A CKD Clinical Decision Support System: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial in Primary Care Clinics

Rationale & Objective: The study aimed to develop, implement, and evaluate a clinical decision support (CDS) system for chronic kidney disease (CKD) in a primary care setting, with the goal of improving CKD care in adults. Study Design: This was a cluster randomized trial. Setting & Participants: A total of 32 Midwestern primary care clinics were randomly assigned to either receive usual care or CKD-CDS intervention. Between April 2019 and March 2020, we enrolled 6,420 patients aged 18-75 years with laboratorydefined glomerular filtration rate categories of CKD Stage G3 and G4, and 1 or more of 6 CKD care gaps: absence of a CKD diagnosis, suboptimal blood pressure or glycated hemoglobin levels, indication for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker but not prescribed, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agent on the active medication list, or indication for a nephrology referral. Intervention: The CKD-CDS provided personalized suggestions for CKD care improvement opportunities directed to both patients and clinicians at primary care encounters. Outcomes: We assessed the proportion of patients meeting each of 6 CKD-CDS quality metrics representing care gap resolution after 18 months. Results: The adjusted proportions of patients meeting quality metrics in CKD-CDS versus usual care were as follows: CKD diagnosis documented (26.6% vs 21.8%; risk ratio [RR], 1.17; 95% CI, 0.91-1.51); angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker prescribed (15.9% vs 16.1%; RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.76-1.18); blood pressure control (20.4% vs 20.2%; RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.8 4-1.15); glycated hemoglobin level control (21.4% vs 22.1%; RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.8 0-1.24); nonsteroidal antiinflammatory agent not on the active medication list (51.5% vs 50.4%; RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.901.17); and referral or visit to a nephrologist (38.7% vs 36.1%; RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.79-1.32). Limitations: We encountered an overall reduction in expected primary care encounters and obstacles to point -of -care CKD-CDS utilization because of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Conclusions: The CKD-CDS intervention did not lead to a significant improvement in CKD quality metrics. The challenges to CDS use during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic likely influenced these results. Funding: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R18DK118463). Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03890588.