Daily hemodialysis and caregivers burden

Assessment of Burden in Caregivers of Patients Undergoing Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis: A Cross-Sectional Study in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

A caregiver attends to the needs or concerns of someone limited by disease, injury, or disability to enhance the patient's quality of life, which can be assessed in three areas: social, physical, and psychological. This cross-sectional study assessed the extent of burden experienced by the caregivers of patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) therapy in King Fahad Medical City in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The Zarit Burden Interview Arabic Abridged version (ZBI-A) was used to assess the level of burden experienced by caregivers. The data was collected and examined by professionals using the SPSS version 23. Based on the data of 50 participants, a mean ZBI-12 score of 12.22 ± 7.2 was reported. According to the ZBI scale, "No to mild burden," "Mild to moderate burden," and "High burden" were reported as 46% (n = 23), 38% (n = 19), and 16% (n = 8) of participants, respectively. The internal consistency of the ZBI-12 scale, assessed using Cronbach's alpha, was 0.664, indicating a satisfactory level of internal consistency. It was determined that caregivers of individuals undergoing PD and HD encounter different degrees of burden, with a significant proportion of caregivers experiencing a substantial burden.

Assessment of Burden in Family Caregivers of Chronic Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis Patients During the Pandemic Period of COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

In Greece, patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD) usually go to dialysis centers two or three times a week for three/four hours per session because the treatment for home is unavailable; therefore, caregivers should perform supportive transportation and care functions.

PURPOSE

This study was designed to assess the burden and quality of life in caregivers of patients undergoing hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis (PD) and to record their attitude toward Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19).

METHODOLOGY

We studied caregivers of patients undergoing hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. A total of 80 caregivers took part (30 caregivers of patients of PD and 50 caregivers of patients of HD). The final form of the questionnaire was based on the Quality-of-Life Scale (SF-12) and the Zarit Scale, in order to record the scale of burden and the effect on them throughout the process. The Fear Due to COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S) contributed to recording the caregivers' fear toward the pandemic of COVID-19.

RESULTS

Most of the caregivers were women with an average age of about 60 years and 6-10 were the patient's wife or partners. The prevalence of the moderate or severe burden of the patients was found at 18.7%, and the few or no burden at all at 33.8%. The prevalence of fear toward COVID-19 was at very high levels, reaching 82.5% in all caregivers.

CONCLUSIONS

During the pandemic period of COVID-19, the role of the caregivers of the patients, both who follow the PD method and those who have joined the HD, is particularly important. Their quality of life has been partially affected in all dimensions.

Burden and Depression among Jordanian Caregivers of Hemodialysis Patients: A Cross-sectional Study

Introduction:

Caring for patients receiving hemodialysis places a burden on caregivers.

Objectives:

To examine caregiving burden and depression in the family caregivers of patients receiving hemodialysis and associated factors.

Methods:

A cross-sectional design was used. Participants were 204 adult caregivers of patients receiving hemodialysis. Questionnaires included sociodemographic characteristics, the Oberst Caregiving Burden Scale-Difficulty (OCBS-D) subscale, Bakas Caregiving Outcomes Scale (BCOS), and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 to measure the burden and depression of caregivers. Descriptive statistics, two linear regression analyses, and multinomial logistic regression were used in data analysis.

Results:

The majority (59.0%, n = 120) of caregivers had a moderate level of depression with scores ranging from 11 to 16. The analysis showed that the mean score of OCBS-D was 42.0 (SD = 4.7) with scores ranging from 26.9 to 58.9 (range = 32.0), while the caregivers' mean score of BCOS was 52.1 (SD = 9.3) with scores ranging from 38.0 to 82.5 (range = 44.5). Given that the expected score of OCBS-D and BCOS ranged from 15 to 75 and 15 to 105, respectively, the analysis indicated a moderate to a high level of burden among caregivers. Age and travel time were associated with a higher likelihood of negative outcomes in the family caregivers, while higher patient age was associated with a greater caregiver burden.

Relevance to Clinical Practice:

It is important to assess and address the practical issues that caregivers experience, such as employment-related responsibilities, financial difficulties, and the need to learn specific skills related to patients’ chronic illnesses.

Conclusion:

Caregivers of patients receiving hemodialysis are likely to experience moderate depression and burden. Caregiver burden increases with patient age and travel time to the hemodialysis units.

Home Dialysis in the Prospective Payment System Era

The ESRD Prospective Payment System introduced two incentives to increase home dialysis use: bundling injectable medications into a single payment for treatment and paying for home dialysis training. We evaluated the effects of the ESRD Prospective Payment System on home dialysis use by patients starting dialysis in the United States from January 1, 2006 to August 31, 2013. We analyzed data on dialysis modality, insurance type, and comorbidities from the United States Renal Data System. We estimated the effect of the policy on home dialysis use with multivariable logistic regression and compared the effect on Medicare Parts A/B beneficiaries with the effect on patients with other types of insurance. The ESRD Prospective Payment System associated with a 5.0% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 4.0% to 6.0%) increase in home dialysis use by the end of the study period. Home dialysis use increased by 5.8% (95% CI, 4.3% to 6.9%) among Medicare beneficiaries and 4.1% (95% CI, 2.3% to 5.4%) among patients covered by other forms of health insurance. The difference between these groups was not statistically significant (1.8%; 95% CI, -0.2% to 3.8%). Conversely, in both populations, the training add-on did not associate with increases in home dialysis use beyond the effect of the policy. The ESRD Prospective Payment System bundling, but not the training add-on, associated with substantial increases in home dialysis, which were identical for both Medicare and non-Medicare patients. These spill-over effects suggest that major payment changes in Medicare can affect all patients with ESRD.