ArticleCJC open2021
Patient Experience After Risk Stratification and Follow-up for Acute Kidney Injury After Cardiac Catheterization: Patient Survey.
Article in CJC open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomarker array for prediction of acute kidney injury after percutaneous coronary intervention for patients who had acute ST segment elevation myocardial infarction.Heart and vessels · 2024Article
- Change Management Accompanying Implementation of Decision Support for Prevention of Acute Kidney Injury in Cardiac Catheterization Units: Program Report.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute kidney injury (AKI) after cardiac catheterization procedures is associated with poor health outcomes. We sought to characterize the experiences of patients after receiving standardized information on their risk of AKI accompanied by instructions for follow-up care after cardiac catheterization.
methodsWe implemented an initiative across 3 cardiac catheterization units in Alberta, Canada to provide standardized assessment, followed by guidance for patients at risk of AKI. This was accompanied by communication to primary care providers to improve continuity of care when patients transition from the hospital to the community. A structured survey from a sample of 100 participants at increased risk of AKI determined their perceptions of information provided and experiences with follow-up steps after the initiative was implemented in each cardiac catheterization unit in Alberta.
resultsThe mean age of participants was 72.4 (SD 10.4) years, 37% were female, and the mean risk of AKI was 8.8%. Most (63%) participants were able to recall the information provided to them about their risk of kidney injury, 68% recalled the education provided on strategies to reduce risk, and 65% believed their primary care practitioner had received enough information to conduct appropriate follow-up care. Eighty-six percent of patients were satisfied with their transition to the community, and 53% were reassured by the information and follow-up care they received.
conclusionsThese findings suggest that communicating risk information to patients, in combination with education and collaboration for follow-up with primary care providers, is associated with positive patient experiences and satisfaction with care.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.