Table 3Clinical evidence summary: Key worker vs usual care

OutcomesNo of Participants (studies) Follow upQuality of the evidence (GRADE)Relative effect (95% CI)Anticipated absolute effects
Risk with Usual careRisk difference with Key worker (95% CI)
Symptoms (KDQOL symptom/problem, 0–100, high is better)

220

(2 studies)

12 weeks

VERY LOW1,2

due to risk of bias, imprecision

The mean symptoms in the control groups was

66.5

The mean symptoms in the intervention groups was

3.62 higher

(0.27 to 6.97 higher)

Functional measures (KDQOL burden of kidney disease, 0–100, high is better)

220

(2 studies)

12 weeks

MODERATE1

due to risk of bias

The mean functional measures in the control groups was

21.5

The mean functional measures in the intervention groups was

0.72 higher

(2.97 lower to 4.42 higher)

Rate of readmission

135

(1 study)

12 weeks

VERY LOW1,2

due to risk of bias, imprecision

Rate Ratio 0.57

(0.21 to 1.58)

Moderate
150 per 1000

65 fewer per 1000

(from 119 fewer to 87 more)

Rate of clinic visits

135

(1 study)

12 weeks

LOW1,2

due to risk of bias, imprecision

Rate Ratio 0.53

(0.34 to 0.82)

Moderate
880 per 1000

414 fewer per 1000

(from 158 fewer to 581 fewer)

Mental wellbeing (KDQOL emotional wellbeing, 0–100, high is better)

220

(2 studies)

12 weeks

MODERATE1

due to risk of bias

The mean mental wellbeing in the control groups was

63.4

The mean mental wellbeing in the intervention groups was

1.49 higher

(3.59 lower to 6.57 higher)

Experience of care (KDQOL patient satisfaction, 0–100, high is better)

220

(2 studies)

12 weeks

LOW1,2

due to risk of bias, imprecision

The mean experience of care in the control groups was

63.0

The mean experience of care in the intervention groups was

6.17 higher

(2.33 to 10.01 higher)

1

Downgraded by 1 increment if the majority of the evidence was at high risk of bias, and downgraded by 2 increments if the majority of the evidence was at very high risk of bias

2

Downgraded by 1 increment if the confidence interval crossed one MID or by 2 increments if the confidence interval crossed both MIDs

From: Evidence review for coordinating care

Cover of Evidence review for coordinating care
Evidence review for coordinating care: Renal replacement therapy and conservative management: Evidence review.
NICE Guideline, No. 107.
National Guideline Centre (UK).
Copyright © NICE 2018.

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.