RESUMEN
There are various dialysis methods available to treat patients with chronic kidney failure. Generally, a distinction is made between peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis, as well as between home dialysis methods and center-based dialysis methods. To be able to advise patients optimally, it is important to understand the opportunities and limitations of the different method variants. This article provides an overview of the therapy options and describes their strengths and weaknesses.
Asunto(s)
Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio , Fallo Renal Crónico , Diálisis Peritoneal , Diálisis Renal , Humanos , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/métodos , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Diálisis Renal/métodos , Diálisis Peritoneal/métodosRESUMEN
Importance: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' mandatory End-Stage Renal Disease Treatment Choices (ETC) model, launched on January 1, 2021, randomly assigned approximately 30% of US dialysis facilities and managing clinicians to financial incentives to increase the use of home dialysis and kidney transplant. Objective: To assess the ETC's association with use of home dialysis and kidney transplant during the model's first 2 years and examine changes in these outcomes by race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cross-sectional study used claims and enrollment data for traditional Medicare beneficiaries with kidney failure from 2017 to 2022 linked to same-period transplant data from the United Network for Organ Sharing. The study data span 4 years (2017-2020) before the implementation of the ETC model on January 1, 2021, and 2 years (2021-2022) following the model's implementation. Exposure: Receiving dialysis treatment in a region randomly assigned to the ETC model. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were use of home dialysis and kidney transplant. A difference-in-differences (DiD) approach was used to estimate changes in outcomes among patients treated in regions randomly selected for ETC participation compared with concurrent changes among patients treated in control regions. Results: The study population included 724â¯406 persons with kidney failure (mean [IQR] age, 62.2 [53-72] years; 42.5% female). The proportion of patients receiving home dialysis increased from 12.1% to 14.3% in ETC regions and from 12.9% to 15.1% in control regions, yielding an adjusted DiD estimate of -0.2 percentage points (pp; 95% CI, -0.7 to 0.3 pp). Similar analysis for transplant yielded an adjusted DiD estimate of 0.02 pp (95% CI, -0.01 to 0.04 pp). When further stratified by sociodemographic measures, including age, sex, race and ethnicity, dual Medicare and Medicaid enrollment, and poverty quartile, there was not a statistically significant difference in home dialysis use across joint strata of characteristics and ETC participation. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, the first 2 years of the ETC model were not associated with increased use of home dialysis or kidney transplant, nor changes in racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in these outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio , Fallo Renal Crónico , Trasplante de Riñón , Reembolso de Incentivo , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Estudios Transversales , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/estadística & datos numéricos , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/economía , Estados Unidos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Fallo Renal Crónico/cirugía , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , MedicareRESUMEN
Introduction: We have launched a pilot study, called DIADIDEAL, to propose nurse-assistance at home for arterio-venous fistula (AVF) cannulation in home hemodialysis (HHD) patients. The aim of the present study was to describe enrollment of the patients and their nurses. Materials: All prevalent HD patients on 30th November 2018 with no medical contraindication to HDD treatment and all incident patients on dialysis from the 30th November 2018 to the 21st April 2023 were eligible. Results: Among 155 prevalent HD patients, 4 patients were included. Among the 276 incident patients on dialysis during the study period, 6 were included. We have phoned 23 nurse centers during the recruitment period. Eight of them agreed to learn in our unit how to cannulate AVF; 27 private nurses were enrolled. Discussion: The results of the DIADIDEAL study will be available in 2024; we hope it will lead to a reimbursement of nurse-AVF cannulation at home in HDD.
Introduction: L'étude DIADIDEAL est une étude pilote sur la ponction de fistule artério-veineuse (FAV) assistée par infirmier libéral en hémodialyse à domicile (HDD). L'objectif de l'étude actuelle est de rapporter le recrutement des patients et de leurs infirmiers diplômés d'État libéraux (IDEL). Matériels et méthodes: Tous les patients prévalents en HD au 30 novembre 2018 n'ayant pas de contre-indication médicale à un traitement par HDD ainsi que tous les patients incidents en dialyse du 30 novembre 2018 au 21 avril 2023 étaient éligibles. Résultats: Parmi les 155 patients prévalents en hémodialyse, 4 ont été inclus. Parmi les 276 patients incidents en dialyse sur la période, 6 ont été inclus dans l'étude. Parmi les 23 cabinets IDEL contactés pour l'étude, 8 ont accepté et 27 IDEL ont été formés à la ponction de FAV. Discussion: Les résultats de l'étude DIADIDEAL seront disponibles en 2024 et viseront à obtenir une nomenclature pour l'acte de ponction de FAV par les IDEL.
Asunto(s)
Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio , Humanos , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/enfermería , Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica/enfermería , Proyectos Piloto , Femenino , Masculino , Punciones , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Cateterismo , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapiaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Many individuals start dialysis in an acute setting with suboptimal pre-dialysis education. These individuals are often treated with central venous catheter insertion and initiation of in-center hemodialysis and only a minority will transfer to a home-based therapy. The dialysis start unit is a program performing in-center hemodialysis in a separate space while providing support and education on chronic kidney disease and treatment options in the initial weeks of kidney replacement therapy. We aimed to assess the uptake of home dialysis therapies between 2013 and 2021 among patients who started acute inpatient hemodialysis at University Health Network, Toronto and underwent dialysis at the dialysis start unit. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational cohort study based on prospectively collected data. Patients' demographics were obtained from electronic charts. In the dialysis start unit, all patients received dialysis modality education by a nurse educator, dedicated home dialysis nurses, and the allied health care team. FINDINGS: During 2013-2021, 122 patients were dialyzed in the dialysis start unit and included in the study. Among those patients, 68 patients ultimately chose home dialysis (57 peritoneal dialysis and 11 home hemodialysis). Fifty-four patients continued in-center hemodialysis. Patients adopting home dialysis were less likely to have diabetes and hypertension as the etiology of kidney failure and more likely to have glomerulonephritis or vasculitis. DISCUSSION: Dialysis modality education is implementable in advanced chronic kidney disease. Individualized education and care after unplanned start dialysis can potentially enhance home dialysis choice and utilization.
Asunto(s)
Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/métodos , Anciano , Terapia de Reemplazo Renal/métodos , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Estudios de CohortesRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To determine the long-term survival of patients receiving home hemodialysis (HHD) through self-punctured arteriovenous access. METHODS: We conducted an observational study of all patients receiving HHD at our facility between 2001 and 2020. The primary outcome was treatment survival, and it was defined as the duration from HHD initiation to the first event of death or technique failure. The secondary outcomes were the cumulative incidence of technique failure and mortality. Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify the predictive factors for treatment survival. RESULTS: A total of 77 patients (mean age, 50.7 years; 84.4% male; 23.4% with diabetes) were included. The median dialysis duration was 18 hours per week, and all patients self-punctured their arteriovenous fistula. During a median follow-up of 116 months, 30 treatment failures (11 deaths and 19 technique failures) were observed. The treatment survival was 100% at 1 year, 83.5% at 5 years, 67.2% at 10 years, and 34.6% at 15 years. Age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.07) and diabetes (aHR, 2.45) were significantly associated with treatment survival. Cardiovascular disease was the leading cause of death, and vascular access-related issues were the primary causes of technique failure, which occurred predominantly after 100 months from HHD initiation. CONCLUSION: This study showed a favorable long-term prognosis of patients receiving HHD. HHD can be a sustainable form of long-term kidney replacement therapy. However, access-related technique failures occur more frequently in patients receiving it over the long term. Therefore, careful management of vascular access is crucial to enhance technique survival.
Asunto(s)
Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/métodos , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/mortalidad , Adulto , Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica , Anciano , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Fallo Renal Crónico/mortalidad , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease affects 10% of the population worldwide, and the number of patients receiving treatment for end-stage kidney disease is forecasted to increase. Therefore, there is a pressing need for innovative digital solutions that increase the efficiency of care and improve patients' quality of life. The aim of the eHealth in Home Dialysis project is to create a novel eHealth solution, called eC4Me, to facilitate predialysis and home dialysis care for patients with chronic kidney disease. OBJECTIVE: Our study aimed to evaluate the usability, user experience (UX), and patient experience (PX) of the first version of the eC4Me solution. METHODS: We used a user-based evaluation approach involving usability testing, questionnaire, and interview methods. The test sessions were conducted remotely with 10 patients with chronic kidney disease, 5 of whom had used the solution in their home environment before the tests, while the rest were using it for the first time. Thematic analysis was used to analyze user test and questionnaire data, and descriptive statistics were calculated for the UMUX (Usability Metric for User Experience) scores. RESULTS: Most usability problems were related to navigation, the use of terminology, and the presentation of health-related data. Despite usability challenges, UMUX ratings of the solution were positive overall. The results showed noteworthy variation in the expected benefits and perceived effort of using the solution. From a PX perspective, it is important that the solution supports patients' own health-related goals and fits with the needs of their everyday lives with the disease. CONCLUSIONS: A user-based evaluation is a useful and necessary part of the eHealth solution development process. Our study findings can be used to improve the usability and UX of the evaluated eC4Me solution. Patients should be actively involved in the solution development process when specifying what information is relevant for them. Traditional usability tests complemented with questionnaire and interview methods can serve as a meaningful methodological approach for gaining insight not only into usability but also into UX- and PX-related aspects of digital health solutions.
Asunto(s)
Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio , Telemedicina , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/métodos , Anciano , Telemedicina/métodos , Satisfacción del Paciente , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/terapia , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/psicología , Interfaz Usuario-Computador , Calidad de Vida/psicología , AdultoRESUMEN
A large portion of new patients with end stage kidney disease initiates dialysis in the acute setting and continue with outpatient dialysis at in-center facilities. To increase home dialysis adoption, programs have successfully operationalized Urgent Start peritoneal dialysis to have patients avoid in-center dialysis and move straight to home. However, Urgent Start home hemodialysis (HHD) has not been a realistic option for providers or patients due to complex machines and long training times (greater than four weeks). The landscape of dialysis treatment is evolving, and innovative approaches are being explored to improve patient outcomes and optimize health care resources. This article delves into the concept of directly transitioning incident patients from hospital admission to HHD, bypassing traditional in-center dialysis training. This forward-thinking approach aims to empower patients, enhance their treatment experience, maximize efficiency, and streamline health care operations. A large hospital organization in the Northeast was able to successfully transition three patients from hospital "crash" starts on hemodialysis directly to HHD.
Asunto(s)
Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio , Fallo Renal Crónico , Humanos , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Educación del Paciente como Asunto , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Transferencia de PacientesRESUMEN
There is a global interest in expanding home dialysis utilization among patients with ESKD. Home hemodialysis (HHD) is an appealing KRT option for this population because of its multiple clinical and quality of life benefits. Central to successful HHD is the establishment and maintenance of a functioning vascular access that serves as a patient's lifeline while on therapy. While the selection of a vascular access type is influenced by individual patient circumstances, the arteriovenous fistula is generally the preferred access method. Training patients to use their dialysis access requires attention to safety, risk management, and monitoring for complications to minimize adverse events and technique failure. Policies incorporating systematic frameworks for quality improvement and assurance, in conjunction with the measurement of metrics relating to vascular access, are tools that should be used by HHD programs to enhance the value of care delivered. In this perspective, we aim to describe what is currently known about the various vascular access options in HHD and to elucidate what needs to be taken into consideration in the selection and care of this access.
Asunto(s)
Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio , Fallo Renal Crónico , Humanos , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/efectos adversos , Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica/efectos adversos , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapiaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Home haemodialysis (HHD) may be associated with important clinical, social or economic benefits. However, few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have evaluated HHD versus in-centre HD (ICHD). The relative benefits and harms of these two HD modalities are uncertain. This is an update of a review first published in 2014. This update includes non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs). OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of HHD versus ICHD in adults with kidney failure. SEARCH METHODS: We contacted the Information Specialist and searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 9 October 2022 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We searched MEDLINE (OVID) and EMBASE (OVID) for NRSIs. SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs and NRSIs evaluating HHD (including community houses and self-care) compared to ICHD in adults with kidney failure were eligible. The outcomes of interest were cardiovascular death, all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, all-cause hospitalisation, vascular access interventions, central venous catheter insertion/exchange, vascular access infection, parathyroidectomy, wait-listing for a kidney transplant, receipt of a kidney transplant, quality of life (QoL), symptoms related to dialysis therapy, fatigue, recovery time, cost-effectiveness, blood pressure, and left ventricular mass. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed if the studies were eligible and then extracted data. The risk of bias was assessed, and relevant outcomes were extracted. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Meta-analysis was performed on outcomes where there was sufficient data. MAIN RESULTS: From the 1305 records identified, a single cross-over RCT and 39 NRSIs proved eligible for inclusion. These studies were of varying design (prospective cohort, retrospective cohort, cross-sectional) and involved a widely variable number of participants (small single-centre studies to international registry analyses). Studies also varied in the treatment prescription and delivery (e.g. treatment duration, frequency, dialysis machine parameters) and participant characteristics (e.g. time on dialysis). Studies often did not describe these parameters in detail. Although the risk of bias, as assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, was generally low for most studies, within the constraints of observational study design, studies were at risk of selection bias and residual confounding. Many study outcomes were reported in ways that did not allow direct comparison or meta-analysis. It is uncertain whether HHD, compared to ICHD, may be associated with a decrease in cardiovascular death (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.07; 2 NRSIs, 30,900 participants; very low certainty evidence) or all-cause death (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.95; 9 NRSIs, 58,984 patients; very low certainty evidence). It is also uncertain whether HHD may be associated with a decrease in hospitalisation rate (MD -0.50 admissions per patient-year, 95% CI -0.98 to -0.02; 2 NRSIs, 834 participants; very low certainty evidence), compared with ICHD. Compared with ICHD, it is uncertain whether HHD may be associated with receipt of kidney transplantation (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.63; 6 NRSIs, 10,910 participants; very low certainty evidence) and a shorter recovery time post-dialysis (MD -2.0 hours, 95% CI -2.73 to -1.28; 2 NRSIs, 348 participants; very low certainty evidence). It remains uncertain if HHD may be associated with decreased systolic blood pressure (SBP) (MD -11.71 mm Hg, 95% CI -21.11 to -2.46; 4 NRSIs, 491 participants; very low certainty evidence) and decreased left ventricular mass index (LVMI) (MD -17.74 g/m2, 95% CI -29.60 to -5.89; 2 NRSIs, 130 participants; low certainty evidence). There was insufficient data to evaluate the relative association of HHD and ICHD with fatigue or vascular access outcomes. Patient-reported outcome measures were reported using 18 different measures across 11 studies (QoL: 6 measures; mental health: 3 measures; symptoms: 1 measure; impact and view of health: 6 measures; functional ability: 2 measures). Few studies reported the same measures, which limited the ability to perform meta-analysis or compare outcomes. It is uncertain whether HHD is more cost-effective than ICHD, both in the first (SMD -1.25, 95% CI -2.13 to -0.37; 4 NRSIs, 13,809 participants; very low certainty evidence) and second year of dialysis (SMD -1.47, 95% CI -2.72 to -0.21; 4 NRSIs, 13,809 participants; very low certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on low to very low certainty evidence, HHD, compared with ICHD, has uncertain associations or may be associated with decreased cardiovascular and all-cause death, hospitalisation rate, slower post-dialysis recovery time, and decreased SBP and LVMI. HHD has uncertain cost-effectiveness compared with ICHD in the first and second years of treatment. The majority of studies included in this review were observational and subject to potential selection bias and confounding, especially as patients treated with HHD tended to be younger with fewer comorbidities. Variation from study to study in the choice of outcomes and the way in which they were reported limited the ability to perform meta-analyses. Future research should align outcome measures and metrics with other research in the field in order to allow comparison between studies, establish outcome effects with greater certainty, and avoid research waste.
Asunto(s)
Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio , Calidad de Vida , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Diálisis Renal , Humanos , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/efectos adversos , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/mortalidad , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/métodos , Diálisis Renal/efectos adversos , Causas de Muerte , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Fallo Renal Crónico/mortalidad , Fallo Renal Crónico/complicaciones , Sesgo , Insuficiencia Renal/terapia , Insuficiencia Renal/mortalidad , Adulto , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/mortalidad , Infarto del Miocardio/mortalidad , Accidente Cerebrovascular/mortalidad , Instituciones de Atención Ambulatoria , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados no Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the hospital service utilization patterns and direct healthcare hospital costs before and during peritoneal dialysis (PD) at home. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients with kidney failure (KF) was conducted at a Mexican Social Security Institute hospital for the year 2014. Cost categories included inpatient emergency room stays, inpatient services at internal medicine or surgery, and hospital PD. The study groups were (1) patients with KF before initiating home PD, (2) patients with less than 1 year of home PD (incident), and (3) patients with more than 1 year of home PD (prevalent). Costs were actualized to international dollars (Int$) 2023. RESULTS: We found that 53% of patients with KF used home PD services, 42% had not received any type of PD, and 5% had hospital dialysis while waiting for home PD. The estimated costs adjusting for age and sex were Int$5339 (95% CI 4680-9746) for patients without home PD, Int$17 556 (95% CI 15 314-19 789) for incident patients, and Int$7872 (95% CI 5994-9749) for prevalent patients; with significantly different averages for the 3 groups (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Although the use of services and cost is highest at the time of initiating PD, over time, using home PD leads to a significant reduction in use of hospital services, which translates into institutional cost savings. Our findings, especially considering the high rates of KF in Mexico, suggest a pressing need for interventions that can reduce healthcare costs at the beginning of renal replacement therapy.
Asunto(s)
Hospitalización , Diálisis Peritoneal , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Hospitalización/economía , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , México , Diálisis Peritoneal/economía , Diálisis Peritoneal/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Anciano , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Insuficiencia Renal/terapia , Insuficiencia Renal/economía , Insuficiencia Renal/epidemiología , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/economía , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/estadística & datos numéricos , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Fallo Renal Crónico/economíaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Rural areas face significant disparities in dialysis care compared to urban areas due to limited access to dialysis facilities, longer travel distances, and a shortage of healthcare professionals. The objective of this study was to conduct a national examination of rural-urban differences in quality of dialysis care offered across counties in the USA. METHODS: Data were gathered from Medicare-certified dialysis facilities in 2020 from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services website. To identify high-need counties, county-level estimated crude prevalence of diabetes in adults was obtained from the 2022 CDC PLACES data portal. Our analysis reviewed 3,141 counties in the USA. The primary outcome measured was whether the county had a dialysis facility. Among those counties that had a dialysis facility, additional outcomes were the average star rating, whether peritoneal dialysis was offered, and whether home dialysis was offered. RESULTS: The type of services offered by dialysis facilities varied significantly, with peritoneal dialysis being the most commonly offered service (50.8%), followed by home hemodialysis (28.5%) and late-shift services (16.0%). These service availabilities are more prevalent in urban facilities than in rural facilities. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Five Star Quality ratings were quite different between urban and rural facilities, with 40.4% of rural facilities having a ranking of five, compared to 27.1% in urban. CONCLUSION: The majority of rural counties lack a single dialysis facility. Counties with high rates of chronic kidney disease, diabetes, and blood pressure, deemed high need, were less likely to have a highly rated dialysis facility. The findings can be used to further inform targeted efforts to increase diabetes educational programming and design appropriate interventions to those residing in rural communities and high-need counties who may need it the most.
Asunto(s)
Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Diálisis Renal , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/normas , Diálisis Renal/estadística & datos numéricos , Calidad de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Población Rural/estadística & datos numéricos , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Fallo Renal Crónico/epidemiología , Población Urbana/estadística & datos numéricos , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus/terapia , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/estadística & datos numéricos , Diálisis Peritoneal/estadística & datos numéricos , Diálisis Peritoneal/normas , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: No previously validated patient-reported experience measures exist for use among patients undergoing home dialysis. We tested the Home Dialysis Care Experience survey, a newly developed 26-item experience measure, among patients from 30 dialysis facilities in the United States. METHODS: Using mail and telephone survey modalities, we approached 1372 patients treated with peritoneal dialysis or home hemodialysis for participation. Using the results from completed surveys, we evaluated item calibration by assessing item floor and ceiling effects. We tested three sets of composite scores and used factor analysis to assess model fit for each. We evaluated associations of composite scores with global ratings and separately with patient and dialysis facility characteristics. Finally, we measured test-retest reliability in patients who completed the survey at two separate time points. RESULTS: Overall, 495 eligible patients completed at least one survey (response rate 36%). Of these, 49 completed the survey in Spanish and 61 completed a second survey within 30 days. We did not detect significant floor or ceiling effects, except for one item that demonstrated >90% responses at the top response option. Analyses supported one 12-item composite scale with high internal consistency reliability: Quality of Home Dialysis Care and Operations (Cronbach alpha=0.85). This scale strongly correlated with overall staff rating ( r =0.73) and overall center rating ( r =0.70). Patient demographic and dialysis facility characteristics were not consistently associated with composite scale scores or overall staff or center ratings. Intraclass correlation coefficients in the test-retest population were 0.74 for the Quality scale, 0.88 for overall staff rating, and 0.90 for overall center rating. CONCLUSIONS: The Home Dialysis Care Experience survey is a 26-item measure that includes one composite scale and two global rating scores and is an informative tool to evaluate patient experience of care for home dialysis.
Asunto(s)
Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Adulto , Diálisis Peritoneal , Estados Unidos , Satisfacción del Paciente , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
The success of a home hemodialysis program depends largely on a patient safety framework and the risk tolerance of a home dialysis program. Dialysis treatments require operators to perform dozens of steps repeatedly and reliably in a complex procedure. For home hemodialysis, those operators are patients themselves or their care partners, so attention to safety and risk mitigation is front of mind. While newer, smaller, and more user-friendly dialysis machines designed explicitly for home use are slowly entering the marketplace, teaching patients to perform their own treatments in an unsupervised setting hundreds of times remains a foundational programmatic obligation regardless of machine. Just how safe is home hemodialysis? How does patient training affect this safety? There is a surprising lack of literature surrounding these questions. No consensus exists among home hemodialysis programs regarding optimized training schedules or methods, with each program adopting its own approach on the basis of local experience. Furthermore, there are little available data on the safety of home hemodialysis as compared with conventional in-center hemodialysis. This review will outline considerations for training patients on home hemodialysis, discuss the safety of home hemodialysis with an emphasis on the risk of serious and life-threatening adverse effects, and address the methods by which adverse events are monitored and prevented.
Asunto(s)
Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio , Educación del Paciente como Asunto , Seguridad del Paciente , Humanos , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/efectos adversos , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio/educación , Factores de Riesgo , Medición de RiesgoRESUMEN
eHealth solutions such as digital patient engagement platforms (DPEPs) aim at enhancing communication and collaboration between patients and clinicians. From the clinicians' viewpoint, concerns exist about new information systems (IS) leading to increased workload and interoperability problems. This article aims to support the development and implementation of DPEPs from the end-users' perspective. We studied clinicians' needs for a new DPEP developed to support home dialysis (HD) care. Eight clinicians participated in remote semi-structured interviews. Clinicians had positive expectations for the new DPEP as it could provide an overall picture of patients' status, support patients' self-care, and save time during patient visits. However, they had concerns about successful implementation, changes to workflows, and integration issues. To conclude, it is important to design and agree on changes in work practices, patient care, and complex IS environments when implementing new DPEP solutions in clinics.
Asunto(s)
Servicios de Atención de Salud a Domicilio , Telemedicina , Humanos , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio , Participación del Paciente , Diálisis RenalRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in home haemodialysis (HHD) performed with low-flow dialysate devices and variable treatment schedules. The target standard Kt/V (stdKt/V) should be 2.3 volumes/week, according to KDOQI guidelines (2015). The current formula for stdKt/V does not help prescribe the dialysis dose (eKt/V) and treatment frequency (TF). The aim of this study was to obtain a formula for stdKt/V that is able to define the minimum required values of eKt/V and TF to achieve the targeted stdKtV. METHODS: Thirty-eight prevalent patients on HHD were enrolled. A total of 231 clinical datasets were available for urea modelling using the Solute-Solver software (SS), recommended by KDOQI guidelines. A new formula (stdKt/V = a + b × Kru + c × eKt/V) was obtained from multivariable regression analysis of stdKt/V vs eKt/V and residual kidney urea clearance (Kru). The values of coefficients a, b and c depend on the treatment schedules and the day of the week of blood sampling for the kinetic study (labdayofwk) and then vary for each of their foreseen 62 combinations. For practical purposes, we used only seven combinations, assuming Monday as a labdayofwk for each of the most common schedules of the 7 days of the week. RESULTS: The stdKt/V values obtained with SS were compared with the paired ones obtained with the formula. The mean ± standard deviation stdKt/V values obtained with SS and the formula were 3.043 ± 0.530 and 2.990 ± 0.553, respectively, with 95% confidence interval +0.15 to -0.26. A 'prescription graph' was built using the formula to draw lines expressing the relationship between Kru and required eKt/V for each TF. Using this graph, TF could have been reduced from the delivered 5.8 ± 0.8 to 4.8 ± 0.8 weekly sessions. CONCLUSIONS: The new formula for stdKtV is reliable and can support clinicians to prescribe the dialysis dose and TF in patients undergoing HHD.
Asunto(s)
Fallo Renal Crónico , Diálisis Renal , Humanos , Hemodiálisis en el Domicilio , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Riñón , UreaRESUMEN
Home-based dialysis modalities offer both clinical and practical advantages to patients. The use of the home-based modalities, peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis, has been increasing over the past decade after a long period of decline. Given the increasing frequency of use of these types of dialysis, it is important for clinicians to be familiar with how these types of dialysis are performed and key clinical aspects of care related to their use in patients with end-stage kidney disease.