A systematically conducted literature review. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was followed. The review was not registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO).
Research questions
1. What are the prevalence and patterns of multimorbidity in adult patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD)?
2. How does multimorbidity affect clinical outcomes in adult patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD)?
Objectives
-Determine the prevalence and patterns of multimorbidity in patients with any stage of CKD to understand the extent and “clusters” of multimorbidity associated with CKD.
-Investigate the association between multimorbidity and adverse clinical outcomes in patients with CKD to understand the impact. This will help develop targeted clinical interventions.
Design:
A systematic review without meta-analysis.
Inclusion criteria
-Studies investigating the prevalence or patterns of multimorbidity in CKD or reduced renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate <90 ml/min/1.73 m2). Any multimorbidity measures were accepted, including simple counts or a comorbidity scoring system.
-Studies that investigated the association between multimorbidity and adverse clinical outcomes in patients with CKD. Outcomes were hospitalisation, mortality, cardiovascular events including myocardial infarction or stroke, progression of CKD to kidney failure or renal replacement therapy, and association of multimorbidity with CKD severity.
-Studies that counted CKD as a multimorbidity.
-Adult participants aged 18 and over.
-Studies published in English.
Exclusion criteria:
-Qualitative studies as the outcomes studied are quantitative in nature.
-Narrative or systematic reviews.
-Drug intervention studies.
-Randomised controlled trials as they often exclude multimorbid participants.
-Case reports or conference abstracts.
-Studies with children or adolescents below 18. Kidney functions differ between adults and children.
-Animal or other experimental preclinical studies.
Search strategy
Selected medical subject headings (MeSH) terms were combined with keywords relating to CKD and multimorbidity to create a search strategy. This was first developed for MEDLINE and then was adapted for other online databases.(See additional file Appendix 1). On May 31, 2023, a literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and SCOPUS online databases. Because a similar systematic review was published in 2020, the search includes papers published between 1 January 2019 and 31 May 2023. Due to the lack of time and resources for translation services, only articles published in English were included. No geographical restriction was placed. Search results were stored and merged in EndNote 20 (Clarivate Analytics, Philadelphia, USA). Papers were screened using Rayyan Intelligent systematic review software. Search terms were set out below:
( ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Chronic Kidney Failure" OR "Renal Insufficiency" OR "Chronic Renal Insufficiency" OR "Kidney Diseases" ) ) OR ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Renal Replacement Therapy" OR "Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy" OR "Dialysis" OR "Peritoneal Dialysis" OR "Hemodialysis" ) ) OR ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "end stage renal disease" ) ) OR ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "kidney function" OR "renal function" OR trend ) ) OR ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( ckd OR crf OR ckf OR crd OR "kidney disease*" OR "kidney injur*" OR "kidney fail*" OR "kidney insufficienc*" ) ) ) AND ( ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "multimorbidity" OR "multiple chronic conditions" ) ) OR ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "multiple comorbidity" ) ) OR ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( ( ( ( ( multimorbid* OR "multi morbidity" OR multimorbidity OR multimorbidity ) OR multiple AND diseas* OR multiple AND condition* OR multi AND condition* OR ( multiple AND comorbid* OR multiple AND comorbidities ) OR ( "multiple disorder" OR multidisorder OR multidisorder ) OR discordant AND comorbid* OR concordant AND comorbid* ) ) ) ) ) ) AND ( ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Treatment Outcomes" OR "health outcome" OR "clinical outcome" ) ) OR ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( ( health OR outcom* OR clinical AND outcom* OR adverse AND outcom* ) ) ) OR ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Kidney Function Tests" OR "kidney function" OR "Hospitalisation" OR "hospitalisation" OR "Death" OR "Mortality" OR "Hospital Mortality" OR "cardiovascular outcome" OR "cancer mortality" ) ) OR ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "Prevalence" OR "cluster" ) ) OR ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "all cause mortality" OR "cardiovascular mortality" ) ) ) AND ( LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2023 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2022 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2021 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2020 ) OR LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR , 2019 ) )
Study selection
Titles and abstracts were screened against the eligibility criteria. The full text was only accessed when there was insufficient information to decide eligibility for inclusion.
Data extraction
A data extraction form was created in MS Excel before the search to extract relevant data from the included studies. Data extraction included study authors, year of publication, study design, setting, sample size, median follow-up time, study results, and outcomes studied.
(Table 3).
Data synthesis
The results are presented in a narrative format. The general framework of the narrative synthesis by Popay et al. (2006) was used. This is because considerable heterogeneity was observed in the included studies regarding methods, sample size, study designs, and outcomes (28).
Quality assessment:
The studies included were either cross-sectional or cohort studies. Based on this, the methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist for cross-sectional and cohort studies. The JBI tool has eight questions for cross-sectional studies and 11 for cohort studies to assess the risk of bias in a study's design, conduct, and analysis (see Additional file Appendix 2, Appendix 3) (29). Based on subjective scoring, studies were rated high, moderate, and low quality. Studies were not excluded based on the quality appraisal. The overall quality of the review was assessed using the SANRA (a scale of the quality assessment of the narrative review articles) checklist (see Additional file Appendix 5) (30).
Table 1 Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklist for cohort studies
|
|
|
|
|
Items
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Study
|
Q 1
|
Q2
|
Q3
|
Q4
|
Q5
|
Q6
|
Q7
|
Q8
|
Q9
|
Q10
|
Q11
|
Score
|
Sullivan et al. (2021)
|
Y
|
Y
|
U
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
91%
|
Helve et al. (2021)
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
U
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
N
|
Y
|
Y
|
91%
|
Burrows et al. (2022)
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
100%
|
Sullivan et al. (2022)
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
N
|
Y
|
Y
|
91%
|
JBI= Joanna Briggs Institute. Q1-Q11 indicate questions 1 to 11 based on the JBI checklist. (See Additional file Appendix 2). Risk of bias: Low= ≥70% “Y”, moderate = 50-69% “Y”, high= <50% “Y”; Y= yes, U= unclear, N= no.
Table 2 Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist for cross-sectional studies
|
|
|
|
|
Items
|
|
|
|
|
Study
|
Q1
|
Q2
|
Q3
|
Q4
|
Q5
|
Q6
|
Q7
|
Q8
|
Score
|
Hawthorne et al. (2023)
|
Y
|
Y
|
U
|
N
|
U
|
Y
|
U
|
Y
|
50%
|
Amaral et al. (2022)
|
Y
|
Y
|
U
|
N
|
Y
|
Y
|
U
|
Y
|
63%
|
Palo et al. (2023)
|
U
|
Y
|
U
|
N
|
N
|
N
|
U
|
N
|
13%
|
Corsonello et al. (2020)
|
Y
|
Y
|
U
|
N
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
75%
|
Hirst et al. (2021)
|
Y
|
U
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
Y
|
88%
|
JBI= Joanna Briggs Institute. Q1-Q8 indicate questions 1 to 8 based on the JBI checklist. (See Additional file Appendix 3). Risk of bias: Low= ≥70% “Y”, moderate = 50-69% “Y”, high= <50% “Y”; Y= yes, U= unclear, N= no.
Patient and public involvement:
No patient or the public was involved.