Home-Based Dialysis: A Primer for the Internist.

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.

Peritoneal Dialysis Technique Survival: A Cohort Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Reasons for transfer from peritoneal dialysis (PD) to hemodialysis (HD) remain incompletely understood. Among incident and prevalent patients receiving PD, we evaluated the association of clinical factors, including prior treatment with HD, with PD technique survival. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Adults who initiated PD at a Dialysis Clinic, Inc (DCI) outpatient facility between January 1, 2010, and September 30, 2019. EXPOSURE: The primary exposure of interest was timing of PD start, categorized as PD-first, PD-early, or PD-late. Other covariates included demographics, clinical characteristics, and routine laboratory results. OUTCOME: Modality switch from PD to HD sustained for more than 90 days. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Multivariable Fine-Gray models with competing risks and time-varying covariates, stratified at 9 months to account for lack of proportionality. RESULTS: Among 5,224 patients who initiated PD at a DCI facility, 3,174 initiated dialysis with PD ("PD-first"), 942 transitioned from HD to PD within 90 days ("PD-early"), and 1,108 transitioned beyond 90 days ("PD-late"); 1,472 (28%) subsequently transferred from PD to HD. The PD-early and PD-late patients had a higher risk of transfer to HD as compared with PD-first patients (in the first 9 months: adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 1.51 [95% CI, 1.17-1.96] and 2.41 [95% CI, 1.94-3.00], respectively; and after 9 months: AHR, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.99-1.35] and AHR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.24-1.65], respectively). More peritonitis episodes, fewer home visits, lower serum albumin levels, lower residual kidney function, and lower peritoneal clearance calculated with weekly Kt/V were additional risk factors for PD-to-HD transfer. LIMITATIONS: Missing data on dialysis adequacy and residual kidney function, confounded by short PD technique survival. CONCLUSIONS: Initiating dialysis with PD is associated with greater PD technique survival, though many of those who initiate PD-late in their dialysis course still experience substantial time on PD. Peritonitis, lower serum albumin, and lower Kt/V are risk factors for PD-to-HD transfer that may be amenable to intervention. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an important kidney replacement modality with several potential advantages compared with in-center hemodialysis (HD). However, a substantial number of patients transfer to in-center HD early on, without having experienced the quality-of-life and other benefits that come with sustained maintenance of PD. Using retrospective data from a midsize national dialysis provider, we found that initiating dialysis with PD is associated with longer maintenance of PD, compared with initiating dialysis with HD and a later switch to PD. However, many of those who initiate PD-late in their dialysis course still experience substantial time on PD. Peritonitis, lower serum albumin, and lower small protein removal are other risk factors for PD-to-HD transfer that may be amenable to intervention.

Identifying Major Barriers to Home Dialysis (The IM-HOME Study): Findings From a National Survey of Patients, Care Partners, and Providers.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Developing strategies to improve home dialysis use requires a comprehensive understanding of barriers. We sought to identify the most important barriers to home dialysis use from the perspective of patients, care partners, and providers. STUDY DESIGN: This is a convergent parallel mixed-methods study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: We convened a seven-member advisory board of patients, care partners, and providers who collectively developed lists of major patient/care partner-perceived barriers and provider-perceived barriers to home dialysis. We used these lists to develop a survey that was distributed to patients, care partners, and providers-through the American Association of Kidney Patients and the National Kidney Foundation. The surveys asked participants to: 1) rank their top three major barriers (quantitative); and 2) describe barriers to home dialysis (qualitative). ANALYTICAL APPROACH: We compiled a list of the top three patient/care partner-perceived and top three provider-perceived barriers (quantitative) and conducted a directed content analysis of open-ended survey responses (qualitative). RESULTS: There were 522 complete responses (233 providers; 289 patients/care partners). The top three patient/care partner-perceived barriers were: fear of performing home dialysis; lack of space; and the need for home-based support. The top three provider-perceived barriers were: poor patient education; limited mechanisms for home-based support staff, mental health, and education; and lack of experienced staff. We identified nine themes through qualitative analysis: limited education; financial disincentives; limited resources; high burden of care; built environment/structure of care delivery that favor in-center hemodialysis; fear and isolation; perceptions of inequities in access to home dialysis; provider perspectives about patients; and patient/provider resiliency. LIMITATIONS: This was an online survey that is subject to non-response bias. CONCLUSIONS: The top three barriers to home dialysis for patient/care partners and providers incompletely overlap, suggesting the need for diverse strategies that simultaneously address patient-perceived barriers at home and provider-perceived barriers in the clinic.

Outcomes of Integrated Home Dialysis Care: Results From the Canadian Organ Replacement Register.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: The integrated home dialysis model proposes the initiation of kidney replacement therapy (KRT) with peritoneal dialysis (PD) and a timely transition to home hemodialysis (HHD) after PD ends. We compared the outcomes of patients transitioning from PD to HHD with those initiating KRT with HHD. STUDY DESIGN: Observational analysis of the Canadian Organ Replacement Register (CORR). SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS: All patients who initiated PD or HHD within the first 90 days of KRT between 2005 and 2018. EXPOSURE: Patients transitioning from PD to HHD (PD+HHD group) versus patients initiating KRT with HHD (HHD group). OUTCOME: (1) A composite of all-cause mortality and modality transfer (to in-center hemodialysis or PD for 90 days) and (2) all hospitalizations (considered as recurrent events). ANALYTICAL APPROACH: A propensity score analysis for which PD+HHD patients were matched 1:1 to (1) incident HHD patients ("incident-match" analysis) or (2) HHD patients with a KRT vintage at least equivalent to the vintage of PD+HHD patients at the transition time ("vintage-matched" analysis). Cause-specific hazards models (composite outcome) and shared frailty models (hospitalization) were used to compare groups. RESULTS: Among 63,327 individuals in the CORR, 163 PD+HHD patients (median of 1.9 years in PD) and 711 HHD patients were identified. In the incident-match analysis, compared to the HHD patients, the PD+HHD group had a similar risk of the composite outcome (HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.58-1.32]) and hospitalizations (HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.76-1.41]). In the vintage-match analysis, PD+HHD patients had a lower hazard for the composite outcome (HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.40-0.94]) but a similar hospitalization risk (HR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.59-1.24]). LIMITATIONS: Risk of survivor bias in the PD+HHD cohort and residual confounding. CONCLUSIONS: Controlling for KRT vintage, the patients transitioning from PD to HHD had better clinical outcomes than the incident HHD patients. These data support the use of integrated home dialysis for patients initiating home-based KRT. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The integrated home dialysis model proposes the initiation of dialysis with peritoneal dialysis (PD) and subsequent transition to home hemodialysis (HHD) once PD is no longer feasible. It allows patients to benefit from initial lifestyle advantages of PD and to continue home-based treatments after its termination. However, some patients may prefer to initiate dialysis with HHD from the outset. In this study, we compared the long-term clinical outcomes of both approaches using a large Canadian dialysis register. We found that both options led to a similar risk of hospitalization. In contrast, the PD-to-HHD model led to improved survival when controlling for the duration of kidney failure.

Direct Transition from Hospital to Home Dialysis: Revolutionizing Home Dialysis Training.

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.

Home dialysis: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference.

Home dialysis modalities (home hemodialysis [HD] and peritoneal dialysis [PD]) are associated with greater patient autonomy and treatment satisfaction compared with in-center modalities, yet the level of home-dialysis use worldwide is low. Reasons for limited utilization are context-dependent, informed by local resources, dialysis costs, access to healthcare, health system policies, provider bias or preferences, cultural beliefs, individual lifestyle concerns, potential care-partner time, and financial burdens. In May 2021, KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) convened a controversies conference on home dialysis, focusing on how modality choice and distribution are determined and strategies to expand home-dialysis use. Participants recognized that expanding use of home dialysis within a given health system requires alignment of policy, fiscal resources, organizational structure, provider incentives, and accountability. Clinical outcomes across all dialysis modalities are largely similar, but for specific clinical measures, one modality may have advantages over another. Therefore, choice among available modalities is preference-sensitive, with consideration of quality of life, life goals, clinical characteristics, family or care-partner support, and living environment. Ideally, individuals, their care-partners, and their healthcare teams will employ shared decision-making in assessing initial and subsequent kidney failure treatment options. To meet this goal, iterative, high-quality education and support for healthcare professionals, patients, and care-partners are priorities. Everyone who faces dialysis should have access to home therapy. Facilitating universal access to home dialysis and expanding utilization requires alignment of policy considerations and resources at the dialysis-center level, with clear leadership from informed and motivated clinical teams.

Updates on Infectious and Other Complications in Peritoneal Dialysis: Core Curriculum 2023.

The last few years have seen several developments in the field of peritoneal dialysis (PD), including successful use of acute PD, increasing emphasis on home dialysis utilization, and improved understanding of models of peritoneal solute transfer. This installment of AJKD's Core Curriculum in Nephrology emphasizes the latest data available for prevention and management of infectious and noninfectious complications of PD. Through case vignettes, appropriate strategies for diagnosis and care of patients with PD peritonitis are reviewed as well as noninfectious complications evident in clinical practice including complications from increased intra-abdominal pressure, namely pericatheter and abdominal leaks, hernia formation, and complications from pleuroperitoneal communication (hydrothorax). Although rates of incisional hernias and pericatheter leaks have decreased with improved peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion techniques, these mechanical complications continue to be common occurrences and are reviewed via pertinent clinical vignettes which aim to address and discuss common implications of these scenarios. Finally, this Core Curriculum article covers a practical overview of peritoneal dialysis catheter dysfunction.

Utility of remote monitoring in patients on automated peritoneal dialysis.

Home hemodialysis (HD) and automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) have advantages over HD in hospitals or HD centers. Home therapies are generally less expensive and give patients greater mobility and freedom for work, school, family, and recreational activities. Technological advances have made it possible to complement APD with devices for remote monitoring (RM) of the patient. With them, objective information generated in the APD device is collected and sent to repositories "in the cloud" for analysis or at the time decided by the health team. With APD+RM, it is possible to monitor therapeutic compliance, effective dialysis time, ultrafiltration volumes, inflow and outflow patterns of dialysis fluid, and patient actions to respond to alarms that indicate deviations from the parameters set by the nephrologist. The results of APD+RM show good acceptance by the patient, nephrologists, and nurses, treatment adherence has improved, hospitalizations and technique failure have decreased, and some aspects of quality of life have improved. However, there is a lack of controlled clinical trials that reliably demonstrate lower mortality and comorbidity due to specific causes.

Registered Nurse in Home Dialysis Therapies and Future Implications.

With an increased emphasis on home dialysis therapies (HDTs), and to ensure nephrology nurses have a voice in health policy discussions and decisions, the American Nephrology Nurses Association (ANNA) initiated the Home Dialysis Therapies Task Force. ANNA fully supports the increased utilization of HDTs and wants to ensure every individual has the option of HDT and deserves an RN in their care. Careful consideration must be given to the impact of legislative initiatives aimed at the nursing shortage and increasing the use of HDTs on delivery of safe care and RN practice. The HDT Task Force implemented a Think Tank to explore and delineate the role of nephrology RNs in HDT to ensure a safe and informed transition to HDT for individuals with kidney failure. The mission was to gather and analyze information on the role of the nephrology RN in HDTs, clarify RN-specific tasks versus tasks that may be delegated to support staff, and gather and gain insight into barriers to HDTs.

Successful Home Hemodialysis Programs: An Exploration of Key Nursing Care Processes.

The aim of this qualitative study was to identify nursing processes of care that help keep patients successfully on home hemodialysis (HHD). A qualitative descriptive approach using appreciative inquiry was used as the framework for data collection and analysis. Four focus groups were held with HHD nursing teams in the Province of Ontario, Canada. Results suggest that successful HHD teams have highly performing nurses who work cohesively as a team, and have consistent structures and processes in place for patient education and follow up. A culture of success has the potential to keep patients successfully on HHD, improve nurse job satisfaction, and retain highly functioning and specialized nursing staff. Quality improvement initiatives aimed at improving rates of HHD are important given the benefits to patients of HHD as a treatment modality.

Enhancing Home Dialysis Training and Retention through Interactive Virtual Reality.

Patients with end stage kidney disease (ESKD) face challenges in comprehending and pursuing available treatment options, particularly with the rising interest in home-based dialysis. Providers struggle to deliver effective, individualized, and cost-efficient training, leading to lower adoption and retention rates. Cannulation, machine use, and safety training remain significant barriers. Using learning science - the marriage of psychology and the neuroscience of learning - we show that interactive virtual reality (IVR) can address these barriers to home dialysis success by providing the experiential learning necessary for deeper understanding and increased competence. We show that IVR broadly engages multiple learning centers in the brain, thus spreading the wealth of knowledge while reducing cognitive load. We conclude by presenting a practical example of the potential of IVR in objective assessment of home dialysis equipment use and cannulation skills training.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Kidney Replacement Therapies Among Adults With Kidney Failure: An Observational Study of Variation by Patient Age.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients present with kidney failure at younger ages than White patients. Younger patients are also more likely to receive transplants and home dialysis than in-center hemodialysis (ICHD), but it is unknown whether racial and ethnic disparities in treatment differ by age. We compared use of kidney replacement therapies between racial and ethnic groups among patients with incident kidney failure overall and by age. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 830,402 US adult (age >21 years) patients initiating kidney failure treatment during the period of 2011-2018. EXPOSURES: Patient race and ethnicity (non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic White, Hispanic, or other) and age group (22-44, 45-64, 65-74, or 75-99 years). OUTCOME: Treatment modality (transplant, peritoneal dialysis [PD], home hemodialysis [HHD], or ICHD) as of day 90 of treatment. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Differences in treatment modalities were quantified for patient subgroups defined by race and ethnicity and by age. Log-binomial regression models were fit to estimate adjusted risk ratios. RESULTS: 81% of patients were treated with ICHD, 3.0% underwent transplants (85% preemptive, 57% living-donor), 10.5% were treated with PD, and 0.7% were treated with HHD. Absolute disparities in treatment were most pronounced among patients aged 22-44 years. Compared with non-Hispanic White patients, whose percentages of treatment with transplant, PD, and HHD were 10.9%, 19.0%, and 1.2%, respectively, non-Hispanic Black patients were less commonly treated with each modality (unadjusted percentages, 1.8%, 13.8%, and 0.6%, respectively), as were Hispanic patients (4.4%, 16.9%, and 0.5%, respectively; all differences P < 0.001). After adjustment, the largest relative disparities were observed for transplant among the 22-44-year age group; compared with non-Hispanic White patients, the adjusted risk ratios for non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients were 0.21 (95% CI, 0.19-0.23) and 0.47 (95% CI, 0.43, 0.51), respectively. LIMITATIONS: Race and ethnicity data not self-reported. CONCLUSIONS: Among adults with incident kidney failure, racial and ethnic disparities in transplant and home dialysis use are most pronounced among the youngest adult patient age group.

Integrating Patient Activation Into Dialysis Care.

Patient activation, the measure of patients' readiness and willingness to manage their own health care, is low among people receiving in-center hemodialysis, which is exacerbated because such centers are commonly set up for patients to passively receive care. In our pursuit of person-centered care and value-based medicine, enabling patients to take a more active role in their care can lead to healthy behaviors, with subsequent reductions in individual burden and costs to the health care system. To improve patient activation, we need to embrace a patient-first approach and combine it with ways to equip patients to thrive with self-management. This requires changes in the training of the health care team as well as changes in care delivery models, promoting interventions such as health coaching and peer mentoring, while leveraging technology to enable self-access to records, self-monitoring, and communication with providers. We also need health care policies that encourage a focus on patient-identified goals, including more attention to patient-reported outcomes. In this article, we review the current status of patient activation in dialysis patients, outline some of the available interventions, and propose steps to change the dynamics of the current system to move toward a more active role for patients in their care.

Trends in home dialysis use differ among age categories in past two decades: A Dutch registry study.

BACKGROUND: Although the number of patients with end-stage kidney disease is growing, the number of patients who perform dialysis at home has decreased during the past two decades. The aim of this study was to explore time trends in the use of home dialysis in the Netherlands. METHODS: Dialysis episodes of patients who started dialysis treatment were studied using Dutch registry data (RENINE). The uptake of home dialysis between 1997 through 2016 was evaluated in time periods of 5 years. Home dialysis was defined as start with peritoneal dialysis or home haemodialysis, or transfer to either within 2 years of dialysis initiation. All analyses were stratified for age categories. Mixed model logistic regression analysis was used to adjust for clustering at patient level. RESULTS: A total of 33 340 dialysis episodes in 31 569 patients were evaluated. Mean age at dialysis initiation increased from 62.5 ± 14.0 to 65.5 ± 14.5 years in in-centre haemodialysis patients, whereas it increased from 51.9 ± 15.1 to 62.5 ± 14.6 years in home dialysis patients. In patients <65 years, the uptake of home dialysis was significantly lower during each 5-year period compared with the previous period, whereas kidney transplantation occurred more often. In patients ≥65 years, the incidence of home dialysis remained constant, whereas mortality decreased. CONCLUSIONS: In patients <65 years, the overall use of home dialysis declined consistently over the past 20 years. The age of home dialysis patients increased more rapidly than that of in-centre dialysis patients. These developments have a significant impact on the organization of home dialysis.

Dialysis-network variability in home dialysis use not explained by patient characteristics: a national registry-based cohort study in France.

BACKGROUND: Although associated with better quality of life and potential economic advantages, home dialysis use varies greatly internationally and appears to be underused in many countries. This study aimed to estimate the dialysis-network variability in home dialysis use and identify factors associated with (i) the uptake in home dialysis, (ii) the proportion of time spent on home dialysis and (iii) home dialysis survival (patient and technique). METHODS: All adults ≥18 years old who had dialysis treatment during 2017-2019 in mainland France were included. Mixed-effects regression models were built to explore factors including patient or residence characteristics and dialysis network associated with variation in home dialysis use. RESULTS: During 2017-2019, 7728/78 757 (9.8%) patients underwent dialysis at least once at home for a total of 120 594/1 508 000 (8%) months. The heterogeneity at the dialysis-network level and to a lesser extent the regional level regarding home dialysis uptake or total time spent was marginally explained by patient characteristics or residence and dialysis-network factors. Between-network heterogeneity was less for patient and technique survival. These results were similar when the analysis was restricted to home peritoneal dialysis or home hemodialysis. CONCLUSIONS: Variability between networks in the use of home dialysis was not fully explained by non-modifiable patient and residence characteristics. Our results suggest that to increase home dialysis use in France, one should focus on home dialysis uptake rather than survival. Financial incentives and a quality improvement programme should be implemented at the dialysis-network level to increase home dialysis use.

Similar survival on home haemodialysis and automated peritoneal dialysis: an inception cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have shown superior survival of patients on home haemodialysis (HD) compared with peritoneal dialysis (PD), but patients on automated PD (APD) and continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) have not been considered separately. As APD allows larger fluid volumes and may be more efficient than CAPD, we primarily compared patient survival between APD and home HD. METHODS: All adult patients who started kidney replacement therapy (KRT) between 2004 and 2017 in the district of Helsinki-Uusimaa in Finland and who were on one of the home dialysis modalities at 90 days from starting KRT were included. We used intention-to-treat analysis. Survival of home HD, APD and CAPD patients was studied using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression with adjustment for propensity scores that were based on extensive data on possible confounding factors. RESULTS: The probability of surviving 5 years was 90% for home HD, 88% for APD and 56% for CAPD patients. After adjustment for propensity scores, the hazard ratio of death was 1.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-2.4] for APD and 1.6 (95% CI 0.74-3.6) for CAPD compared with home HD. Censoring at the time of kidney transplantation (KTx) or at transfer to in-centre HD did not change the results. Characteristics of home HD and APD patients at the start of dialysis were similar, whereas patients on CAPD had higher median age and more comorbidities and received KTx less frequently. CONCLUSIONS: Home HD and APD patients had comparable characteristics and their survival appeared similar.

Peritoneal dialysis patient selection from a comorbidity perspective.

Despite many medical and socioeconomic advantages, peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an underutilized dialysis modality that in most countries is used by only 5%-20% of dialysis patients, while the vast majority are treated with in-center hemodialysis. Several factors may explain this paradox, such as lack of experience and infrastructure for training and monitoring of PD patients, organizational issues, overcapacity of hemodialysis facilities, and lack of economic incentives for dialysis centers to use PD instead of HD. In addition, medical conditions that are perceived (rightly or wrongly) as contraindications to PD represent barriers for the use of PD because of their purported potential negative impact on clinical outcomes in patients starting PD. While there are few absolute contraindications to PD, high age, comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus, obesity, polycystic kidney disease, heart failure, and previous history of abdominal surgery and renal allograft failure, may be seen (rightly or wrongly) as relative contraindications and thus barriers to initiation of PD. In this brief review, we discuss how the presence of these conditions may influence the strategy of selecting patients for PD, focusing on measures that can be taken to overcome potential problems.

Comorbidity is not associated with dialysis modality choice in patients with end-stage kidney disease.

AIM: Over the past years the proportion of home dialysis patients has decreased in the Netherlands. In addition, the home dialysis use varies significantly among centres. It is unclear whether this is the result of differences in comorbidity, or other factors. Our aim was to investigate the association between comorbidity and dialysis modality choice. METHODS: The multi-centre DOMESTICO cohort study collected comorbidity data of patients who started dialysis in 35 Dutch centres from 2012 to 2016. Comorbidity was assessed by the Charlson comorbidity index. Home dialysis was defined as any peritoneal dialysis or home haemodialysis treatment during follow-up. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to assess the association between comorbidity and dialysis modality, with a mixed model approach to adjust for clustering of patients within dialysis centres. RESULTS: A total of 1358 patients were included, of whom 628 were treated with home dialysis. In crude mixed model analyses, the probability of receiving home dialysis was lower when comorbidity score was higher: having a high comorbidity score resulted in an odds ratio of 0.74 (95% CI 0.54-1.00) when compared with patients without comorbidities. After adjustments for age, sex, ethnic background, body mass index and dialysis vintage, there was no association between comorbidity and home dialysis. CONCLUSION: Comorbidity was not significantly associated with home dialysis choice, after adjustment for several confounding factors including age and body mass index. Future studies should aim at unravelling the centre-specific characteristics that probably play a role in dialysis modality choice.

The need for individualizing teaching and assurance of knowledge transmission to patients training for home dialysis.

Patients have varied learning styles and this has implications for home haemodialysis (HHD). Assessment tools directed toward understanding these styles remains understudied. As a consequence, this may lead to substandard retention rates or adverse events in HHD programs. As part of a continuous quality improvement initiative we have aimed to improve our understanding of patient learning styles and consequently tailor home dialysis training to individuals. To objectively determine knowledge translation and comprehension, irrespective of learning styles, we have introduced an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). This assessment tool allows for further refinement of educational priorities by highlighting both deficiencies and strengths. Thereafter, an exit OSCE ensures patients attain an acceptable standard to complete home haemodialysis independently. We hope this tool will help shape future training criteria for HHD programs and consequently reduce adverse event rates.

Evaluation of the experience with the use of telemedicine in a home dialysis program-a qualitative and quantitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Assisted home hemodialysis is a therapeutic modality for patients diagnosed with end-stage renal disease who require dialysis replacement therapy and have concomitant health limitations that prevent them from attending a satellite dialysis unit or performing their own treatment. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to evaluate whether telemedicine provided through telemonitoring can improve the ongoing relationship between the doctor, the nurse and the patient. METHOD: This prospective longitudinal, qualitative and quantitative study analyzes the impact of telemedicine through an evaluation of the experiences of patients and nurses. During the study, we performed remote weekly monitoring for 6 months. RESULTS: A total of 17 patients and 12 nurses were included. We observed that the patients and nurses had positive experiences with telemonitoring and highlighted feelings of being cared for and improved confidence, although they indicated that telemonitoring does not replace face-to-face visits. CONCLUSION: Telemonitoring is a useful tool to increase satisfaction with and confidence in home hemodialysis.