ASN's Mission

To create a world without kidney diseases, the ASN Alliance for Kidney Health elevates care by educating and informing, driving breakthroughs and innovation, and advocating for policies that create transformative changes in kidney medicine throughout the world.

learn more

Contact ASN

1401 H St, NW, Ste 900, Washington, DC 20005

email@asn-online.org

202-640-4660

The Latest on X

Kidney Week

Please note that you are viewing an archived section from 2023 and some content may be unavailable. To unlock all content for 2023, please visit the archives.

Abstract: SA-PO1106

Progress Against Progression? CKD Management in the Age of Telenephrology

Session Information

Category: CKD (Non-Dialysis)

  • 2301 CKD (Non-Dialysis): Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Prevention

Authors

  • Scherzer, Zachary A., University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics, Madison, Wisconsin, United States
  • Lesnik, Dyan M., William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, Wisconsin, United States
  • Maursetter, Laura J., University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics, Madison, Wisconsin, United States
Background

Nephrology has seen an uptick in transition to remote care delivery, but there has been limited direction for optimal selection of patients appropriate for this method of care. Furthermore, there is limited literature to show which profile of patients utilize the telenephrology platform. In this study, we report the baseline population differences between telenephrology and in-person care groups that are naturally selected when this option is available.

Methods

Single center retrospective cohort analysis involving 1,305 patients seen across 4,230 visits over a 3-year period at a well-established nephrology clinic within the Veterans Affairs health system. Baseline characteristics and health profile data were assessed based on grouping of individuals to the telenephrology group (>50% virtual visits) or in-person group (≤50% virtual visits).

Results

Baseline characteristics including demographic information and comorbid conditions were similar between the two groups. A higher preponderance of those living in rurally defined areas, as compared to those in urban settings, were found to receive in-person care. Individuals who received in-person care were noted to have twice as many emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations throughout the course of the study. Similarly, those seen in-person were significantly more likely to be referred for hospice/palliative services.

Conclusion

Understanding the health profiles of those who receive telenephrology versus in-person care can inform future decision-making for appropriate utilization. It was surprising to see a higher degree of telemedicine visits occurring with individuals residing in urban locations. Discomfort with aspects of technology and/or lack of reliable internet for those living in rural areas are possible factors implicated in this. More surprising was the increase in ED visits, hospital admissions, and palliative care by those seen in-person. It could be that those seen in-person were more ill, this was a use of convenience due to proximity, or that care is being missed with telenephrology. These finding makes future research on the cause of these differences, as well as the impact of telenephrology on CKD progression, imperative.