Assessment of Appropriate Prescribing in Maintenance Haemodialysis and Comparison of Prescribing Patterns Between State- and Privately-Funded Patients: A Retrospective Review

Abstract

Background:

Patients with end stage renal disease undergoing haemodialysis commonly have multimorbidity, which in turn leads to polypharmacy. Additionally, end stage renal disease limits the choice and dosage of medicines. In Namibia, patients can access care at privately run dialysis centres. Patients seen at state-run health facilities in need of renal care from the dialysis centres, have their renal care costs covered by the Ministry of Health and Social Services.

Aim:

The main purpose of this study was to assess the appropriateness of medication therapy among patients with end stage renal disease who underwent haemodialysis at two dialysis centres in Windhoek. Further, the study also compared prescribing patterns between state-funded and privately funded haemodialysis patients.

Methods:

A retrospective, quantitative and analytic design involving the review of clinical records of patients attending haemodialysis at the two dialysis centres. The types of medicines prescribed were classified according to the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification. The Drug Prescribing in Renal Failure Handbook was used as a primary reference for assessing the appropriateness of renal dosage adjustment. The primary references used to check for the appropriateness of medication choice were the KDIGO Clinical Practice Guidelines. Other references were used as secondary sources.

Results:

A total of 147 patients’ clinical records were reviewed and included in this study. About one-third (33.3%) of patients had at least one or more inappropriately selected medicines. Most patients 82.0% (n = 121) had at least one or more inappropriately renally adjusted medicines. More privately funded patients were prescribed Vitamin D or its analogues (P < .001), phosphate binders (P < .001), antithrombotic agents (P < .001), lipid modifying agents (P < .001), and angiotensin receptor blockers (P < .001).

Conclusion:

As anticipated, patients on haemodialysis were being managed with a relatively large number of medicines. Renal dosage adjustment could be improved to ensure patient safety. The differences in the prescribing of vital medicines such as phosphate binders, between state funded versus privately funded patients warrants further investigation.

Keywords

haemodialysis renal dosage adjustment medication selection prescribing patterns Namibia

Introduction

The number of people receiving dialysis globally is expected to increase to up to 10 million by the year 2030, with 70% of these individuals living in sub-Saharan Africa.^1,2 In many parts of the world, diabetes mellitus is the leading cause of end stage renal disease (ESRD); however, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), hypertension, systemic lupus erythematosus, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection contribute significantly.³ The burden of chronic kidney disease (CKD) is also expected to increase significantly in Namibia due to the continued increasing prevalence of CKD risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes mellitus and HIV. For instance, in 2019, 52% of adults aged 30 to 79 years in Namibia were diagnosed with hypertension, yet only 22% of those on treatment had controlled blood pressure.⁴

Patients receiving dialysis have a high burden of co-existing diseases, resulting in the use of many medicines and an increased risk of drug-related problems. Further, the pharmacokinetics of medicines may be significantly altered by ESRD.^5,6 Haemodialysis may effectively clear some small molecules from circulation, leading to subtherapeutic levels after a dialysis session.⁷ These changes in drug pharmacokinetics therefore necessitate dosage adjustment, as failure to do so may lead to drug or metabolite accumulation, predisposing the patient to adverse effects. Appropriate medication selection and dosage adjustment are therefore crucial to prevent undesirable health outcomes, mortality, and morbidity in patients on renal replacement therapy.

Although several studies and systematic reviews have been conducted to assess prescribing in patients with CKD, only a few have specifically assessed those on haemodialysis.^8-17 These studies in haemodialysis patients were mainly conducted in high-income countries. Studies conducted in African countries^18-21 have mostly assessed prescribing in patients with various stages of CKD and not those on dialysis. One study conducted in Nigeria,¹⁰ in which 53.7% of participants were on maintenance dialysis, reported only on drug-drug interactions and not on the overall appropriateness of therapy. This highlights a noticeable gap in the availability of data on the appropriateness of management of dialysis patients in sub-Saharan Africa, where unique challenges such as limited access to medicines and issues of medicine affordability persist.

The healthcare system in Namibia comprises of public and private sectors.^22,23 The public sector is financed by the national government under the Ministry of Health and Social Services (MOHSS) and caters for approximately 83% of the country’s population, predominantly people who are unable to pay for medical insurance or to pay out of pocket.²³ At the time of this study, the MOHSS did not have any haemodialysis units, although some are now available. Therefore, in the event a state-funded patient required haemodialysis, the MOHSS paid for this service at a private dialysis centre.²⁴ Although the World Bank classifies Namibia as an upper-middle-income country, Namibia has one of the highest rates of socioeconomic inequality in the world.²⁵ According to the 2023 national census, 37% of the population was unemployed and 34% of employed people reported earning a gross income of USD$100 or less per month.²⁶ As both private and state-funded patients receive dialysis from the same facilities, it is not known whether there are differences in prescribing patterns between patient groups.

Haemodialysis services, as well as medicines needed to manage complications of kidney disease, are costly. Therefore, identifying potentially inappropriate or unnecessary prescribing can help reduce the burden of healthcare costs related to dialysis for both patients and health insurers, including the MOHSS. A study conducted in a dialysis facility in Detroit (US) reported that the inclusion of a clinical pharmacist resulted in a total cost saving of almost US$500,000.²⁷ In most dialysis centres in Namibia, pharmacists are not part of the multidisciplinary team responsible for direct care of dialysis patients. This study was necessary to identify gaps in the pharmaceutical care of haemodialysis patients that pharmacists in Namibia can fill.

Aim

The main purpose of this study was to assess the appropriateness of medication therapy among patients who underwent maintenance haemodialysis at two dialysis centres in Windhoek, Namibia. Further, the study also compared prescribing patterns between state-funded and privately-funded haemodialysis patients.

Ethics Approval

Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Namibia Human Research and Ethics Committee (Ref: SOP0001) and the MOHSS (Ref: 17/3/3/MS). Written permission for data collection was also obtained from the management of the dialysis centres. No identifiable patient information was collected for the purpose of this study.

Methods

Study Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective, quantitative, analytic design involving review of clinical records of patients attending haemodialysis at two dialysis centres in Windhoek, Namibia, was conducted from July 2022 to December 2022. These two outpatient dialysis centres are private health facilities; however, they attend to both state and privately funded patients. In this study, state patients were individuals who typically received healthcare services at state-run health facilities but received renal care at the dialysis centres and their renal care costs were covered by the MOHSS. Privately funded patients were those patients whose renal care costs were covered by medical insurance, or they paid out of pocket.

Sample Size and Eligibility Criteria

The minimum sample size for this study was determined based on the prevalence of inappropriate medication selection and inappropriate dosage adjustment among CKD patients reported in studies conducted in African countries, which ranged from 27%-43% and 14-35%, respectively.^18-21 Using Epi Info version 7.2.4.0 (CDC, Atlanta, GA, USA), a single-population proportion formula was used. Assuming a prevalence of inappropriate drug selection of 43%²¹ and a prevalence of inappropriate dosage adjustment of 35%²⁰ among dialysis patients in Windhoek, with a 95% confidence interval, 80% power, the minimum sample sizes were determined to be 102 and 100 for these two main outcome measures, respectively. At the time of the study, these two dialysis centres each attended to an average of 70 patients per month.

All patients who were diagnosed with ESRD regardless of age and gender, underwent haemodialysis sessions for at least 1 month, had comorbid conditions managed with at least one medication and attended haemodialysis sessions at one of the two centres between July 2022 and December 2022 were included in the study. Patients whose clinical records had missing main outcome measures were excluded. However, when a patient had missing information for variables other than the main outcome measures, such patients were included in the study but excluded from the analysis for that particular variable. For example, the computed median body mass index excluded patients whose recent weight or height were missing. In cases where a diagnosis was not recorded, and there was no clinical suspicion of such a diagnosis based on laboratory results, vital signs, or medications prescribed, it was assumed that that the condition was not present. The same was assumption was applied for missing laboratory results that were either not recorded or whose printed results were not attached to the patient’s clinical records. This approach is consistent with standard clinical practice.

There were notable differences in the use of laboratory tests used to screen for acid-base disorders, between state-funded and privately-funded patients. This indicated variations in monitoring practices. Since the analysis was based on the data available, these differences could have influenced the variations reported in the types of comorbidities and thereby affecting comparability between the two groups. This was recognised as a possible confounding factor during interpretation of results, however, since this differences in monitoring practices was not measured, it could not be controlled for.

Data Collection Procedure and Study Outcomes

Data for all patients that met the inclusion criteria was collected using a pretested data collection tool (Supplementary Material 1). Information on the types of medicines prescribed was obtained from the clinical records and were later classified according to the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification.²⁸ Medications containing combinations were considered as single medicine, represented by one ATC code.

For each patient, each of their prescribed medicines were assessed to determine whether they required dosage adjustment in haemodialysis based on the recommendations from the Drug Prescribing in Renal Failure Handbook.²⁹ The Oxford Handbook of Dialysis,³⁰ British National Formulary (BNF),³¹ South African Medicines Formulary (SAMF),³² and Summary of Product Characteristics³³ were also used as secondary sources of information on renal dosage adjustment. For this study, a dosage adjustment error was defined as failure to change a dose or dosing interval to that recommended for patients on haemodialysis. A drug dosage was rated as ‘inappropriate’ if the dosage prescribed was not in conformity with the recommended adjustment in haemodialysis. Fixed dose combinations were rated as ‘inappropriate’ if any of the active pharmaceutical ingredients in the combination was inappropriately dosed.

Each prescribed medicine was also assessed to determine appropriateness of medication choice in managing comorbid conditions. The primary references used to check for the appropriateness of medication choice was the KDIGO Clinical Practice Guidelines.^34-39 Other sources such as the British National Formulary (BNF), South African Medicines Formulary (SAMF), Oxford Handbook of Dialysis were all used as secondary sources in case of missing, unclear, or conflicting information in the primary reference source.^30-32

Each prescribed medicine was studied to determine the appropriateness of medication choice by checking several aspects; they were assessed on whether they were the correct drug to manage the comorbid condition(s), any contraindications in ESRD, use of medicine without indication, presence of clinically significant major drug interactions between the medicines used, therapeutic duplications as well as any drug allergies the patient may have had. Medication choices that met the above criteria were rated as ‘appropriate’ and those that did not meet one or more of the criteria were rated as ‘inappropriate’.

Statistical Analysis

Data were entered in Microsoft Excel and exported to IBM SPSS 26 for analysis.⁴⁰ Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the participants’ demographics. To compare the demographics and prescribing patterns between state- and private-funded patients, Chi-square or a Fisher’s exact tests were used for categorical variables, and unpaired T-test or Mann-Whitney U test was used for continuous and discrete variables. A P-value < .05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Patients’ Socio-Demographic and Clinical Characteristics

A total of 181 clinical records were reviewed and 147 were included in the study. The 34 clinical records excluded from the study belonged to patients who either had acute kidney injury or were temporary visitors from other parts of the country and were missing information on the main outcome measures.

Of the included records, slightly more than half (n = 78, 53.1%) were state funded. Of the state patients, 53.8% were female compared to 37.7% of private patients (P = .05). State funded patients tended to be younger (42.0 ± 13.3 years vs 53.2 ± 14.9 years; P < .001). Private patients had more comorbidities (4 ± 3; P = .002) and a higher average number of medicines per patient (12.4 ± 3.9; P = .004) compared to state patients. The most common co-morbid conditions in both state and private patients were hypertension (n = 74, 98.6% vs n = 69, 100%) and anaemia (n = 72, 92.5% vs n = 64, 92.8%). Details of the demographic differences are shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Demographics and Clinical Data of Patients on Maintenance Haemodialysis (n = 147).

Characteristics	Total (n = 147)	State (n = 78)	Private (n = 69)	P-value
Gender (n, %)
Male	79 (53.7)	36 (46.2)	43 (62.3)	.05^a
Female	68 (46.3)	42 (53.8)	26 (37.7)	.05^a
Age, years (mean ± SD)	47.3 ± 15.1	42.0 ± 13.3	53.2 ± 14.9	<.001^b
Body Mass Index kg/m² (median ± IQR)¹	22.1 (18.8-27)	21.8 (18.6-21.8)	22.4 (19-29.1)	.163^c
Number of comorbidities (median ± IQR)	4 ± 3.9	3 ± 2	4 ± 3	.002^c
Number of medicines per patient (mean ± SD)	11.5 ± 3.5	10.7 ± 2.9	12.4 ± 3.9	.004^b
Major co-morbid conditions
Hypertension	143 (98.6)	74 (94.9)	69 (100)	.175^a
Anaemia	136 (92.5)	72 (92.3)	64 (92.8)	.918^a
Secondary hyperparathyroidism	91 (61.9)	57 (73.1)	34 (49.3)	.003^a
Acid-base disorders	69 (46.9)	6 (7.7)	63 (91.3)	<.001^a
Other cardiovascular diseases^#	44 (29.9)	13 (16.7)	31 (44.9)	<.001^a
Hyperkalaemia	40 (27.2)	19 (24.4)	21 (30.4)	.409^a
Diabetes mellitus	32 (21.8)	8 (10.3)	24 (34.8)	<.001^a
Venous thromboembolism	26 (17.7)	12 (15.4)	14 (20.3)	.437^a
HIV infection	23 (15.6)	11 (14.1)	12 (17.4)	.584^a
Genito-urinary disorders	23 (15.6)	9 (11.5)	14 (20.3)	.145^a

Chi-square test.

T-test (independent samples).

Mann-Whitney U test.

Other cardiovascular disorders include; heart failure, rheumatic heart disease, ischaemic heart disease).

Data available for 89 patients (State = 51, Private = 38).

Appropriateness of Renal Drug Dosage and Medication Choice

During the study period, 163 unique medicines were prescribed to the 147 participants, classified based on their ATC classification. Out of the 1691 total medicines prescribed, 15.6% (n = 263) required renal dosage adjustment, slightly under half (n = 128, 48.7%) of those were appropriately adjusted (Table 2). The most common inappropriately dosed medicine was perindopril. Of the patients prescribed perindopril, 55 patients were receiving higher than the maximum dose recommended for patients on dialysis. Most of the patients (82%) had at least one inappropriately renally adjusted medicine (Table 2).

Table 2.

Renal Drug Dosage Adjustment Among Patients Undergoing Maintenance Haemodialysis (n = 147).

Variable	n (%)
Number of unique medicines prescribed	163
Medicines with guidelines for dosage adjustment	41 (25.2)
Total medicines prescribed to all patients	1691
Medicines requiring dosage adjustment	263 (15.6)
Medicines appropriately adjusted	128 (48.7)
Medicines inappropriately adjusted	135 (51.3)
Type of dosing error
Underdosage	21 (15.6)
Overdosage	111 (82.2)
Treatment duration too long	3 (2.2)

Among 147 patients included in the current study, 33.3% (n = 49) had one or more inappropriately selected medicines. The most common medication selection errors were identified in the management of CKD complications. In the management of anaemia, 46 patients had an elevated haemoglobin (>10 g/L) and continued to receive erythropoietin. Additionally, 30 patients with elevated ferritin levels were still receiving IV iron sucrose. Eighteen patients were receiving an ACE-I or ARB while having hyperkalaemia (>5.5).

Prescribing Patterns Among State Funded and Privately Funded Patients

There were differences in medication prescribing between state- and privately-funded patients. More private patients were prescribed vitamin D or its analogues (P < .001), phosphate binders (P < .001), antithrombotic agents (P < .001), lipid modifying agents (P < .001), and angiotensin receptor blockers (P < .001). In comparison, state patients were more likely to be prescribed calcium supplementation (P < .001), iron supplementation (P = .025), calcium channel blockers (P < .001), and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (P < .001). There were no differences in the prescribing of erythropoietin, folic acid, other antihypertensives, and anti-infectives. Table 3 shows the medicines prescribed from each of the most prescribed drug classes.

Table 3.

The Most Frequently Prescribed Medicines for Patients Receiving Renal Replacement Therapy.

Medication name	Total (n = 167 (%))	State (n = 78)	Private (n = 69)	P-value
Alimentary tract and metabolism
Vitamin D and analogues	126 (85.7)	59 (75.6)	67 (97.1)	<.001
Calcium supplements (including Calcium gluconate)	88 (59.9)	60 (76.9)	28 (40.6)	<.001
Phosphate binders	48 (32.7)	15 (19.2)	33 (47.8)	<.001
Proton pump inhibitors	41 (27.9)	17 (21.8)	24 (34.8)	.080
Blood and blood forming organs
Antithrombotic agents	107 (72.8)	29 (37.2)	47 (68.1)	<.001
Iron preparations	132 (89.8)	68 (87.2)	50 (72.5)	.025
Folic acid	31 (21.1)	13 (16.7)	19 (27.5)	.111
Erythropoietin	132 (89.8)	67 (85.9)	65 (94.2)	.097
Cardiovascular system
Calcium channel blockers (any)	78 (53.1)	59 (75.6)	19 (27.5)	<.001
Lipid modifying agents	25 (17.0)	3 (3.8)	22 (31.9)	<.001
Beta blocking agents	90 (61.2)	49 (62.8)	53 (76.8)	.066
Alpha-adrenoreceptor antagonists	77 (52.4)	46 (59.0)	31 (45.0)	.089
Diuretics	121 (82.3)	65 (83.3)	56 (81.2)	.730
Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I)	65 (44.2)	46 (59.0)	19 (27.5)	<.001
Angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB)	53 (32.7)	16 (20.5)	37 (53.6)	<.001
Anti-infective for systemic use
Beta lactam antibiotics	6 (4.1)	2 (2.6)	4 (5.8)	.323
Sulphonamides and trimethoprim	3 (2.0)	1 (1.3)	2 (2.9)	.489
Fluoroquinolone antibiotics	2 (1.4)	1 (1.3)	1 (1.4)	.930
Carbapenems	2 (1.4)	2 (2.6)	0 (0)	.180
Aminoglycosides	2 (1.4)	2 (2.6)	0 (0)	.180
Antiretrovirals for treating HIV	23 (15.6)	11 (14.1)	12 (17.4)	.584

Discussion

Principal Findings

This study found that fewer than half of medicines requiring dosage adjustment were appropriately adjusted. One-third of patients had at least one or more inappropriately selected medicines. Further, there were some differences in the types of medicines prescribed to state- and privately-funded patients.

Demographics and Clinical Data of Patients on Maintenance Haemodialysis

Interestingly, state-funded patients had a lower prevalence of comorbidities compared to privately funded patients. This may be explained by the fact that state-funded patients were on average 11 years younger compared to privately funded patients. However, it may also be influenced by limitations in screening for complications. For example, for state patients, urea and electrolyte (U&E) screening usually only includes sodium, potassium, urea, and serum creatinine. More patients in private were monitored with a basic metabolic panel (BMP) which includes bicarbonate and chloride in addition to the others in the U&E. Therefore, it is not surprising that patients in state facilities had fewer documented acid-base disorders, as this is usually identified with the serum bicarbonate which was not available for most state-funded patients.

Uncontrolled hypertension was the most common risk factor for CKD in both state and private patients. A diagnosis of hypertension at a younger age has been significantly associated with higher risk of CKD.⁴¹ Two studies conducted in South Africa and Kenya also reported an mean age of patients with CKD similar to that of state funded patients in our study.^18,42 These findings show that young people of working age are being affected by kidney disease across sub-Saharan Africa, highlighting opportunities for intervention to prevent or delay renal replacement therapy.

Appropriateness of Medication Dosage and Selection

Only 18% of the 147 patients had all their medicines appropriately adjusted. Out of the total medicines prescribed to all patients, 263 (15.6%) medicines required dosage adjustment and slightly under half (n = 128, 48.7%) were appropriately adjusted. With overdosage being the most common category of drug dosage adjustment errors. This highlights the opportunity for improvement in medication dosing and pharmacists could play a key role. These findings are similar to those reported by studies undertaken in other LMICs such as Pakistan^43,44 and Palestine.⁴⁵ These countries have reported that dosage adjustment errors are one of the most prevalent drug related errors in CKD patients. The high prevalence of dosage adjustment errors in LMICs in Asia^43-46 and Africa^18,47 is not unexpected as dose adjustment in patients with renal impairment is rarely done in most settings. The failure to adjust doses has been attributed to prescribers underestimating the potential adverse outcomes of lack of dose adjustment.⁴⁵ In contrast, a study carried out in the US, reported a much lower prevalence of dosage adjustment errors in haemodialysis patients.²⁷ There are a variety of potential factors leading to fewer errors. For instance, CKD patients in high income countries are more likely to be attended to by a multidisciplinary health care team comprising doctors and clinical pharmacists. Although the practice of pharmacy has transformed in many parts of the world to become more patient-oriented, in some LMICs, pharmacists still have more traditional roles focused on pharmaceutical products and dispensing.⁴⁸ These pharmacists rarely have access to important clinical information such as renal function test results which would be necessary to make appropriate renal dosing recommendations. In high-income countries, electronic medical records can allow team members real-time access to all the clinical data for a patient, particularly in hospital settings. These systems also have alerts that may make recommendations on renal dosing with medication order entry.

Medications were appropriately selected in 80.3% (n = 118) of the patients, while the remaining 19.7% had at least one or more inappropriately selected drugs. Although patients were managed with a relatively high number of medicines (on average, 12 per patient), the findings on medication selection appropriateness suggest that it was clinically appropriate in most cases. In recent years some studies have suggested redefining polypharmacy from merely counting number of medicines prescribed to adopting terms such as ‘appropriate or inappropriate polypharmacy.⁴⁹ The most common medication selection errors were identified in the management of CKD complications. Other studies have reported a much higher prevalence of medication choice errors ranging from 27.7% to 60.3%.^19,50,51 In the current study, patients were normally seen by one prescriber at the dialysis centre who was responsible for initiating therapy as well as changing dialysis regimens; having consistent providers has been shown to be a factor that may lead to less medication choice errors.⁵² Previous studies have demonstrated the role of pharmacists in identifying and intervening in medication dosing and selection errors when they are directly involved in the care of haemodialysis patients.^27,53-55 This study suggests that pharmacists in Namibia may have an important role in improving medication selection and dosage adjustment in patients on haemodialysis.

Comparison of Prescribing Patterns Between State- and Privately-Funded Patients

More private patients were prescribed vitamin D or its analogues (97%.1%) and phosphate binders (47.8%) (P < .001). This highlights a possible overuse of these agents in private patients since less than half of private patients had secondary hyperparathyroidism and active vitamin D levels were rarely monitored. State patients were less likely to receive phosphate binders (P < .001) even though more state patients compared to private patients had secondary hyperparathyroidism (73.1%). This may be because phosphate binders are not part of the Namibia Essential Medicines List (NEMLIST)⁵⁶ due to their high cost and are therefore not readily available or routinely prescribed in state hospitals. Private patients were also more likely to be prescribed antithrombotic agents (P < .001) and lipid modifying agents (P < .001). This may be due to higher prevalence of cardiovascular diseases (P < .001) and diabetes (P < .001) among private patients, or less screening for cardiovascular disease risk for state patients.

State patients were more likely to be prescribed calcium supplementation (P < .001), mainly calcium gluconate. The frequent prescribing of calcium gluconate in state patients’ needs to be explored further. It is not known whether it was used in place of phosphate binders or as a calcium supplementation. Calcium gluconate 300 mg tablets are the only oral calcium supplements included on the NEMLIST. This tablets contain approximately 28 g elemental calcium and the commonly prescribed dose of 600 mg thrice daily is not sufficient to manage hypocalcaemia in CKD.⁵⁷ There is limited evidence to support the use of calcium gluconate as a phosphate binder hence it is not recommended in international guidelines.^36,58

Regarding hypertension management, state patients were more likely to be prescribed calcium channel blockers (P < .001), and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (P < .001). In state hospitals in Namibia, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors are preferred over angiotensin receptor blockers and are prescribed more frequently for management of hypertension even in patients without CKD.⁵⁹ In comparison, private patients were more likely to be prescribed an angiotensin receptor blockers (P < .001), which may be due to prescribing preferences and better access to this class of medicines.

There were several limitations in our study. Firstly, this study made use of data from manual patient clinical records, for this reason some data may have been recorded wrongly or omitted. The exclusion of patients with missing main outcome measures may have introduced selection bias. Nonetheless, all patient records that were reviewed and met the inclusion criteria were included in the study, resulting in a more representative sample. Differences in monitoring between state- and privately-funded patients may have influenced types of comorbidities identified and prescribing patterns observed between the two groups. For example, privately-funded patients with more access to laboratory monitoring are more likely to be diagnosed with a complication of CKD and are more likely to have their treatment adjusted accordingly. Actual utilization of these prescribed medicines by patients could not be confirmed and information on other medicines that the patients may have been taking such as self-medications or herbal medicines was not obtained either. Interviewing patients may have also revealed other issues such as poor adherence, inappropriate timing of drug administration, and may have helped identify drugs that may no longer be necessary for the patient.

Impact of the Study

The findings of our study support the need for a more multidisciplinary approach involving nephrologists, general practitioners, nurses, laboratory personnel and pharmacists in the care of patients receiving dialysis, to improve rational prescribing practices. Continuing professional development activities designed specifically for pharmacists caring for patients on dialysis are needed to make them a proactive and effective member of the team. Currently, there is only a brief section in the NSTG addressing the diagnosis of renal diseases, and haemodialysis is simply mentioned as an option for patients with renal disease.⁵⁹ However, the growing prevalence of CKD in Namibia calls for the inclusion of more evidence-based information on the management of common complications and comorbidities in patients receiving haemodialysis, as well as recommendations for appropriate clinical monitoring to the next edition of the NSTG. This change would drive the needed revision of the NEMLIST to include more medicines for non-communicable diseases such as CKD and its complications, ensuring alignment between the two documents. The NEMLIST has historically prioritised communicable diseases, however, with shifting disease demographics in Namibia, there is a need for equitable health resource allocation and improved access to medicines used in the management of non-communicable diseases.

Conclusion

Patients on maintenance haemodialysis were managed with a relatively large number of medicines although the medicines are appropriately selected for their indications in most cases, renal dosage adjustment was inappropriately undertaken in most cases. The differences in the prescribing patterns of vital medicines such as phosphate binders, between state funded- and privately-funded patients warrants further investigation. A wide variety of medicines were prescribed to all patients. There is still much work needed to optimise drug therapy, improve patient outcomes and ensure safe management of these patients. Clinical pharmacy services would therefore be of great value in the care of dialysis patients in Namibia.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-hpx-10.1177_00185787251403015 – Supplemental material for Assessment of Appropriate Prescribing in Maintenance Haemodialysis and Comparison of Prescribing Patterns Between State- and Privately-Funded Patients: A Retrospective Review

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-hpx-10.1177_00185787251403015 for Assessment of Appropriate Prescribing in Maintenance Haemodialysis and Comparison of Prescribing Patterns Between State- and Privately-Funded Patients: A Retrospective Review by Martha Kampanza, Roger Karel Verbeeck, Lauren Jonkman and Mwangana Mubita in Hospital Pharmacy

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We wish to acknowledge the dialysis centres management and staff members for their support with this research.

ORCID iD

Martha Kampanza

Ethical Considerations

This retrospective chart review study involving human participants was in accordance with the ethical standards of the University of Namibia and the Ministry of Health and Social services research and ethics committees and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Namibia Human Research and Ethics Committee (Ethics Approval Number: SOP0001) and the Ministry of Health and Social Services (Ethics Approval Number: 17/3/3/MS) in 2022. Written permission for data collection was also obtained from the management of the dialysis centres.

Consent to Participate

In view of the retrospective nature of the study and that the study involved patient chart reviews, informed consent was not obtained from patients. The need for formal consent was waived by the ethics committees. No identifiable patient information was collected for the purpose of this study.

Author Contributions

RKV, MM designed and supervised the study, RKV, MM, and MK developed the study protocol. MK collected the data, LJ provided input on the interpretation of the data. MK, LJ, MM analysed the data. MK drafted the manuscript, all authors reviewed and finalised the manuscript.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

All data used in this study has been anonymised and can be obtained by request from the corresponding author.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Liyanage

Ninomiya

Jha

, et al. Worldwide access to treatment for end-stage kidney disease: a systematic review. Lancet. 2015;385(9981):1975-1982. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61601-9

Sanyaolu

Okorie Annan

, et al. Epidemiology and management of chronic renal failure: a global public health problem. Biostat Epidemiol. 2018;1(1):11-16. doi:10.30881/beij.00005

Hashmi

Benjamin

Lappin

. End-Stage Renal Disease. Accessed August 1, 2023. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK499861/End-Stage Renal Disease

World Health Organization. Namibia Hypertension Profile. Accessed February 18, 2025. https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/hypertension-nam-2023-country-profile

Fan

de Lannoy

IAM

. Pharmacokinetics. Biochem Pharmacol. 2014;87(1):93-120. doi:10.1016/j.bcp.2013.09.007

Lea-Henry

Carland

Stocker

Sevastos

Roberts

. Clinical pharmacokinetics in kidney disease: fundamental principles. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2018;13(7):1085-1095. doi:10.2215/CJN.00340118

Verbeeck

Musuamba

. Pharmacokinetics and dosage adjustment in patients with renal dysfunction. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2009;65(8):757-773. doi:10.1007/s00228-009-0678-8

Marin

Beresford

, et al. Prescription patterns in dialysis patients: differences between hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients and opportunities for deprescription. Can J Kidney Health Dis. 2020;7:1-10. doi:10.1177/2054358120912652

Paik

Zhuo

York

, et al. Medication burden and prescribing patterns in patients on hemodialysis in the USA, 2013-2017. Am J Nephrol. 2021;52(12):919-928. doi:10.1159/000520028

10.

Fasipe

Akhideno

Nwaiwu

Adelosoye

. Assessment of prescribed medications and pattern of distribution for potential drug;drug interactions among chronic kidney disease patients attending the Nephrology Clinic of Lagos University Teaching Hospital in Sub-Saharan West Africa. Clin Pharmacol. 2017;9:125-132. doi:10.2147/CPAA.S147835

11.

Nagano

Tomori

Koiwa

, et al. Identification of prescribing patterns in hemodialysis outpatients taking multiple medications. Pharmacy. 2023;11(2):43. doi:10.3390/pharmacy11020043

12.

Tadvi

Hussain

. Analysis of prescription pattern in patients on maintenance haemodialysis. Indian J Pharm Phamacol. 2020;7(2):125-129. doi:10.18231/j.ijpp.2020.021

13.

Nafih

Mateti

Shenoy

Shivaprasad

Moorthy

. A study on prescribing patterns in hemodialysis and renal transplantation patients. Egypt Pharm J. 2022;21(4):496. doi:10.4103/epj.epj_89_22

14.

Murthy

NBV

Satyanarayana

. Prescribing pattern of drugs in chronic kidney disease patients on hemodialysis at a tertiary care hospital. Int J Basic Clin Pharmacol. 2017;6(4):928-932. doi:10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20171106

15.

Rankovic

GGN

Pejcic

Krtinic

, et al. Factors associated with potentially inappropriate prescribing in elderly patients with various degrees of chronic kidney disease. Hemodial Int. 2024;28(4):419-428. doi:10.1111/hdi.13171

16.

Almodovar

Donneyong

Seiber

Nahata

. Potentially inappropriately prescribed medication prescriptions among medicare patients receiving hemodialysis. Am J Kidney Dis. 2024;84(1):132-134. doi:10.1053/j.ajkd.2023.11.012

17.

Pereira-Céspedes

Jiménez-Morales

Palomares-bayo

Martinez-Martinez

Calleja-Hernadez

. Medication review with follow-up for end-stage renal disease: drug-related problems and negative outcomes associated with medication—a systematic review. J Clin Med. 2023;13(4):1048. doi:10.3390/jcm12155080

18.

Njeri

Ogallo

Nyamu

Opanga

Birichi

. Medication-related problems among adult chronic kidney disease patients in a sub-Saharan tertiary hospital. Int J Clin Pharm. 2018;40(5):1217-1224. doi:10.1007/s11096-018-0651-7

19.

Adibe

Igboeli

Ukwe

. Evaluation of drug therapy problems among renal patients receiving care in some tertiary hospitals in Nigeria. Trop J Pharm Res. 2017;16(3):697-704. doi:10.4314/tjpr.v16i3.27

20.

Garedow

Bobasa

Wolide

, et al. Drug-related problems and associated factors among patients admitted with chronic kidney disease at Jimma University Medical Center, Jimma Zone, Jimma, Southwest Ethiopia: a hospital-based prospective observational study. Int J Nephrol. 2019:1:1-11. doi:10.1155/2019/1504371

21.

Legesse

Muhammed

Hamza

Nasir

Nedi

. Medication related problems among ambulatory patients with chronic kidney disease at St. Paul’s Hospital Millennium Medical College, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. PLoS One. 2022;17(12):e0278563. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0278563

22.

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH-German Federal Ministry for Economic, Cooperation and Development (BMZ). Sector Brief Namibia: Health. Accessed September 10, 2024. https://www.giz.de/en/downloads/giz2023-sector-brief-namibia-health.pdf

23.

Christians

. Country profile – Primary healthcare and family medicine in Namibia. Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med. 2020;12(1): e1-e3. doi:10.4102%2Fphcfm.v12i1.2242

24.

The Namibian Parliament and National Assembly. Vote 13 Budget Statement: Statement by DR Kalumbi Shangula, (MP) Minister of Health and Social Services, on the Occasion of the Introduction of Vote 13 (Health and Social Services) for the 2024/ 2025 Financial Year. Accessed September 2, 2024. https://www.parliament.na/wpcontent/uploads/2021/07/Vote13_Health.pdf

25.

World Bank Group. The World Bank in Namibia. Accessed February 19, 2025. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/namibia/overview

26.

Namibia Statistics Agency. Namibia 2023 Population and Housing Census Labour Force Report. Accessed February 19, 2023. https://census.nsanamibia.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/2023-PHC-Labourforce-Report.pdf

27.

Daifi

Feldpausch

Roa

Yee

. Implementation of a clinical pharmacist in a hemodialysis facility: a quality improvement report. Kidney Med. 2021;3(2):241-247.e1. doi:10.1016/j.xkme.2020.11.015

28.

World Health Organization. Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) Classification: Structure and Principles. Accessed May 28, 2023. https://www.who.int/tools/atc-ddd-toolkit/atc-classification

29.

Ashley

Dunleavy

. The Renal Drug Handbook, 5th ed. CRC Press; 2017. doi:10.1201/9781315379456

30.

Levy

Brown

Lawrence

, eds. Oxford Handbook of Dialysis. 4th ed. Oxford University Press; 2016.

31.

Joint Formulary Committee. British National Formulary. 78th ed. British Medical Association and Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain; 2019.

32.

Rossiter

, ed. South African Medicines Formulary. 13th ed. Health and Medical Publishing Group; 2020.

33.

Electronic Medicines Compendium (EMC) . Datapharm Ltd; 2024. Accessed May 23, 2023. https://www.medicines.org.uk/emc#gref

34.

Flythe

Chang

Gallagher

, et al. Blood pressure and volume management in dialysis: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference. Kidney Int. 2020;97(5):861-876. doi:10.1016/j.kint.2020.01.046

35.

Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Glomerular Disease Work Group. KDIGO 2021 clinical practice guideline for the management of glomerular diseases. Kidney Int. 2021;100(4):S1-S276. doi:10.1016/j.kint.2021.05.021

36.

Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) CKD-MBD Update Work Group. KDIGO 2017 clinical practice guideline update for the diagnosis, evaluation, prevention, and treatment of Chronic Kidney Disease-Mineral and Bone Disorder (CKD-MBD). Kidney Int. 2017;7(1):1-59. doi:10.1016/j.kisu.2017.04.001

37.

Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) CKD Work Group. KDIGO 2012 clinical practice guideline for anemia in chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int. 2012;2(4):1-12. Accessed May 23, 2023. https://kdigo.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/KDIGO-2012-Anemia-Guideline-English.pdf

38.

Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) CKD Work Group. KDIGO 2022 Clinical Practice Guideline for Diabetes Management in Chronic Kidney Disease. Accessed May 24, 2023. https://kdigo.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/KDIGO-2022-Clinical-Practice-Guideline-for-Diabetes-Management-in-CKD.pdf

39.

Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO). Clinical Practice Guideline for Lipid Management in Chronic Kidney Disease. 2013. Accessed June 13, 2023. https://kdigo.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/KDIGO-2013-Lipids-Guideline-English.pdf

40.

IBM Corp. Released 2019. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.

41.

Qiu

. The relationship between the age of onset of hypertension and chronic kidney disease: a cross-sectional study of the American population. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024;11:1426953. doi:10.3389/fcvm.2024.1426953

42.

Adeniyi

Laurence

Volmink

. Prevalence of chronic kidney disease and association with cardiovascular risk factors among teachers in Cape Town, South Africa. Clin Kidney J. 2017;10(3):363-369. doi:10.1093/ckj/sfw138

43.

Saleem

Masood

. Pattern and predictors of medication dosing errors in chronic kidney disease patients in Pakistan: a single center retrospective analysis. PLoS One. 2016;11(7):e0158677. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0158677

44.

Hassan

Ali

Ullah

Ahmed

Zar

, et al. Assessment of medication dosage adjustment in hospitalized patients with chronic kidney disease. Cureus. 2021;13(2):e13449. doi:10.7759/cureus.13449

45.

Sweileh

Janem

Sawalha

, et al. Medication dosing errors in hospitalized patients with renal impairment: a study in Palestine. Pharmacoepidem Drug Safe. 2007;16(8):908-912. doi:10.1002/pds.1412

46.

Pankhrin

Srestha

Karki

Marasine

Lama

Pokharel

. Drug dosage adjustment of chronic kidney disease patients at nephrology ward in tertiary care hospital of Nepal. EJMS. 2020;2(1):41-50. doi:10.46405/ejms.v2i1.39

47.

Getachew

Tadesse

Shibeshi

. Drug dosage adjustment in hospitalized patients with renal impairment at Tikur Anbessa specialized hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. BMC Nephrol. 2015;16:158. doi:10.1186/s12882-015-0155-9

48.

Ahmed

Hasan

Hassali

. Clinical pharmacy and pharmaceutical care: a need to homogenize the concepts. Am J Pharm Educ. 2010;74(10):193g.

49.

Hughes

. Appropriate and inappropriate polypharmacy—choosing the right strategy. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2021;87(1):84-86. doi:10.1111/bcp.14589

50.

Harris

Zhang

. The role of gender disparities in kidney injury. Ann Transl Med. 2020;8(7):514-514. doi:10.21037%2Fatm.2020.01.23

51.

Pehlivanli

Eyupoglu

Basgut

Erturk

Ozcelikay

. Impact of a multidisciplinary approach involving clinical pharmacist on resolving drug related problems in chronic kidney patients: a prospective interventional study. BMC Nephrol. 2023;24(1):149. doi:10.1186/s12882-023-03210-5

52.

Kondo

Nakamura

Yamazaki

, et al. Prescription of potentially inappropriate medications to elderly hemodialysis patients: prevalence and predictors. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2015;30(3):498-505. doi:10.1093/ndt/gfu070

53.

Alshogran

Hajjar

Muflih

Alzoubi

. The role of clinical pharmacist in enhancing hemodialysis patients’ adherence and clinical outcomes: a randomized-controlled study. Int J Clin Pharm. 2022;44(5):1169-1178. doi:10.1007/s11096-022-01453-0

54.

Nicholas

Edward

. A pharmacy-based medication reconciliation and review program in hemodialysis patients: a prospective study. Pharm Pract (Granada). 2016;14(3):785. doi:10.18549/PharmPract.2016.03.785

55.

Berlo-van de Laar

IRF

Sluiter

Riet

Taxis

Jansman

FGA

. Pharmacist-led medication reviews in pre-dialysis and dialysis patients. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2020;16(12):1718-1723. doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2020.02.006

56.

Republic of Namibia Ministry of Health and Social Services. Namibia Essential Medicines List. 2016. Accessed September 23, 2024. https://platform.who.int/docs/default-source/mca-documents/policy-documents/essential-medicines-and-equipment/NAM-CH-43-01-EMD-2016-eng-Namibia-Essential-Medicines-List-2016.pdf

57.

Trailokya

Srivastava

Bhole

Zalte

. Calcium and Calcium salts. J Assoc Physicians India. 2017;65(2):100-103.

58.

National Kidney Foundation n’s Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI). Clinical Practice Guidelines for Bone Metabolism and Disease in Chronic Kidney Disease. 2017. Accessed February 8, 2024. http://kidneyfoundation.cachefly.net/professionals/KDOQI/guidelines_bone/index.htm

59.

Republic of Namibia Ministry of Health and Social Services. Namibia Standard Treatment Guidelines. 2nd ed. Tertiary Health Care and Clinical Support Services Division; 2021.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB