Routine Laboratory Testing Every 4 Versus Every 6 Weeks for Patients on Maintenance Hemodialysis: A Quality Improvement Project

Application of intelligent nursing system based on big data in maintenance hemodialysis patients

Maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) is one of the most important renal replacement therapies for patients with end-stage renal disease. However, long-term and frequent treatment not only damages the physiological functions of patients but also leads to serious economic burdens and mental stress. This can easily cause a series of psychological disorders in patients, resulting in severe rejection and fear of MHD. To reduce patient resistance and improve the quality of life of MHD, this article built an intelligent nursing system based on big data and then used the constructed intelligent nursing system to research MHD. Through experiments, it has been found that compared to self-efficacy intervention, intelligent nursing systems can control the concurrent rate of MHD patients below 14 %, and self-efficacy intervention methods can control the concurrent rate of MHD patients above 13 %. Moreover, using intelligent nursing systems can improve the ability of MHD patients to self-care. At the same time, before the use of intelligent nursing systems, the nursing satisfaction of MHD patients also varied greatly, with the overall satisfaction rate after use being 70 % higher than before. Using intelligent nursing systems can improve the satisfaction of MHD patients with nursing outcomes.

Reducing the Frequency of Surveillance Blood Work in Patients Treated With Maintenance Hemodialysis: A Local Quality Improvement Initiative

Introduction

There is little evidence on the ideal frequency of routine blood work in maintenance dialysis patients to manage complications, including anemia, mineral bone disease (MBD), and hyperkalemia. Recent quality improvement studies from Ontario showed no negative impacts when decreasing the frequency from monthly to every 6 weeks in conventional in-center hemodialysis (ICHD) patients. In December 2020, Alberta Kidney Care-South (AKC-S) reduced the frequency of routine blood work from every 6 weeks to every 8 weeks for ICHD patients.

Objective

We aimed to assess the impact of reducing blood work frequency on patient outcomes.

Methods

We compared prevalent AKC-S ICHD patients in 2 cohorts: (1) retrospective control (October 31, 2019-October 31, 2020) and (2) prospective intervention (December 1, 2020-December 1, 2021). Primary outcomes were true frequency of routine blood work, odds of patients being within target for anemia and MBD, and proportion of lab values of hyperkalemia. Furthermore, we compared hospitalizations and mortality.

Results

A total of 972 patients in Calgary's ICHD program were included, 787 in each period (with 602 patients overlapping both cohorts). The frequency of routine blood work decreased from every 39.5 days in the control period to every 54.2 days in the intervention period (P < .01). There was a reduction in the odds of phosphate values in targets (P = .02), and an increase in the odds of labs with hyperkalemia (>6.0 mmol/L) during the intervention period (P = .01). There was no significant change in the odds of being within the accepted targets during the intervention period compared with the control period for hemoglobin, Tsat, calcium, or parathyroid hormone (PTH). Fewer patients were hospitalized during the intervention period and the risk of death decreased as well, although additional factors such as the COVID-19 pandemic may have affected this. A cost-savings of $32 962 occurred from the reduced anemia and MBD blood work during the intervention period.

Conclusions

When ICHD units in Calgary reduced routine blood work frequency from every 6 weeks to 8 weeks, there were no negative impacts on hospitalizations or deaths. A slightly lower proportion of phosphate values were within target, and a 0.7% increase in potassium values greater than 6 mmol/L was demonstrated. Our study suggests that blood work frequency in ICHD dialysis patients may be further reduced to every 8 weeks safely. Ultimately, additional pragmatic trials are needed to identify the optimal frequency of routine blood work.

Regular laboratory testing and patient survival among patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis: a Korean nationwide cohort study

Routine laboratory tests are regularly performed in patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis (HD) to detect anemia, chronic kidney disease-mineral bone disorders, and cardiovascular disease. More frequent laboratory tests may be associated with better outcomes. However, there is little evidence supporting a specific monitoring interval. This study evaluated the impact of regular laboratory testing on mortality in Korean patients undergoing maintenance HD. We used HD quality assessments, and National Health Insurance Service claims data from October to December 2015. In HD quality assessment, 22 tests are recommended every 1-6 months. A total of 34,950 patients were divided into two groups based on the regularity of laboratory testing. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess the effects of regular laboratory tests on patient mortality during a mean follow-up duration of 53.7 months. The proportion of patients with and without regular laboratory testing was 85.6% (n = 29,914) and 14.4% (n = 5036), respectively. Patients who underwent regular laboratory testing had a longer dialysis duration, lower serum phosphorus levels and diastolic blood pressure, and higher hemoglobin and single-pool Kt/V levels than those who did not. After adjusting for demographic and clinical parameters, regular laboratory testing independently reduced mortality risk (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval 0.85-0.95; P < 0.001). Regular laboratory testing was associated with a decreased mortality risk among patients undergoing HD. Management of end-stage kidney disease-related complications based on laboratory tests can improve survival.

Continuous quality improvement in peritoneal dialysis: Your questions answered

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) uptake around the globe has steadily increased over the last several decades as a viable alternative to haemodialysis. Continued success of this technique for patients is contingent on the application of continuous quality improvement (CQI) principles in PD practice which can improve patient outcomes and in turn lead to more successful PD programmes worldwide. In this installation of 'Your Questions Answered', we will outline an approach to quality improvement initiatives and examine the importance of CQI principles in PD practice. We will also highlight common pitfalls and provide strategies to identify potential targets for improvement within your PD programme.

Detection of Hyponatremia Development in Hemodialysis Patients by Routine Automated Conductivity-Based Monitoring

Predialytic hyponatremia is associated with poor outcome in hemodialysis patients. Hypotonic hyponatremia is the most frequently encountered disorder reflecting mixed disorders combining extracellular fluid overload and free water excess, resulting from the interplay of intermittency of dialysis and diet observance, and likely precipitated by an acute or subacute illness. In this context, hyponatremia requires to be detected and worked up to identify and cure the cause. In this clinical case report, we describe preliminary results of using an online biosensor on a dialysis machine that provides automated predialysis plasma sodium concentration derived from dialysate conductivity measurements. Based on this biosensor, within a 5 year time frame, 11 patients out of more than 130 maintenance hemodialysis patients and over 40,000 dialysis sessions were identified with episodes of predialysis hyponatremia (≤135 mmol/l). In all patients, hyponatremic episodes were indicative of a severe underlying illness associated with fluid overload leading to plasma hypotonicity. Automated online predialysis plasma sodium concentration measurement offers an innovative, reliable, and cost-free tool that permits to detect hyponatremia as marker of an underlying illness development in dialysis patients. The value of this tool in supporting clinical decision-making deserves further studies in a large dialysis population.

Routine laboratory testing in hemodialysis: how frequently is it needed?

Background:

Hemodialysis patients are followed by routine laboratory testing. There is uncertainty whether these tests always lead to a change in decision-making. This study aims to discover the number of yearly interventions/changes in prescription based on these tests and depict the group of patients who would benefit from reduced or increased laboratory blood tests.

Methods:

This is a multi-center retrospective study that included patients on hemodialysis for more than one year. Laboratory data collected included yearly average of hemoglobin, urea reduction ratio (URR), serum phosphate, calcium, potassium, parathormone (PTH), ferritin and transferrin saturation (TSAT); changes in prescription of erythropoietin-stimulating agents (ESAs), intravenous (IV) iron, alfacalcidol, phosphate binders and dialysis parameters were retrieved from medical records. A multivariate regression analysis assessed factors associated with high number of interventions.

Results:

A total of 210 hemodialysis patients were included: 62.4% males, 47.1% diabetics. Their median age was 72 (62,78.5) years. Their laboratory parameters were within KDIGO targets. The median number of yearly interventions was 5 (3,7) for ESAs, 4 (2,6) for IV iron, 1 (0,2.25) for phosphate binders, 0 (0,1) for alfacalcidol. Based on the multivariate analysis, patients with higher ferritin, frequent changes in ESA, more changes in alfacalcidol and higher PTH had higher number of prescription’s changes in ESA, IV iron, phosphate binders and alfacalcidol respectively.

Conclusion:

While maintaining KDIGO targets, therapeutic interventions following routine laboratory testing did not exceed six times yearly for all parameters. This suggests that a reduced testing frequency in hemodialysis patients is possible without any impact on quality of care. A personalized approach remains safe for hemodialysis patients while reducing the cost. This is very relevant in low-resource settings and during economic crises and needs to be evaluated in prospective studies.

Canadian Society of Nephrology Commentary on the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes 2017 Clinical Practice Guideline Update for the Diagnosis, Evaluation, Prevention, and Treatment of Chronic Kidney Disease-Mineral and Bone Disorder

Purpose of review:

(1) To provide commentary on the 2017 update to the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2017 Clinical Practice Guideline Update for the Diagnosis, Evaluation, Prevention, and Treatment of Chronic Kidney Disease-Mineral and Bone Disorder (CKD-MBD); (2) to apply the evidence-based guideline update for implementation within the Canadian health care system; (3) to provide comment on the care of children with chronic kidney disease (CKD); and (4) to identify research priorities for Canadian patients.

Sources of information:

The KDIGO 2017 Clinical Practice Guideline Update for the Diagnosis, Evaluation, Prevention, and Treatment of CKD-MBD.

Methods:

The commentary committee co-chairs selected potential members based on their knowledge of the Canadian kidney community, aiming for wide representation from relevant disciplines, academic and community centers, and different geographical regions.

Key findings:

We agreed with many of the recommendations in the clinical practice guideline on the diagnosis, evaluation, prevention, and treatment of CKD-MBD. However, based on the uncommon occurrence of abnormalities in calcium and phosphate and the low likelihood of severe abnormalities in parathyroid hormone (PTH), we recommend against screening and monitoring levels of calcium, phosphate, PTH, and alkaline phosphatase in adults with CKD G3. We suggest and recommend monitoring these parameters in adults with CKD G4 and G5, respectively. In children, we agree that monitoring for CKD-MBD should begin in CKD G2, but we suggest measuring ionized calcium, rather than total calcium or calcium adjusted for albumin. With regard to vitamin D, we suggest against routine screening for vitamin D deficiency in adults with CKD G3-G5 and G1T-G5T and suggest following population health recommendations for adequate vitamin D intake. We recommend that the measurement and management of bone mineral density (BMD) be according to general population guidelines in CKD G3 and G3T, but we suggest against routine BMD testing in CKD G4-G5, CKD G4T-5T, and in children with CKD. Based on insufficient data, we also recommend against routine bone biopsy in clinical practice for adults with CKD or CKD-T, or in children with CKD, although we consider it an important research tool.

Limitations:

The committee relied on the evidence summaries produced by KDIGO. The CSN committee did not replicate or update the systematic reviews.

Reducing Phlebotomy in Hemodialysis Patients: A Quality Improvement Study

Rationale & Objective

Hospitalized patients receiving hemodialysis frequently have routine, daily laboratory studies drawn by peripheral venipuncture-a painful process that damages peripheral veins that may be needed for future dialysis access. Some of these peripheral venipunctures are likely preventable by drawing blood samples off the hemodialysis machine circuit. We describe an initiative to allow and encourage blood to be drawn “with dialysis.”

Study Design

Quality improvement study.

Setting & Participants

Non–critically ill adult patients treated with hemodialysis at Stanford Health Care between September 2018 and September 2019.

Quality Improvement Activities

We modified the electronic health record to allow providers to order laboratory studies with the frequency “with dialysis.” Use of the “with dialysis” frequency was promoted through educational efforts aimed at primary medical teams, nephrology consult staff, and nephrology advanced practice providers.

Outcomes

We tracked the number of “with dialysis” blood draws and the number of eligible patients per week during the first year of implementation.

Analytical Approach

The number of “with dialysis” blood draws and eligible patients per week were measured over time. Cost savings were estimated by multiplying the difference in cost between peripheral venipuncture and “with dialysis” blood draw by the number of “with dialysis” blood draws performed.

Results

Uptake during the first year of implementation was an average of 6.3 “with dialysis” draws per 100 eligible patients per week. Estimated savings exceeded $7,000 in the first year of the program.

Limitations

Our single-center study may not be generalizable to other institutions, especially those without dialysis ordering and laboratory ordering housed within the same electronic system. We were unable to track additional outcomes, including the number of peripheral venipunctures and delays in laboratory results.

Conclusions

The prevention of unnecessary peripheral venipuncture in hospitalized patients receiving hemodialysis is a promising and valuable quality improvement target, which may be aided by the electronic health record. Future work is needed to increase recognition and use of “with dialysis”blood work options.

The Frequency of Routine Blood Sampling and Patient Outcomes Among Maintenance Hemodialysis Recipients

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Surveillance blood work is routinely performed in maintenance hemodialysis (HD) recipients. Although more frequent blood testing may confer better outcomes, there is little evidence to support any particular monitoring interval.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective population-based cohort study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

All prevalent HD recipients in Ontario, Canada, as of April 1, 2011, and a cohort of incident patients commencing maintenance HD in Ontario, Canada, between April 1, 2011, and March 31, 2016.

EXPOSURE

Frequency of surveillance blood work, monthly versus every 6 weeks.

OUTCOMES

The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events, all-cause hospitalization, and episodes of hyperkalemia.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Cox proportional hazards with adjustment for demographic and clinical characteristics was used to evaluate the association between blood testing frequency and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were evaluated using the Andersen-Gill extension of the Cox model to allow for potential recurrent events.

RESULTS

7,454 prevalent patients received care at 17 HD programs with monthly blood sampling protocols (n=5,335 patients) and at 8 programs with blood sampling every 6 weeks (n=2,119 patients). More frequent monitoring was not associated with a lower risk for all-cause mortality compared to blood sampling every 6 weeks (adjusted HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.99-1.38). Monthly monitoring was not associated with a lower risk for any of the secondary outcomes. Results were consistent among incident HD recipients.

LIMITATIONS

Unmeasured confounding; limited data for center practices unrelated to blood sampling frequency; no information on frequency of unscheduled blood work performed outside the prescribed sampling interval.

CONCLUSIONS

Monthly routine blood testing in HD recipients was not associated with a lower risk for death, cardiovascular events, or hospitalizations as compared with testing every 6 weeks. Given the health resource implications, the frequency of routine blood sampling in HD recipients deserves careful reassessment.