Cargando…

Methodology used in studies reporting chronic kidney disease prevalence: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND: Many publications report the prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in the general population. Comparisons across studies are hampered as CKD prevalence estimations are influenced by study population characteristics and laboratory methods. METHODS: For this systematic review, two res...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brück, Katharina, Jager, Kitty J., Dounousi, Evangelia, Kainz, Alexander, Nitsch, Dorothea, Ärnlöv, Johan, Rothenbacher, Dietrich, Browne, Gemma, Capuano, Vincenzo, Ferraro, Pietro Manuel, Ferrieres, Jean, Gambaro, Giovanni, Guessous, Idris, Hallan, Stein, Kastarinen, Mika, Navis, Gerjan, Gonzalez, Alfonso Otero, Palmieri, Luigi, Romundstad, Solfrid, Spoto, Belinda, Stengel, Benedicte, Tomson, Charles, Tripepi, Giovanni, Völzke, Henry, Wiȩcek, Andrzej, Gansevoort, Ron, Schöttker, Ben, Wanner, Christoph, Vinhas, Jose, Zoccali, Carmine, Van Biesen, Wim, Stel, Vianda S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4514069/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26209739
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfv131
_version_ 1782382735970533376
author Brück, Katharina
Jager, Kitty J.
Dounousi, Evangelia
Kainz, Alexander
Nitsch, Dorothea
Ärnlöv, Johan
Rothenbacher, Dietrich
Browne, Gemma
Capuano, Vincenzo
Ferraro, Pietro Manuel
Ferrieres, Jean
Gambaro, Giovanni
Guessous, Idris
Hallan, Stein
Kastarinen, Mika
Navis, Gerjan
Gonzalez, Alfonso Otero
Palmieri, Luigi
Romundstad, Solfrid
Spoto, Belinda
Stengel, Benedicte
Tomson, Charles
Tripepi, Giovanni
Völzke, Henry
Wiȩcek, Andrzej
Gansevoort, Ron
Schöttker, Ben
Wanner, Christoph
Vinhas, Jose
Zoccali, Carmine
Van Biesen, Wim
Stel, Vianda S.
author_facet Brück, Katharina
Jager, Kitty J.
Dounousi, Evangelia
Kainz, Alexander
Nitsch, Dorothea
Ärnlöv, Johan
Rothenbacher, Dietrich
Browne, Gemma
Capuano, Vincenzo
Ferraro, Pietro Manuel
Ferrieres, Jean
Gambaro, Giovanni
Guessous, Idris
Hallan, Stein
Kastarinen, Mika
Navis, Gerjan
Gonzalez, Alfonso Otero
Palmieri, Luigi
Romundstad, Solfrid
Spoto, Belinda
Stengel, Benedicte
Tomson, Charles
Tripepi, Giovanni
Völzke, Henry
Wiȩcek, Andrzej
Gansevoort, Ron
Schöttker, Ben
Wanner, Christoph
Vinhas, Jose
Zoccali, Carmine
Van Biesen, Wim
Stel, Vianda S.
author_sort Brück, Katharina
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Many publications report the prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in the general population. Comparisons across studies are hampered as CKD prevalence estimations are influenced by study population characteristics and laboratory methods. METHODS: For this systematic review, two researchers independently searched PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify all original research articles that were published between 1 January 2003 and 1 November 2014 reporting the prevalence of CKD in the European adult general population. Data on study methodology and reporting of CKD prevalence results were independently extracted by two researchers. RESULTS: We identified 82 eligible publications and included 48 publications of individual studies for the data extraction. There was considerable variation in population sample selection. The majority of studies did not report the sampling frame used, and the response ranged from 10 to 87%. With regard to the assessment of kidney function, 67% used a Jaffe assay, whereas 13% used the enzymatic assay for creatinine determination. Isotope dilution mass spectrometry calibration was used in 29%. The CKD-EPI (52%) and MDRD (75%) equations were most often used to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR). CKD was defined as estimated GFR (eGFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) in 92% of studies. Urinary markers of CKD were assessed in 60% of the studies. CKD prevalence was reported by sex and age strata in 54 and 50% of the studies, respectively. In publications with a primary objective of reporting CKD prevalence, 39% reported a 95% confidence interval. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this systematic review showed considerable variation in methods for sampling the general population and assessment of kidney function across studies reporting CKD prevalence. These results are utilized to provide recommendations to help optimize both the design and the reporting of future CKD prevalence studies, which will enhance comparability of study results.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4514069
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45140692015-07-27 Methodology used in studies reporting chronic kidney disease prevalence: a systematic literature review Brück, Katharina Jager, Kitty J. Dounousi, Evangelia Kainz, Alexander Nitsch, Dorothea Ärnlöv, Johan Rothenbacher, Dietrich Browne, Gemma Capuano, Vincenzo Ferraro, Pietro Manuel Ferrieres, Jean Gambaro, Giovanni Guessous, Idris Hallan, Stein Kastarinen, Mika Navis, Gerjan Gonzalez, Alfonso Otero Palmieri, Luigi Romundstad, Solfrid Spoto, Belinda Stengel, Benedicte Tomson, Charles Tripepi, Giovanni Völzke, Henry Wiȩcek, Andrzej Gansevoort, Ron Schöttker, Ben Wanner, Christoph Vinhas, Jose Zoccali, Carmine Van Biesen, Wim Stel, Vianda S. Nephrol Dial Transplant Present Clinical Status, Epidemiological Implications and Molecular Basis BACKGROUND: Many publications report the prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in the general population. Comparisons across studies are hampered as CKD prevalence estimations are influenced by study population characteristics and laboratory methods. METHODS: For this systematic review, two researchers independently searched PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify all original research articles that were published between 1 January 2003 and 1 November 2014 reporting the prevalence of CKD in the European adult general population. Data on study methodology and reporting of CKD prevalence results were independently extracted by two researchers. RESULTS: We identified 82 eligible publications and included 48 publications of individual studies for the data extraction. There was considerable variation in population sample selection. The majority of studies did not report the sampling frame used, and the response ranged from 10 to 87%. With regard to the assessment of kidney function, 67% used a Jaffe assay, whereas 13% used the enzymatic assay for creatinine determination. Isotope dilution mass spectrometry calibration was used in 29%. The CKD-EPI (52%) and MDRD (75%) equations were most often used to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR). CKD was defined as estimated GFR (eGFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) in 92% of studies. Urinary markers of CKD were assessed in 60% of the studies. CKD prevalence was reported by sex and age strata in 54 and 50% of the studies, respectively. In publications with a primary objective of reporting CKD prevalence, 39% reported a 95% confidence interval. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this systematic review showed considerable variation in methods for sampling the general population and assessment of kidney function across studies reporting CKD prevalence. These results are utilized to provide recommendations to help optimize both the design and the reporting of future CKD prevalence studies, which will enhance comparability of study results. Oxford University Press 2015-08 2015-07-24 /pmc/articles/PMC4514069/ /pubmed/26209739 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfv131 Text en © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Present Clinical Status, Epidemiological Implications and Molecular Basis
Brück, Katharina
Jager, Kitty J.
Dounousi, Evangelia
Kainz, Alexander
Nitsch, Dorothea
Ärnlöv, Johan
Rothenbacher, Dietrich
Browne, Gemma
Capuano, Vincenzo
Ferraro, Pietro Manuel
Ferrieres, Jean
Gambaro, Giovanni
Guessous, Idris
Hallan, Stein
Kastarinen, Mika
Navis, Gerjan
Gonzalez, Alfonso Otero
Palmieri, Luigi
Romundstad, Solfrid
Spoto, Belinda
Stengel, Benedicte
Tomson, Charles
Tripepi, Giovanni
Völzke, Henry
Wiȩcek, Andrzej
Gansevoort, Ron
Schöttker, Ben
Wanner, Christoph
Vinhas, Jose
Zoccali, Carmine
Van Biesen, Wim
Stel, Vianda S.
Methodology used in studies reporting chronic kidney disease prevalence: a systematic literature review
title Methodology used in studies reporting chronic kidney disease prevalence: a systematic literature review
title_full Methodology used in studies reporting chronic kidney disease prevalence: a systematic literature review
title_fullStr Methodology used in studies reporting chronic kidney disease prevalence: a systematic literature review
title_full_unstemmed Methodology used in studies reporting chronic kidney disease prevalence: a systematic literature review
title_short Methodology used in studies reporting chronic kidney disease prevalence: a systematic literature review
title_sort methodology used in studies reporting chronic kidney disease prevalence: a systematic literature review
topic Present Clinical Status, Epidemiological Implications and Molecular Basis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4514069/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26209739
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfv131
work_keys_str_mv AT bruckkatharina methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT jagerkittyj methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT dounousievangelia methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT kainzalexander methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT nitschdorothea methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT arnlovjohan methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT rothenbacherdietrich methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT brownegemma methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT capuanovincenzo methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT ferraropietromanuel methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT ferrieresjean methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT gambarogiovanni methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT guessousidris methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT hallanstein methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT kastarinenmika methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT navisgerjan methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT gonzalezalfonsootero methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT palmieriluigi methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT romundstadsolfrid methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT spotobelinda methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT stengelbenedicte methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT tomsoncharles methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT tripepigiovanni methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT volzkehenry methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT wiecekandrzej methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT gansevoortron methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT schottkerben methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT wannerchristoph methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT vinhasjose methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT zoccalicarmine methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT vanbiesenwim methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview
AT stelviandas methodologyusedinstudiesreportingchronickidneydiseaseprevalenceasystematicliteraturereview