Background: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a potent risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). CVD risk increases in a stepwise manner with increasing kidney impairment and is significantly reduced by kidney transplantation, suggesting a causal relationship. Dyslipidemia, a well recognised CVD risk factor, is highly prevalent in CKD. While dyslipidemia is a risk factor for CKD, kidney impairment can also induce a dyslipidemic state that may contribute to the excess burden of CVD in CKD. We utilised a multipronged approach to determine whether a causal relationship exists. Materials and Methods: Retrospective case-control analysis of 816 patients admitted to the Royal Hobart Hospital in 2008–2009 with different degrees of kidney impairment and retrospective before-after cohort analysis of 60 patients who received a transplanted kidney between 1999 and 2009. Results: Decreased estimated GFR (eGFR) was independently associated with decreased high density lipoprotein (HDL, p < 0.0001) and increased triglyceride concentrations (p < 0.01) in multivariate analysis. There was no significant relationship between eGFR and low density lipoprotein (LDL) or total cholesterol in multivariate analysis. Kidney transplantation increased HDL (p < 0.0001) and decreased triglyceride (p = 0.007) concentration, whereas there was no significant change in LDL and total cholesterol. These effects were dependent on maintenance of graft function, statin therapy (those who were on) if graft failure occurred then HDL again decreased and triglycerides increased. Conclusions: Kidney transplantation ameliorated alterations in plasma lipoprotein profile associated with kidney impairment, an effect that was dependent on the maintenance of graft function. These data suggest that kidney function is a determinant of HDL and triglyceride concentrations in patients with CKD.

Accessible Summary Some people with a learning disability need to go to hospital to get help with their mental health or if they have challenging behaviour. We wanted to see if we could help people get the right support at home so they did not have to go to hospital We had a special meeting to help this happen called a ‘Planning Live’ meeting These meetings helped some people stay at home and get support without having to go to hospital. For the people who had to come into hospital, they had a shorter stay and could go home more quickly. Abstract Background: Recent government policy has focused on reducing the number of people with a learning disability receiving treatment for challenging behaviour or mental health difficulties in hospitals (including in assessment and treatment units; ATU). People with a learning disability should be supported to remain in their community when receiving support for challenging behaviour or mental health difficulties whenever possible.Methods: This study considered a novel intervention based on person‐centred planning practice, which aimed to coordinate a person's support, identify outstanding needs and increase communication. This intervention intended to reduce rates of inpatient admission, and support the person to remain in their community, whilst ensuring their needs are met. This intervention was assessed by considering the number of people admitted to the inpatient services before and after the intervention, the length of inpatient admissions before and after the intervention, and by analysing qualitative feedback from participants in the intervention.Results: ‘Planning Live’ meetings were held for 102 people. Forty‐five meetings were held retrospectively following an emergency admission. Following the ‘Planning Live’ meeting, five people had a planned admission and 52 people did not have an inpatient admission. The median length of inpatient stay fell from 143.5 days before the introduction of ‘Planning Live’ to 66 days (a statistically significant reduction). Qualitative feedback shows that the process was largely seen as helpful by professionals, families and individuals taking part in the meetings.Conclusions: The results suggest this person‐centred intervention contributed towards a reduction in the amount of time individuals stayed in hospital. However, the total number of hospital admissions rose following the intervention.

No abstract