Factors influencing withdrawal from dialysis: a national registry study.

BACKGROUND: Dialysis withdrawal is the third most common cause of death in patients receiving dialysis for established renal failure (ERF) in Scotland. We describe incidence, risk factors and themes influencing decision-making in a national renal registry. METHODS: Details of deaths in those receiving renal replacement therapy (RRT) for ERF in Scotland are reported to the Scottish Renal Registry via a unique mortality report. We extracted patient demographics and comorbidity, cause and location of death, duration of RRT and pertinent free text comments from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2014. Withdrawal incidence was calculated and logistic regression used to identify significantly influential variables. Themes emerging from clinician comments were tabulated for descriptive purposes. RESULTS: There were 2596 deaths; median age at death was 68 [interquartile range (IQR) 58, 76] years, 41.5% were female. Median duration on RRT was 1110 (IQR 417, 2151) days. Dialysis withdrawal was the primary cause of death in 497 (19.1%) patients and withdrawal contributed to death in a further 442 cases (17.0%). The incidence was 41 episodes per 1000 patient-years. Regression analysis revealed increasing age, female sex and prior cerebrovascular disease were associated with dialysis withdrawal as a primary cause of death. Conversely, interstitial renal disease, angiographically proven ischaemic heart disease, valvular heart disease and malignancy were negatively associated. Analysis of free text comments revealed common themes, portraying an image of physical and psychological decline accelerated by acute illnesses. CONCLUSIONS: Death following dialysis withdrawal is common. Factors important to physical independence-prior cerebrovascular disease and increasing age-are associated with withdrawal. When combined with clinician comments this study provides an insight into the clinical decline affecting patients and the complexity of this decision. Early recognition of those likely to withdraw may improve end of life care.

How safe is renal replacement therapy? A national study of mortality and adverse events contributing to the death of renal replacement therapy recipients.

BACKGROUND: Patients receiving treatment with renal replacement therapy (RRT) have high mortality, and ensuring patient safety in this population is difficult. We aimed to estimate the incidence and nature of medical adverse events contributing to the death of patients being treated with RRT. METHODS: This population registry-based retrospective case review study included all patients being treated with RRT for established renal failure in Scotland and who died between 1 January 2008 and 30 June 2011. Deaths were reviewed by consultant nephrologists using a structured questionnaire to identify factors contributing to death occurring in both the inpatient and outpatient setting. Reviewers were able to use any information source deemed relevant, including paper and electronic clinical records, mortality and morbidity meetings and procurator fiscal (Scottish coroner) investigations. Deaths occurring in 2008 and 2009 where avoidable factors were identified that may have or did lead to death of a patient were subject to further review and root cause analysis, in order to identify recurrent themes. RESULTS: Of 1551 deaths in the study period, 1357 were reviewed (87.5%). Cumulative RRT exposure in the cohort was 2.78 million person-days. RRT complications were the primary cause of death in 28 (2.1%). Health-care-associated infection had contributed to 9.6% of all deaths. In 3.5% of deaths, factors were identified which may have or did contribute to death. These were both organizational and human error related and were largely due to five main causes: management of hyperkalaemia, prescribing, out of hours care, infection and haemodialysis vascular access. CONCLUSIONS: Adverse events contributing to death in RRT recipients mainly relate to the everyday management of common medical problems and not the technical aspects of RRT. Efforts to avoid harm in this population should address these ubiquitous causes of harm.

Buttonhole needling of ateriovenous fistulae: a randomized controlled trial.

Buttonhole needling of arteriovenous fistulae (AVFs) was first described 30 years ago, but little evidence has been reported to show how it might differ from the standard rope-ladder technique. We carried out a randomized control trial comparing these two techniques. All suitable patients within the region were considered for recruitment. Patients were then randomized to continue with traditional rope-ladder needling or changed to buttonhole needling. A mean of 13.7 (median, 11) sharp needles were required to create a track. Nine of 22 patients in the buttonhole group reduced or stopped local anesthetic (LA) for needle insertion compared with one of 25 in the traditional group. The diameter of the buttonhole AVFs remained unchanged, whereas the control group increased in size by 30% +/- 7% (p < 0.01), equivalent to an absolute increase of 5 mm. There was no difference in bleeding times, but there was a preference for the buttonhole technique with 21 of the 22 patients and 15 of 23 nurses preferring buttonhole needling. Buttonhole needling is preferred by both patients and staff, reduces discomfort during needling and reduces AVF enlargement. There is a low level of complication.