25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Call for Papers: Green Renal Replacement Therapy: Caring for the Environment

      Submit here before July 31, 2024

      About Blood Purification: 3.0 Impact Factor I 5.6 CiteScore I 0.83 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Major Difficulties the US Nephrologist Faces in Providing Adequate Dialysis

      research-article
      ,
      Blood Purification
      S. Karger AG
      Dialysis adequacy, Medical economics

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aim: To identify the major difficulties nephrologists in the US face in providing adequate dialysis. Methods: To identify the perceived obstacles to achieving adequate dialysis in the US, 30 clinical support specialists responsible for nursing education and training were polled. Their responses together with those found in the recent literature were summarized and analyzed. Results: The obstacles identified fell into the following major categories: (1) economic; (2) personnel shortage; (3) education, and (4) cultural. The principal specific difficulties identified in providing adequate dialysis were the provision of sufficient time and frequency of dialysis, adequate volume control and vascular and peritoneal access. Conclusions: The obstacles we currently face are serious but can be conquered through better understanding of the problems and education of professionals, patients and payers. The simple improvement in two specific areas, the creation of more native arteriovenous fistulae and growth of home dialysis, are identified as the highest priorities to overcome these obstacles.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Type of vascular access and mortality in U.S. hemodialysis patients.

          Vascular access (VA) complications account for 16 to 25% of hospital admissions. This study tested the hypothesis that the type of VA in use is correlated with overall mortality and cause-specific mortality. Data were analyzed from the U.S. Renal Data System Dialysis Morbidity and Mortality Study Wave 1, a random sample of 5507 patients, prevalent on hemodialysis as of December 31, 1993. The relative mortality risk during a two-year observation was analyzed by Cox-regression methods with adjustments for demographic and comorbid conditions. Using similar methods, cause-specific analyses also were performed for death caused by infection and cardiac causes. In diabetic mellitus (DM) patients with end-stage renal disease, the associated relative mortality risk was higher for those with arteriovenous graft (AVG; RR = 1.41, P < 0.003) and central venous catheter (CVC; RR = 1.54, P < 0.002) as compared with arteriovenous fistula (AVF). In non-DM patients, those with CVC had a higher associated mortality (RR = 1.70, P < 0.001), as did to a lesser degree those with AVG (RR = 1.08, P = 0.35) when compared with AVF. Cause-specific analyses found higher infection-related deaths for CVC (RR = 2.30, P < 0.06) and AVG (RR = 2.47, P < 0.02) compared with AVF in DM; in non-DM, risk was higher also for CVC (RR = 1.83, P < 0.04) and AVG (RR = 1.27, P < 0.33). In contrast to our hypothesis that AV shunting increases cardiac risk, deaths caused by cardiac causes were higher in CVC than AVF for both DM (RR = 1.47, P < 0.05) and non-DM (RR = 1.34, P < 0.05) patients. This case-mix adjusted analysis suggests that CVC and AVG are correlated with increased mortality risk when compared with AVF, both overall and by major causes of death.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Nonadherence in hemodialysis: associations with mortality, hospitalization, and practice patterns in the DOPPS.

            Nonadherence among hemodialysis patients compromises dialysis delivery, which could influence patient morbidity and mortality. The Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS) provides a unique opportunity to review this problem and its determinants on a global level. Nonadherence was studied using data from the DOPPS, an international, observational, prospective hemodialysis study. Patients were considered nonadherent if they skipped one or more sessions per month, shortened one or more sessions by more than 10 minutes per month, had a serum potassium level openface>6.0 mEq/L, a serum phosphate level openface>7.5 mg/dL (>2.4 mmol/L), or interdialytic weight gain (IDWG)>5.7% of body weight. Predictors of nonadherence were identified using logistic regression. Survival analysis used the Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for case-mix. Skipping treatment was associated with increased mortality [relative risk (RR) = 1.30, P = 0.01], as were excessive IDWG (RR = 1.12, P = 0.047) and high phosphate levels (RR = 1.17, P = 0.001). Skipping also was associated with increased hospitalization (RR = 1.13, P = 0.04), as were high phosphate levels (RR = 1.07, P = 0.05). Larger facility size (per 10 patients) was associated with higher odds ratios (OR) of skipping (OR = 1.03, P = 0.06), shortening (OR = 1.03, P = 0.05), and IDWG (OR = 1.02, P = 0.07). An increased percentage of highly trained staff hours was associated with lower OR of skipping (OR = 0.84 per 10%, P = 0.02); presence of a dietitian was associated with lower OR of excessive IDWG (OR = 0.75, P = 0.08). Nonadherence was associated with increased mortality risk (skipping treatment, excessive IDWG, and high phosphate) and with hospitalization risk (skipping, high phosphate). Certain patient/facility characteristics also were associated with nonadherence.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Longer treatment time and slower ultrafiltration in hemodialysis: associations with reduced mortality in the DOPPS.

              Longer treatment time (TT) and slower ultrafiltration rate (UFR) are considered advantageous for hemodialysis (HD) patients. The study included 22,000 HD patients from seven countries in the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS). Logistic regression was used to study predictors of TT > 240 min and UFR > 10 ml/h/kg bodyweight. Cox regression was used for survival analyses. Statistical adjustments were made for patient demographics, comorbidities, dose of dialysis (Kt/V), and body size. Europe and Japan had significantly longer (P 240 min was independently associated with significantly lower relative risk (RR) of mortality (RR = 0.81; P = 0.0005). Every 30 min longer on HD was associated with a 7% lower RR of mortality (RR = 0.93; P 10 ml/h/kg was associated with higher odds of intradialytic hypotension (odds ratio = 1.30; P = 0.045) and a higher risk of mortality (RR = 1.09; P = 0.02). Longer TT and higher Kt/V were independently as well as synergistically associated with lower mortality. Rapid UFR during HD was also associated with higher mortality risk. These results warrant a randomized clinical trial of longer dialysis sessions in thrice-weekly HD.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BPU
                Blood Purif
                10.1159/issn.0253-5068
                Blood Purification
                S. Karger AG
                978-3-8055-8237-7
                978-3-318-01434-1
                0253-5068
                1421-9735
                2007
                December 2006
                14 December 2006
                : 25
                : 1
                : 48-52
                Affiliations
                Fresenius Medical Care North America, Lexington, Mass., USA
                Article
                96397 Blood Purif 2007;25:48–52
                10.1159/000096397
                17170537
                83ca8e24-4d87-4911-a783-1a83207348a8
                © 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                History
                Page count
                Tables: 2, References: 27, Pages: 5
                Categories
                Paper

                Cardiovascular Medicine,Nephrology
                Medical economics,Dialysis adequacy
                Cardiovascular Medicine, Nephrology
                Medical economics, Dialysis adequacy

                Comments

                Comment on this article