reporting of RRT episodes is vital for the analysis of time dependent studies such as survival or time to transplantation. A proportion of patients starting RRT were assigned an incorrect start date. In order to improve the accuracy of this reporting the UK Renal Registry
must work with renal centres and clinical staff on improving data input for the start of RRT.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationUK Renal Registry 12th Annual Report (December 2009)
PublisherKarger
Pagesc271-c278
Number of pages8
Volume115 Suppl 1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2010

Publication series

NameNephron Clinical Practice
PublisherKarger
Volume115

Fingerprint

Registries
Kidney
Renal Dialysis
Urea
Transplantation

Cite this

Ford, D. J., Fogarty, D. G., Steenkamp, R., Tomson, C. R. V., Ben-Shlomo, Y., & Ansell, D. (2010). The UK Renal Registry Advanced CKD Study: frequency of incorrect reporting of date of start of RRT. In UK Renal Registry 12th Annual Report (December 2009) (Vol. 115 Suppl 1, pp. c271-c278). (Nephron Clinical Practice; Vol. 115). Karger. https://doi.org/10.1159/000301236
Ford, Daniel J. ; Fogarty, Damian G. ; Steenkamp, Retha ; Tomson, Charles R. V. ; Ben-Shlomo, Yoav ; Ansell, David. / The UK Renal Registry Advanced CKD Study: frequency of incorrect reporting of date of start of RRT. UK Renal Registry 12th Annual Report (December 2009). Vol. 115 Suppl 1 Karger, 2010. pp. c271-c278 (Nephron Clinical Practice).
@inbook{abddf3ea64e9478c9cd1aeecdcfddc4d,
title = "The UK Renal Registry Advanced CKD Study: frequency of incorrect reporting of date of start of RRT",
abstract = "Background: A preliminary review of the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) pre-RRT study data revealed results suggesting that, for some patients, the date of start of renal replacement therapy (RRT), as reported to the UKRR, was incorrect and often significantly later than the true date of start. A more detailed study then aimed to validate a set of criteria to identify patients with an incorrect start date. Methods: Pre-RRT laboratory data were electronically extracted from 8,810 incident RRT patients from 9 UK renal centres. Any patient with a low urea (<15 mmol/L) at the start of RRT or with a substantial improvement in kidney function (either a fall in urea >10 mmol/L or rise in eGFR >2 ml/min/1.73 m) within the two months prior to RRT were considered to potentially have an incorrect date of start. In 4selected centres, the electronic patient records of all patients flagged were reviewed to validate these criteria.Results: Of 8,810 patients, 1,616 (18.3{\%}) were flagged by the identification criteria as having a potentially incorrect date of start of RRT, although a single centre accounted for 41{\%} of the total flagged cohort. Of these flagged patients, 61.7{\%} had been assigned an incorrect date of start of haemodialysis (HD), 5.7{\%} had evidence of acute RRT being given before the reported date of start of HDand 9.2{\%} had evidence of starting peritoneal dialysis exchanges prior to the reported date of start. Ofthose flagged, 10.7{\%} had a correct date of start of RRT.Conclusions: Accurate reporting of RRT episodes is vital for the analysis of time dependent studies such as survival or time to transplantation. A proportion of patients starting RRT were assigned an incorrect start date. In order to improve the accuracy of this reporting the UK Renal Registrymust work with renal centres and clinical staff on improving data input for the start of RRT.",
author = "Ford, {Daniel J.} and Fogarty, {Damian G.} and Retha Steenkamp and Tomson, {Charles R. V.} and Yoav Ben-Shlomo and David Ansell",
year = "2010",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1159/000301236",
language = "English",
volume = "115 Suppl 1",
series = "Nephron Clinical Practice",
publisher = "Karger",
pages = "c271--c278",
booktitle = "UK Renal Registry 12th Annual Report (December 2009)",

}

Ford, DJ, Fogarty, DG, Steenkamp, R, Tomson, CRV, Ben-Shlomo, Y & Ansell, D 2010, The UK Renal Registry Advanced CKD Study: frequency of incorrect reporting of date of start of RRT. in UK Renal Registry 12th Annual Report (December 2009). vol. 115 Suppl 1, Nephron Clinical Practice, vol. 115, Karger, pp. c271-c278. https://doi.org/10.1159/000301236

The UK Renal Registry Advanced CKD Study: frequency of incorrect reporting of date of start of RRT. / Ford, Daniel J.; Fogarty, Damian G.; Steenkamp, Retha; Tomson, Charles R. V.; Ben-Shlomo, Yoav; Ansell, David.

UK Renal Registry 12th Annual Report (December 2009). Vol. 115 Suppl 1 Karger, 2010. p. c271-c278 (Nephron Clinical Practice; Vol. 115).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter (peer-reviewed)

TY - CHAP

T1 - The UK Renal Registry Advanced CKD Study: frequency of incorrect reporting of date of start of RRT

AU - Ford, Daniel J.

AU - Fogarty, Damian G.

AU - Steenkamp, Retha

AU - Tomson, Charles R. V.

AU - Ben-Shlomo, Yoav

AU - Ansell, David

PY - 2010/3

Y1 - 2010/3

N2 - Background: A preliminary review of the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) pre-RRT study data revealed results suggesting that, for some patients, the date of start of renal replacement therapy (RRT), as reported to the UKRR, was incorrect and often significantly later than the true date of start. A more detailed study then aimed to validate a set of criteria to identify patients with an incorrect start date. Methods: Pre-RRT laboratory data were electronically extracted from 8,810 incident RRT patients from 9 UK renal centres. Any patient with a low urea (<15 mmol/L) at the start of RRT or with a substantial improvement in kidney function (either a fall in urea >10 mmol/L or rise in eGFR >2 ml/min/1.73 m) within the two months prior to RRT were considered to potentially have an incorrect date of start. In 4selected centres, the electronic patient records of all patients flagged were reviewed to validate these criteria.Results: Of 8,810 patients, 1,616 (18.3%) were flagged by the identification criteria as having a potentially incorrect date of start of RRT, although a single centre accounted for 41% of the total flagged cohort. Of these flagged patients, 61.7% had been assigned an incorrect date of start of haemodialysis (HD), 5.7% had evidence of acute RRT being given before the reported date of start of HDand 9.2% had evidence of starting peritoneal dialysis exchanges prior to the reported date of start. Ofthose flagged, 10.7% had a correct date of start of RRT.Conclusions: Accurate reporting of RRT episodes is vital for the analysis of time dependent studies such as survival or time to transplantation. A proportion of patients starting RRT were assigned an incorrect start date. In order to improve the accuracy of this reporting the UK Renal Registrymust work with renal centres and clinical staff on improving data input for the start of RRT.

AB - Background: A preliminary review of the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) pre-RRT study data revealed results suggesting that, for some patients, the date of start of renal replacement therapy (RRT), as reported to the UKRR, was incorrect and often significantly later than the true date of start. A more detailed study then aimed to validate a set of criteria to identify patients with an incorrect start date. Methods: Pre-RRT laboratory data were electronically extracted from 8,810 incident RRT patients from 9 UK renal centres. Any patient with a low urea (<15 mmol/L) at the start of RRT or with a substantial improvement in kidney function (either a fall in urea >10 mmol/L or rise in eGFR >2 ml/min/1.73 m) within the two months prior to RRT were considered to potentially have an incorrect date of start. In 4selected centres, the electronic patient records of all patients flagged were reviewed to validate these criteria.Results: Of 8,810 patients, 1,616 (18.3%) were flagged by the identification criteria as having a potentially incorrect date of start of RRT, although a single centre accounted for 41% of the total flagged cohort. Of these flagged patients, 61.7% had been assigned an incorrect date of start of haemodialysis (HD), 5.7% had evidence of acute RRT being given before the reported date of start of HDand 9.2% had evidence of starting peritoneal dialysis exchanges prior to the reported date of start. Ofthose flagged, 10.7% had a correct date of start of RRT.Conclusions: Accurate reporting of RRT episodes is vital for the analysis of time dependent studies such as survival or time to transplantation. A proportion of patients starting RRT were assigned an incorrect start date. In order to improve the accuracy of this reporting the UK Renal Registrymust work with renal centres and clinical staff on improving data input for the start of RRT.

U2 - 10.1159/000301236

DO - 10.1159/000301236

M3 - Chapter (peer-reviewed)

VL - 115 Suppl 1

T3 - Nephron Clinical Practice

SP - c271-c278

BT - UK Renal Registry 12th Annual Report (December 2009)

PB - Karger

ER -

Ford DJ, Fogarty DG, Steenkamp R, Tomson CRV, Ben-Shlomo Y, Ansell D. The UK Renal Registry Advanced CKD Study: frequency of incorrect reporting of date of start of RRT. In UK Renal Registry 12th Annual Report (December 2009). Vol. 115 Suppl 1. Karger. 2010. p. c271-c278. (Nephron Clinical Practice). https://doi.org/10.1159/000301236