Chronic kidney disease (CKD) affects around 10% of the global population and has been estimated to affect around 50% of individuals with type 2 diabetes and 50% of those with heart failure. The guideline-recommended approach is to manage with disease-modifying therapies, but real-world data suggest that prescribing rates do not reflect this in practice.

To develop a cross-specialty consensus on optimal management of the patient with CKD using a modified Delphi method.

An international steering group of experts specialising in internal medicine, endocrinology/diabetology, nephrology and primary care medicine developed 42 statements on aspects of CKD management including identification and screening, risk factors, holistic management, guidelines, cross-specialty alignment and education. Consensus was determined by agreement using an online survey.

The survey was distributed to cardiologists, nephrologists, endocrinologists and primary care physicians across 11 countries.

The threshold for consensus agreement was established a priori by the steering group at 75%. Stopping criteria were defined as a target of 25 responses from each country (N=275), and a 4-week survey period.

274 responses were received in December 2022, 25 responses from Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Guatemala, Mexico, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey and 24 responses from Egypt. 53 responses were received from cardiologists, 52 from nephrologists, 55 from endocrinologists and 114 from primary care physicians. 37 statements attained very high agreement (≥90%) and 5 attained high agreement (≥75% and

There is a high degree of consensus regarding aspects of CKD management among healthcare professionals from 11 countries. Based on these strong levels of agreement, the steering group derived 12 key recommendations focused on diagnosis and management of CKD.

Employee Occupational Health (‘occupational health’) clinicians have expansive perspectives of the experience of healthcare personnel. Integrating mental health into the purview of occupational health is a newer approach that could combat historical limitations of healthcare personnel mental health programmes, which have been isolated and underused.

We aimed to document innovation and opportunities for supporting healthcare personnel mental health through occupational health clinicians. This work was part of a national qualitative needs assessment of employee occupational health clinicians during COVID-19 who were very much at the centre of organisational responses.

This qualitative needs assessment included key informant interviews obtained using snowball sampling methods.

We interviewed 43 US Veterans Health Administration occupational health clinicians from 29 facilities.

This analysis focused on personnel mental health needs and opportunities, using consensus coding of interview transcripts and modified member checking.

Three major opportunities to support mental health through occupational health involved: (1) expanded mental health needs of healthcare personnel, including opportunities to support work-related concerns (eg, traumatic deployments), home-based concerns and bereavement (eg, working with chaplains); (2) leveraging expanded roles and protocols to address healthcare personnel mental health concerns, including opportunities in expanding occupational health roles, cross-disciplinary partnerships (eg, with employee assistance programmes (EAP)) and process/protocol (eg, acute suicidal ideation pathways) and (3) need for supporting occupational health clinicians’ own mental health, including opportunities to address overwork/burn-out with adequate staffing/resources.

Occupational health can enact strategies to support personnel mental health: to structurally sustain attention, use social cognition tools (eg, suicidality protocols or expanded job descriptions); to leverage distributed attention, enhance interdisciplinary collaboration (eg, chaplains for bereavement support or EAP) and to equip systems with resources and allow for flexibility during crises, including increased staffing.

In older patients, the diagnosis of acute pyelonephritis (APN) is challenging. The aim was to evaluate the added value of CT to history, physical examination and urinalysis for the diagnosis of APN in older patients with suspected infection with an unknown focus.

Retrospective diagnostic study.

Department of General Medicine in an acute care hospital in Japan.

Patients aged ≥65 years who underwent blood cultures, a urine culture, and chest and abdominal CT to detect the focus of infection were included.

Two radiologists independently reviewed four non-contrast CT signs: perirenal fat stranding, pelvicalyceal wall thickening, enlargement of the kidney and thickening of Gerota’s fascia. Findings on contrast-enhanced CT could not be evaluated due to an insufficient number of patients in whom contrast-enhanced CT was performed. An expert panel was used as the reference standard for APN. The added value of CT findings was quantified by comparing the diagnostic performance between a model based on 10 predictors available before CT and an extended model including the CT findings.

Of 473 patients, 61 (14.8%) were diagnosed with APN. When the laterality of the CT findings was taken into account, the model fit was not improved by adding them. In the laterality-insensitive analysis, the model performance was significantly improved by adding the CT signs (likelihood-ratio test p=0.03; c-index 0.89 vs 0.91, p=0.03). However, their clinical utility was only to improve the classification of 11.5% of patients with APN.

The added value of non-contrast CT findings to history, physical examination and urinalysis was limited for the diagnosis of APN in older patients with a suspected infection with an unknown focus.