Automated Electronic Alert for the Care and Outcomes of Adults With Acute Kidney Injury
Authors: Ting Li, Buyun Wu, Li Li, Ao Bian, Juan Ni, Kang Liu, Zhongke Qin, Yudie Peng, Yining Shen, Mengru Lv, Xinyi Lu, Changying Xing, Huijuan Mao
Journal: JAMA Network Open (2024)

Importance Despite the expansion of published electronic alerts for acute kidney injury (AKI), there are still concerns regarding their effect on the clinical outcomes of patients. Objective To evaluate the effect of the AKI alert combined with a care bundle on the care and clinical outcomes of patients with hospital-acquired AKI. Design, Setting, and Participants This single-center, double-blind, parallel-group randomized clinical trial was conducted in a tertiary teaching hospital in Nanjing, China, from August 1, 2019, to December 31, 2021. The inclusion criteria were inpatient adults aged 18 years or older with AKI, which was defined using the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes creatinine criteria. Participants were randomized 1:1 to either the alert group or the usual care group, which were stratified by medical vs surgical ward and by intensive care unit (ICU) vs non-ICU setting. Analyses were conducted on the modified intention-to-treat population. Interventions A programmatic AKI alert system generated randomization automatically and sent messages to the mobile telephones of clinicians (alert group) or did not send messages (usual care group). A care bundle accompanied the AKI alert and consisted of general, nonindividualized, and nonmandatory AKI management measures. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was maximum change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) within 7 days after randomization. Secondary patient-centered outcomes included death, dialysis, AKI progression, and AKI recovery. Care-centered outcomes included diagnostic and therapeutic interventions for AKI. Results A total of 2208 patients (median [IQR] age, 65 [54-72] years; 1560 males [70.7%]) were randomized to the alert group (n = 1123) or the usual care group (n = 1085) and analyzed. Within 7 days of randomization, median (IQR) maximum absolute changes in eGFR were 3.7 (−6.4 to 19.3) mL/min/1.73 m 2 in the alert group and 2.9 (−9.2 to 16.9) mL/min/1.73 m 2 in the usual care group ( P = .24). This result was robust in all subgroups in an exploratory analysis. For care-centered outcomes, patients in the alert group had more intravenous fluids (927 [82.6%] vs 670 [61.8%]; P &amp;amp;lt; .001), less exposure to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (56 [5.0%] vs 119 [11.0%]; P &amp;amp;lt; .001), and more AKI documentation at discharge (560 [49.9%] vs 296 [27.3%]; P &amp;amp;lt; .001) than patients in the usual care group. No differences were observed in patient-centered secondary outcomes between the 2 groups. Conclusions and Relevance Results of this randomized clinical trial showed that the electronic AKI alert did not improve kidney function or other patient-centered outcomes but changed patient care behaviors. The findings warrant the use of a combination of high-quality interventions and AKI alert in future clinical practice. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03736304