Making the Case for Standardized Outcome Measures in Exercise and Physical Activity Research in Chronic Kidney Disease

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Physical activity and exercise are core components of lifestyle modification strategies for the management of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Yet, physical activity levels have consistently remained poor across all stages of CKD. Exercise interventions, including aerobic and resistance training, and lifestyle interventions promoting physical activity, have been shown to improve a multitude of clinical endpoints and factors important to patients; however, despite the evidence, the provision of physical activity in clinical practice is still inadequate. The usefulness of any study hinges on the adequacy and clinical relevance of the outcomes and outcome measures used. Inconsistent reporting and wide disparities in outcome use across studies limit evidence synthesis to help guide clinical practice. The kidney exercise and physical activity field has been particularly prone to inconsistent outcome reporting. To ensure research is relevant and able to influence clinical practice and future research, we need to ensure the use (and reporting) of standardized, relevant outcome measures. Core outcome sets (COS) have been widely developed across many chronic conditions, yet these COS have not been tailored to physical activity and exercise in CKD. Outcomes in clinical research need to be relevant to the intervention being employed. From this perspective, we summarize the importance that standardizing outcomes and outcome measures may have in relation to physical activity and exercise interventions for people living with kidney disease.

Related collections

Most cited references 54

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Chronic Kidney Disease.

Angela Webster, Evi V Nagler, Rachael Morton … (2017)

The definition and classification of chronic kidney disease (CKD) have evolved over time, but current international guidelines define this condition as decreased kidney function shown by glomerular filtration rate (GFR) of less than 60 mL/min per 1·73 m(2), or markers of kidney damage, or both, of at least 3 months duration, regardless of the underlying cause. Diabetes and hypertension are the main causes of CKD in all high-income and middle-income countries, and also in many low-income countries. Incidence, prevalence, and progression of CKD also vary within countries by ethnicity and social determinants of health, possibly through epigenetic influence. Many people are asymptomatic or have non-specific symptoms such as lethargy, itch, or loss of appetite. Diagnosis is commonly made after chance findings from screening tests (urinary dipstick or blood tests), or when symptoms become severe. The best available indicator of overall kidney function is GFR, which is measured either via exogenous markers (eg, DTPA, iohexol), or estimated using equations. Presence of proteinuria is associated with increased risk of progression of CKD and death. Kidney biopsy samples can show definitive evidence of CKD, through common changes such as glomerular sclerosis, tubular atrophy, and interstitial fibrosis. Complications include anaemia due to reduced production of erythropoietin by the kidney; reduced red blood cell survival and iron deficiency; and mineral bone disease caused by disturbed vitamin D, calcium, and phosphate metabolism. People with CKD are five to ten times more likely to die prematurely than they are to progress to end stage kidney disease. This increased risk of death rises exponentially as kidney function worsens and is largely attributable to death from cardiovascular disease, although cancer incidence and mortality are also increased. Health-related quality of life is substantially lower for people with CKD than for the general population, and falls as GFR declines. Interventions targeting specific symptoms, or aimed at supporting educational or lifestyle considerations, make a positive difference to people living with CKD. Inequity in access to services for this disease disproportionally affects disadvantaged populations, and health service provision to incentivise early intervention over provision of care only for advanced CKD is still evolving in many countries.

0 comments Cited 942 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Epidemiology of chronic kidney disease: an update 2022

Csaba P. Kovesdy (2022)

0 comments Cited 360 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider

Paula Williamson, Douglas G. Altman, Jane Blazeby … (2012)

The selection of appropriate outcomes or domains is crucial when designing clinical trials in order to compare directly the effects of different interventions in ways that minimize bias. If the findings are to influence policy and practice then the chosen outcomes need to be relevant and important to key stakeholders including patients and the public, health care professionals and others making decisions about health care. There is a growing recognition that insufficient attention has been paid to the outcomes measured in clinical trials. These issues could be addressed through the development and use of an agreed standardized collection of outcomes, known as a core outcome set, which should be measured and reported, as a minimum, in all trials for a specific clinical area. Accumulating work in this area has identified the need for general guidance on the development of core outcome sets. Key issues to consider in the development of a core outcome set include its scope, the stakeholder groups to involve, choice of consensus method and the achievement of a consensus.