Hemodialysis – Research Article

Lloyd A. · Jefferies H. · Pyart R. · Roberts G.

Author affiliations

University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK

Log in to MyKarger to check if you already have access to this content.

Buy FullText & PDF Unlimited re-access via MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more

CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *

Select

KAB

Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!

If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.

Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.

Learn more

Access via DeepDyve Unlimited fulltext viewing Of this article Organize, annotate And mark up articles Printing And downloading restrictions apply

Select

Subscribe Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more

Subcription rates

Select

* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview

Received: November 18, 2021
Accepted: May 14, 2022
Published online: October 07, 2022

Number of Print Pages: 5
Number of Figures: 2
Number of Tables: 1

ISSN: 0253-5068 (Print)
eISSN: 1421-9735 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/BPU

Abstract

Introduction: Significant variation exists in the prevalence of home haemodialysis (HHD) among UK renal centres. Our centre has a HHD prevalence of 2%, and we aimed to study how many patients who chose HHD as their preferred mode of renal replacement therapy (RRT) went on to receive this treatment and the barriers to starting this treatment. Methods: A retrospective single-centre analysis of electronic medical records for all patients who chose HHD at the time of RRT education was performed, and data were collected on patient demographics, comorbidity, frailty, RRT events, and barriers to HHD. Results: 116 patients chose HHD as their preferred mode of RRT between 2006 and 2018. Of these patients, 93 required RRT, but only 28 patients ever received HHD. No statistical difference was identified between those patients who only received unit haemodialysis (UHD) and those who went onto receive HHD with respect to age, gender, comorbidity, frailty, and socioeconomic deprivation. Patient choice, change in clinical condition, transplantation, home environment, vascular access problems, and training delays were identified as reasons patients did not start HHD. No documented reason could be found in 9 patients with a breakdown of communication between clinics and peripheral dialysis units attributed as a significant contributor in some of these patients. Of the 26 patients who started HHD after UHD, 19 did so within 1 year of starting UHD. Conclusion: Most patients who choose HHD do not receive HHD. Many patients never start HHD because of potentially reversible barriers including inadequate communication among clinicians about patient choices, patients changing their minds once in a dialysis unit, and inadequate timely training support.

© 2022 S. Karger AG, Basel

References Nesrallah G, Suri R, Moist L, Kortas C, Lindsay RM. Volume control and blood pressure management in patients undergoing quotidian hemodialysis. Am J Kidney Dis. 2003 Jul;42:13–7. Lockridge RS, Kjellstrand CM. Nightly home hemodialysis: outcome and factors associated with survival. Hemodial Int. 2011 Apr;15(2):211–8. Culleton BF, Walsh M, Klarenbach SW, Mortis G, Scott-Douglas N, Quinn RR, et al. Effect of frequent nocturnal hemodialysis versus conventional hemodialysis on left ventricular mass and quality of life: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2007 Sep;298(11):1291. Manns BJ, Walsh MW, Culleton BF, Hemmelgarn B, Tonelli M, Schorr M, et al. Nocturnal hemodialysis does not improve overall measures of quality of life compared to conventional hemodialysis. Kidney Int. 2009 Mar;75(5):542–9. Rocco MV, Lockridge RS, Beck GJ, Eggers PW, Gassman JJ, Greene T, et al. The effects of frequent nocturnal home hemodialysis: the frequent hemodialysis network nocturnal trial. Kidney Int. 2011 Nov;80(10):1080–91. Howard K, Salkeld G, White S, McDonald S, Chadban S, Craig JC, et al. The cost-effectiveness of increasing kidney transplantation and home-based dialysis. Nephrology. 2009 Feb;14(1):123–32. Renal association. Renal association data portal. Available from: https://renal.org/audit-research/data-portal/demographics. UK Renal Registry. UK renal registry summary of annual report – analyses of adult data to the end of 2018. 2020. UK Renal Registry. Jayanti A, Foden P, Rae A, Morris J, Brenchley P, Mitra S. The influence of renal centre and patient sociodemographic factors on home haemodialysis prevalence in the UK. Nephron. 2017;136(2):62–74. Walker RC, Morton RL, Palmer SC, Marshall MR, Tong A, Howard K. A discrete choice study of patient preferences for dialysis modalities. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2018 Jan;13(1):100–8. El Shamy O, Muller T, Tokita J, Cummings Y, Sharma S, Uribarri J. Home dialysis: a majority chooses it, a minority gets it. Blood Purif. 2021;50(6):818–22. Pyart R, Aggett J, Goodland A, Jones H, Prichard A, Pugh J, et al. Exploring the choices and outcomes of older patients with advanced kidney disease. PLoS One. 2020;15(6):e0234309. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373–83. Rockwood K, Song X, MacKnight C, Bergman H, Hogan DB, McDowell I, et al. A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. CMAJ. 2005 Aug;173(5):489–95. Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview

Received: November 18, 2021
Accepted: May 14, 2022
Published online: October 07, 2022

Number of Print Pages: 5
Number of Figures: 2
Number of Tables: 1

ISSN: 0253-5068 (Print)
eISSN: 1421-9735 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/BPU

Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer 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.