The association between longer haemodialysis treatment times and hospitalization and mortality after the two-day break in individuals receiving three times a week haemodialysis

Digital Health Support: Current Status and Future Development for Enhancing Dialysis Patient Care and Empowering Patients

Chronic kidney disease poses a growing global health concern, as an increasing number of patients progress to end-stage kidney disease requiring kidney replacement therapy, presenting various challenges including shortage of care givers and cost-related issues. In this narrative essay, we explore innovative strategies based on in-depth literature analysis that may help healthcare systems face these challenges, with a focus on digital health technologies (DHTs), to enhance removal and ensure better control of broader spectrum of uremic toxins, to optimize resources, improve care and outcomes, and empower patients. Therefore, alternative strategies, such as self-care dialysis, home-based dialysis with the support of teledialysis, need to be developed. Managing ESKD requires an improvement in patient management, emphasizing patient education, caregiver knowledge, and robust digital support systems. The solution involves leveraging DHTs to automate HD, implement automated algorithm-driven controlled HD, remotely monitor patients, provide health education, and enable caregivers with data-driven decision-making. These technologies, including artificial intelligence, aim to enhance care quality, reduce practice variations, and improve treatment outcomes whilst supporting personalized kidney replacement therapy. This narrative essay offers an update on currently available digital health technologies used in the management of HD patients and envisions future technologies that, through digital solutions, potentially empower patients and will more effectively support their HD treatments.

Designing family-based interventions in kidney failure: The perspectives of the triad 'patients on haemodialysis/family caregivers/healthcare professionals

OBJECTIVES

This study explored the perspectives of people undergoing in-centre haemodialysis, family caregivers, and healthcare professionals about the development and implementation of family-based interventions in renal care settings.

DESIGN

A qualitative exploratory study was carried out combining purposive and snowball sampling techniques.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were submitted to thematic analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 82 individuals (27 adults on haemodialysis, 32 family caregivers, and 23 healthcare professionals) participated in this study. Five major themes were identified: (i) educational needs (improve disease and treatment-related knowledge; acquire better clarification on dialysis-related health behaviours); (ii) support needs (easier access to available community resources and professional psychological support; additional emotional and instrumental support from family members); (iii) expected barriers (concerns about participating in a group format; availability of the person on haemodialysis/family caregiver dyad; travel to the intervention site and associated costs); (iv) expected benefits (mutual emotional validation and support; improve family coping skills and involvement); and (v) preferences for content and format (interdisciplinary and moderated by health psychologists) and timing of the intervention (weekends and/or non-dialysis days).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggested that interventions focused on the family system in kidney failure need to follow an interdisciplinary approach, combining psychosocial support with an educational component. Future research is needed to minimize barriers to the conjoint participation of the person on haemodialysis/caregiver dyad. This study identifies important intervention goals to inform the design of family-based interventions for people receiving haemodialysis and their family caregivers.

Mapping Patients' Perceived Facilitators and Barriers to In-Center Hemodialysis Attendance to the Health Belief Model: Insights from a Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Previous research has shown that deliberate withdrawal, skipping, and/or shortening hemodialysis sessions has become a major health problem associated with poor clinical outcomes and early mortality in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). However, patients' experiences with this treatment remain largely unexplored. This study aimed to explore patients' perceived facilitators and barriers to in-center hemodialysis attendance and map these findings to the Health Belief Model.

METHODS

A qualitative exploratory study was conducted with a purposive sample. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and submitted to thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients (66.2 ± 12.3 years old; length of time on hemodialysis: 35.2 ± 51.5 months) were interviewed. Five major facilitators (social support, perceived benefits, self-efficacy, time on dialysis, and risk/susceptibility perception) and two barriers (lack of knowledge about ESRD and hemodialysis, and psychosocial costs) were identified.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to the prescribed regimen of hemodialysis attendance is a complex and multidimensional phenomenon that involves an interaction between modifying factors (social support, disease and treatment knowledge, time on dialysis) and patients' perceived benefits, perceived risks, self-efficacy, and treatment costs. This study findings expand knowledge by suggesting that perceiving health benefits from the beginning of treatment, self-efficacy to deal with dialysis demands, and purpose in life are important facilitators of adherence to in-center hemodialysis sessions. Furthermore, it suggests that the impact of the hemodialysis regimen on the emotional well-being of family members is an important barrier. Future interventions should focus on skills training to promote self-efficacy and family coping with the demands of in-center hemodialysis, improve disease and treatment knowledge, and help balance perceived benefits with dialysis costs.

Propensity Score and Instrumental Variable Techniques in Observational Transplantation Studies: An Overview and Worked Example Relating to Pre-Transplant Cardiac Screening

Inferring causality from observational studies is difficult due to inherent differences in patient characteristics between treated and untreated groups. The randomised controlled trial is the gold standard study design as the random allocation of individuals to treatment and control arms should result in an equal distribution of known and unknown prognostic factors at baseline. However, it is not always ethically or practically possible to perform such a study in the field of transplantation. Propensity score and instrumental variable techniques have theoretical advantages over conventional multivariable regression methods and are increasingly being used within observational studies to reduce the risk of confounding bias. An understanding of these techniques is required to critically appraise the literature. We provide an overview of propensity score and instrumental variable techniques for transplant clinicians, describing their principles, assumptions, strengths, and weaknesses. We discuss the different patient populations included in analyses and how to interpret results. We illustrate these points using data from the Access to Transplant and Transplant Outcome Measures study examining the association between pre-transplant cardiac screening in kidney transplant recipients and post-transplant cardiac events.

Patient Preferences for Longer or More Frequent In-Center Hemodialysis Regimens: A Multicenter Discrete Choice Study

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Longer and more frequent hemodialysis sessions are associated with both benefits and harms. However, their relative importance to patients and how they influence acceptability for patients have not been quantified.

STUDY DESIGN

Discrete-choice experiment in which a scenario followed by 12 treatment choice sets were presented to patients in conjunction with varying information about the clinical impact of the treatments offered.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Patients with kidney failure treated with maintenance dialysis for≥1 year in 5 UK kidney centers.

PREDICTORS

Length and frequency of hemodialysis sessions and their prior reported associations with survival, quality of life, need for fluid restriction, hospitalization, and vascular access complications.

OUTCOME

Selection of longer (4.5 hours) or more frequent (4 sessions per week) hemodialysis regimens versus remaining on 3 sessions per week with session lengths of 4 hours.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Multinomial mixed effects logistic regression estimating the relative influence of different levels of the predictors on the selection of longer and more frequent dialysis, controlling for patient demographic characteristics.

RESULTS

Among 183 prevalent in-center hemodialysis patients (mean age of 63.7 years, mean dialysis vintage of 4.7 years), 38.3% (70 of 183) always chose to remain on regimens of 3 sessions per week with session duration of 4 hours. Depicted associations of increasing survival and quality of life, reduced need for fluid restriction, and avoiding additional access complications were all significantly associated with choosing longer or more frequent treatment regimens. Younger age, fatigue, previous experience of vascular access complications, absence of heart failure, and shorter travel time to dialysis centers were associated with preference for 4 sessions per week. Patients expressed willingness to trade up to 2 years of life to avoid regimens of 4 sessions per week or access complications. After applying estimated treatment benefits and harms from existing literature, the fully adjusted model revealed that 27.1% would choose longer regimens delivered 3 times per week and 34.3% would choose 4 hours 4 times per week. Analogous estimates for younger fatigued patients living near their unit were 23.5% and 62.5%, respectively.

LIMITATIONS

Estimates were based on stated preferences rather than observed behaviors. Predicted acceptance of regimens was derived from data on treatment benefits and harms largely sourced from observational studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Predicted acceptance of longer and more frequent hemodialysis regimens substantially exceeds their use in current clinical practice. These findings underscore the need for robust data on clinical effectiveness of these more intensive regimens and more extensive consideration of patient choice in the selection of dialysis regimens.

Proportion of Hemodialysis Treatments with High Ultrafiltration Rate and the Association with Mortality

Background

Rapid fluid removal during hemodialysis has been associated with increased mortality. The limit of ultrafiltration rate (UFR) monitored by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services is 13 ml/kg per hour. It is not clear if the proportion of treatments with high UFR is associated with higher mortality. We examined the association of proportion of dialysis treatments with high UFR and mortality in end stage kidney failure patients receiving hemodialysis.

Methods

This was a retrospective study of incident patients initiating hemodialysis between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2019, at Emory dialysis centers. The proportion of treatments with high UFR (>13 ml/kg per hour) per patient was calculated using data from the initial 3 months of dialysis therapy. Patients were categorized on the basis of quartiles of proportion of dialysis sessions with high UFR. Risk of death and survival probabilities were calculated and compared for all quartiles.

Results

Of 1050 patients eligible, the median age was 59 years, 56% were men, and 91% were Black. The median UFR was 6.5 ml/kg per hour, and the proportion of sessions with high UFR was 5%. Thirty-one percent of patients never experienced high UFR. Being a man, younger age, shorter duration of hemodialysis sessions, lower weight, diabetic status, higher albumin, and history of heart failure were associated with a higher proportion of sessions with high UFR. Patients in the higher quartile (26% dialysis with high UFR, average UFR 9.8 ml/kg per hour, median survival of 5.6 years) had a higher risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio 1.54; 95% CI, 1.13 to 2.10) compared with those in the lower quartile (0% dialysis with high UFR, average UFR 4.7 ml/kg per hour, median survival 8.8 years).

Conclusions

Patients on hemodialysis who did not experience frequent episodes of elevated UFR during the first 3 months of their dialysis tenure had a significantly lower risk of death compared with patients with frequent episodes of high UFR.

Hidden risks associated with conventional short intermittent hemodialysis: A call for action to mitigate cardiovascular risk and morbidity

The development of maintenance hemodialysis (HD) for end stage kidney disease patients is a success story that continues to save many lives. Nevertheless, intermittent renal replacement therapy is also a source of recurrent stress for patients. Conventional thrice weekly short HD is an imperfect treatment that only partially corrects uremic abnormalities, increases cardiovascular risk, and exacerbates disease burden. Altering cycles of fluid loading associated with cardiac stretching (interdialytic phase) and then fluid unloading (intradialytic phase) likely contribute to cardiac and vascular damage. This unphysiologic treatment profile combined with cyclic disturbances including osmotic and electrolytic shifts may contribute to morbidity in dialysis patients and augment the health burden of treatment. As such, HD patients are exposed to multiple stressors including cardiocirculatory, inflammatory, biologic, hypoxemic, and nutritional. This cascade of events can be termed the dialysis stress storm and sickness syndrome. Mitigating cardiovascular risk and morbidity associated with conventional intermittent HD appears to be a priority for improving patient experience and reducing disease burden. In this in-depth review, we summarize the hidden effects of intermittent HD therapy, and call for action to improve delivered HD and develop treatment schedules that are better tolerated and associated with fewer adverse effects.

YouTube as a source of information on COVID-19 and dialysis

OBJECTIVES

The coronavirus 2019 pandemic has become a serious threat to the global health and spreading rapidly. Dialysis patients may have developed anxiety because of their disease characteristics during this pandemic. The aim of this study was to assess the reliability and quality of the most viewed English-language YouTube videos on COVID-19 and dialysis link.

METHOD

A YouTube search was achieved using the key words "COVID-19 dialysis", "SARS CoV-2 dialysis", "coronavirus hemodialysis", "COVID peritoneal dialysis".

RESULTS

Among the 43 videos analysed, 24 (55.8%) were high quality, 11 (25.6%) were moderate quality, and 8 (18.6%) were of low quality according to global quality score. Significant differences were found between the groups in modified DISCERN scores and the number of views, likes, comments.

CONCLUSIONS

The most reliable sources such as universities, governments, professional societies should better use YouTube for dissemination of accurate, reliable and useful health-related information to the general public.

The effect of hyperkalemia and long inter-dialytic interval on morbidity and mortality in patients receiving hemodialysis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic kidney disease, especially those receiving hemodialysis (HD), are at risk of hyperkalemia (HK). This systematic review aimed to evaluate the prevalence of HK in patients with renal disease receiving HD and collate evidence on the effect of HK and differing HD patterns (i.e., long vs. short inter-dialytic intervals [LIDI and SIDI, respectively] in a thrice weekly schedule) on mortality.

METHODS

Comprehensive searches were conducted across six databases and selected conference proceedings by two independent reviewers up to September 2020. A hundred and two studies reporting frequency of HK, mortality, or cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in adult patients with acute, chronic or end-stage renal disease in receipt of HD were included. Narrative synthesis of results was undertaken with key findings presented in tables and figures.

RESULTS

Median prevalence of HK in patients with renal disease receiving HD was 21.6% and increased in patients receiving concomitant medications - mainly renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors and potassium-sparing diuretics. Associations between elevated potassium levels and increased risk of both all-cause and CV mortality in the HD population were consistent across the included studies. In addition, there was a rise in all-cause and CV mortality on the day following LIDI compared with the day after the two SIDIs in patients on HD.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence identified in this systematic review indicates a relationship between HK and LIDI with mortality in patients with renal disease receiving HD, emphasizing the need for effective monitoring and management to control potassium levels both in emergency and chronic HD settings.

"Together We Stand": A Pilot Study Exploring the Feasibility, Acceptability, and Preliminary Effects of a Family-Based Psychoeducational Intervention for Patients on Hemodialysis and Their Family Caregivers

This pilot study aimed to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effects of a family-based psychoeducational intervention for patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD) and their family members. This was a single-group (six dyads), six-week, pre–post pilot study, delivered in a multifamily group format. Feasibility was based on screening, eligibility, content, retention, completion, and intervention adherence rates. Acceptability was assessed at post-intervention through a focus group interview. Self-reported anxiety and depression and patients’ inter-dialytic weight gain (IDWG) were also measured. The screening (93.5%), retention (85.7%), and completion (100%) rates were satisfactory, whereas eligibility (22.8%), consent (18.4%), and intervention adherence (range: 16.7–50%) rates were the most critical. Findings showed that participants appreciated the intervention and perceived several educational and emotional benefits. The results from the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test showed that a significant decrease in anxiety symptoms (p = 0.025, r = 0.646) was found, which was followed by medium to large within-group effect sizes for changes in depression symptoms (p = 0.261, r = 0.325) and patients’ IDWG (p = 0.248, r = 0.472), respectively. Overall, the results indicated that this family-based psychoeducational intervention is likely to be feasible, acceptable, and effective for patients undergoing HD and their family caregivers; nonetheless, further considerations are needed on how to make the intervention more practical and easily implemented in routine dialysis care before proceeding to large-scale trials.

Effects of interdialytic interval on heart rate variability in chronic hemodialysis patients: a cross-sectional study

Previous studies showed that long interdialytic interval of chronic hemodialysis increased risk of sudden cardiac death compared to short interdialytic interval. Diabetes mellitus (DM) and autonomic dysfunction are the strong adverse predictors of survival in ESRD patients. We aimed to compare autonomic function between long and short interdialytic interval of chronic hemodialysis in patients with and without DM. One-hundred sixty-three patients receiving chronic hemodialysis were enrolled. The electrocardiogram recording was performed twice in each patient during 4-h hemodialysis session after long and short interdialytic intervals to assess heart rate variability (HRV). Mean age was 61.4 ± 14.3 years. HRV parameters during hemodialysis did not differ between long and short interdialytic interval in overall population. Nevertheless, in 82 (50.3%) patients, SDNN (47.4 ± 23.8 vs. 43.4 ± 19.5 ms, P = 0.039), ASDNN (24.8 ± 14.3 vs. 22.7 ± 12.3 ms, P = 0.025), LF (8.4 ± 6.8 vs. 7.6 ± 6.6 ms², P = 0.040) increased after long interdialytic interval. The greater change of SDNN, ASDNN, VLF and LF between long and short interdialytic intervals was noted in DM, compared to non-DM patients. We demonstrated that there was no difference of HRV parameters after short and long interdialytic interval. However, there was greater autonomic alteration observed in DM than non-DM patients between 2 interdialytic intervals.

Anemia management for home dialysis including the new US public policy initiative

Patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) requiring kidney replacement therapy are often treated in conventional dialysis centers at substantial cost and patient inconvenience. The recent United States Executive Order on Advancing American Kidney Health, in addition to focusing on ESKD prevention and reforming the kidney transplantation system, focuses on providing financial incentives to promote a shift toward home dialysis. In accordance with this order, a goal was set to have 80% of incident dialysis patients receiving home dialysis or a kidney transplant by 2025. Compared with conventional in-center therapy, home dialysis modalities, including both home hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, appear to offer equivalent or improved mortality, clinical outcomes, hospitalization rates, and quality of life in patients with ESKD in addition to greater convenience, flexibility, and cost-effectiveness. Treatment of anemia, a common complication of chronic kidney disease, may be easier to manage at home with a new class of agents, hypoxia-inducible factor-prolyl hydroxylase inhibitors, which are orally administered in contrast to the current standard of care of i.v. iron and/or erythropoiesis-stimulating agents. This review evaluates the clinical, quality-of-life, economic, and social aspects of dialysis modalities in patients with ESKD, including during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic; explores new therapeutics for the management of anemia in chronic kidney disease; and highlights how the proposed changes in Advancing American Kidney Health provide an opportunity to improve kidney health in the United States.

End-stage renal disease is not yours, is not mine, is OURS: Exploring couples lived experiences through dyadic interviews

INTRODUCTION

As a psychosocial dyad, couples are greatly challenged by end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Renal replacement therapies are highly demanding and involve lifelong restrictions and readjustments that sometimes translate into profound changes in couples' routines. However, little is known about the experiences of these couples with this condition. This study examined the experiences of couples living with ESRD.

METHODS

A qualitative exploratory study was conducted with a purposive sample. Semistructured dyadic interviews were conducted with 12 patients (65.1 ± 12.8 years old; eight males) undergoing in-center hemodialysis for 18.6 (±13.3) months and their spouses (60.3 ± 11.2 years old; seven females). The interviews were digitally audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and submitted to thematic analysis by two independent researchers.

FINDINGS

The findings from the dyadic perspective were conceptualized into two major themes: negative impacts (emotional distress, constraints on leisure and daily activities, impacts on couples' dynamics, and difficulties in meal planning) and unmet needs (educational, relational, financial, instrumental, and supportive needs).

DISCUSSION

The findings suggested that ESRD has several negative impacts that are related to the reported unmet needs, which might difficult couples' psychosocial adjustment to the condition. Both partners may benefit from educational and supportive interventions that address their needs, targeting the couple as a unit. Recognizing ESRD as a family condition is crucial for the development of innovative family-based interventions that can promote couples' healthy adjustment to the disease.

Survival on four compared with three times per week haemodialysis in high ultrafiltration patients: an observational study

Background

The harm caused by the long interdialytic interval in three-times-per-week haemodialysis regimens (3×WHD) may relate to fluid accumulation and associated high ultrafiltration rate (UFR). Four-times-per-week haemodialysis (4×WHD) may offer a solution, but its impact on mortality, hospitalization and vascular access complications is unknown.

Methods

From the AROii cohort of incident in-centre haemodialysis patients, 3×WHD patients with a UFR >10 mL/kg/h were identified. The hazard for the outcomes of mortality, hospitalization and vascular access complications in those who switched to 4×WHD compared with staying on 3×WHD was estimated using a marginal structural Cox proportional hazards model. Adjustment included baseline patient and treatment characteristics with inverse probability weighting used to adjust for time-varying UFR and cardiovascular comorbidities.

Results

From 10 637 European 3×WHD patients, 3842 (36%) exceeded a UFR >10 mL/kg/h. Of these, 288 (7.5%) started 4×WHD and at baseline were more comorbid. Event rates while receiving 4×WHD compared with 3×WHD were 12.6 compared with 10.8 per 100 patient years for mortality, 0.96 compared with 0.65 per year for hospitalization and 14.7 compared with 8.0 per 100 patient years for vascular access complications. Compared with 3×WHD, the unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for mortality on 4×WHD was 1.05 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78–1.42]. Following adjustment for baseline demographics, time-varying treatment probability and censoring risks, this HR was 0.73 (95% CI 0.50–1.05; P = 0.095). Despite these adjustments on 4×WHD, the HR for hospitalization remained elevated and vascular access complications were similar to 3×WHD.

Conclusions

This observational study was not able to demonstrate a mortality benefit in patients switched to 4×WHD. To demonstrate the true benefits of 4×WHD requires a large, well-designed clinical trial. Our data may help in the design of such a study.

Dialysis-Induced Cardiovascular and Multiorgan Morbidity

Hemodialysis has saved many lives, albeit with significant residual mortality. Although poor outcomes may reflect advanced age and comorbid conditions, hemodialysis per se may harm patients, contributing to morbidity and perhaps mortality. Systemic circulatory "stress" resulting from hemodialysis treatment schedule may act as a disease modifier, resulting in a multiorgan injury superimposed on preexistent comorbidities. New functional intradialytic imaging (i.e., echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) and kinetic of specific cardiac biomarkers (i.e., Troponin I) have clearly documented this additional source of end-organ damage. In this context, several factors resulting from patient-hemodialysis interaction and/or patient management have been identified. Intradialytic hypovolemia, hypotensive episodes, hypoxemia, solutes, and electrolyte fluxes as well as cardiac arrhythmias are among the contributing factors to systemic circulatory stress that are induced by hemodialysis. Additionally, these factors contribute to patients' symptom burden, impair cognitive function, and finally have a negative impact on patients' perception and quality of life. In this review, we summarize the adverse systemic effects of current intermittent hemodialysis therapy, their pathophysiologic consequences, review the evidence for interventions that are cardioprotective, and explore new approaches that may further reduce the systemic burden of hemodialysis. These include improved biocompatible materials, smart dialysis machines that automatically may control the fluxes of solutes and electrolytes, volume and hemodynamic control, health trackers, and potentially disruptive technologies facilitating a more personalized medicine approach.

Variability and trends over time and across centres in haemodialysis weekly duration in Australia and New Zealand

AIM

Haemodialysis treatment prescription varies widely internationally. This study explored patient- and centre-level characteristics associated with weekly haemodialysis hours.

METHODS

Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) Registry data were analysed. Characteristics associated with weekly duration were evaluated using mixed-effects linear regression models with patient- and centre-level covariates as fixed effects, and dialysis centre and state as random effects using the 2017 prevalent in-centre haemodialysis (ICHD) and home haemodialysis (HHD) cohorts. Evaluation of patterns of weekly duration over time analysed the 2000 to 2017 incident ICHD and HHD cohorts.

RESULTS

Overall, 12 494 ICHD and 1493 HHD prevalent patients in 2017 were included. Median weekly treatment duration was 13.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 12-15) hours for ICHD and 16 (IQR 15-20) hours for HHD. Male sex, younger age, higher body mass index, arteriovenous fistula/graft use, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ethnicity and longer dialysis vintage were associated with longer weekly duration for both ICHD and HHD. No centre characteristics were associated with duration. Variability in duration across centres was very limited in ICHD compared with HHD, with variation in HHD being associated with state. Duration did not vary significantly over time for ICHD, whereas longer weekly HHD treatments were reported between 2006 and 2012 compared with before and after this period.

CONCLUSION

This study in the Australian and New Zealand haemodialysis population showed that weekly duration was primarily associated with patient characteristics. No centre effect was demonstrated. Practice patterns seemed to differ across states/countries, with more variability in HHD than ICHD.

Survival of patients treated with extended-hours haemodialysis in Europe: an analysis of the ERA-EDTA Registry

Background

Previous US studies have indicated that haemodialysis with ≥6-h sessions [extended-hours haemodialysis (EHD)] may improve patient survival. However, patient characteristics and treatment practices vary between the USA and Europe. We therefore investigated the effect of EHD three times weekly on survival compared with conventional haemodialysis (CHD) among European patients.

Methods

We included patients who were treated with haemodialysis between 2010 and 2017 from eight countries providing data to the European Renal Association–European Dialysis and Transplant Association Registry. Haemodialysis session duration and frequency were recorded once every year or at every change of haemodialysis prescription and were categorized into three groups: CHD (three times weekly, 3.5–4 h/treatment), EHD (three times weekly, ≥6 h/treatment) or other. In the primary analyses we attributed death to the treatment at the time of death and in secondary analyses to EHD if ever initiated. We compared mortality risk for EHD to CHD with causal inference from marginal structural models, using Cox proportional hazards models weighted for the inverse probability of treatment and censoring and adjusted for potential confounders.

Results

From a total of 142 460 patients, 1338 patients were ever treated with EHD (three times, 7.1 ± 0.8 h/week) and 89 819 patients were treated exclusively with CHD (three times, 3.9 ± 0.2 h/week). Crude mortality rates were 6.0 and 13.5/100 person-years. In the primary analyses, patients treated with EHD had an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.73 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62–0.85] compared with patients treated with CHD. When we attributed all deaths to EHD after initiation, the HR for EHD was comparable to the primary analyses [HR 0.80 (95% CI 0.71–0.90)].

Conclusions

EHD is associated with better survival in European patients treated with haemodialysis three times weekly.

Being on hemodialysis during the COVID-19 outbreak: A mixed-methods' study exploring the impacts on dialysis adequacy, analytical data, and patients' experiences

For individuals with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), the novel coronavirus can present several additional challenges in disease self-management. This study aimed to explore the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic in non-COVID-19 patients with ESRD undergoing in-center hemodialysis (HD). A mixed-methods study was conducted with a purposive sample recruited from one dialysis unit in Portugal. Quantitative data were collected retrospectively from patients' medical records from February 2020 (T1-before the outbreak) and from April 2020 (T2-during lockdown). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 patients (66.9 ± 11.9 years old) undergoing HD for an average of 46.1 months (±39.5) in April 2020. Overall results suggested that dialysis adequacy and serum albumin levels decreased significantly at T2, while phosphorus levels increased. The findings from thematic analysis suggested several psychosocial negative impacts and impacts on disease and treatment-related health behaviors (eg, difficulties managing dietary restrictions during the lockdown and diminished physical activity), which can partially explain these quantitative results. However, some patients were also able to find positive impacts in this experience and problem-focused and emotional strategies were identified to cope with the demands of COVID-19. Several recommendations have been made to mitigate patients' emotional, relational, and educational unmet needs during the current pandemic and in the event of new outbreaks.

Emergency department visits and hospitalizations among hemodialysis patients by day of the week and dialysis schedule in the United States

Background and objective

Previous reports indicated that patients on thrice-weekly hemodialysis (HD) had higher mortality rates after the 3-day interdialytic interval. However, day-of-the-week patterns of emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations remain under-investigated.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of HD patients on thrice-weekly dialysis, using 2013 data from the United States Renal Data System (USRDS). We estimated crude incidence rates of ED visits and hospitalizations by day of the week and dialysis schedule (Monday, Wednesday, Friday or Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday). Using Poisson regression, we estimated case-mix adjusted rate ratios of all-cause ED visits and hospitalizations, and adjusted rates of cause-specific ED visits and hospitalizations.

Results

We identified 241,093 eligible HD patients in 2013, who had 514,773 ED visits and 301,674 hospitalizations that year. Three distinct but related patterns of outcome events were observed. Crude and adjusted incidence rates of all-cause, cardiovascular, and infection-related ED visits and hospitalizations, but not vascular-access-related events, were higher on all three HD treatment days (“dialysis-day effect”). Rates for ED visits and hospitalizations were lower on weekends than weekdays, rising appreciably from Sunday to Monday for both dialysis schedules (“post-weekend effect”); and rates were highest after the long 3-day interval between dialysis sessions for both dialysis schedules (“interdialytic-gap effect”). In contrast, rates of hospitalizations not preceded by an ED visit were nearly the same Monday through Friday and lower on weekends for both dialysis schedules.

Conclusions

Higher rates of ED visits and hospitalizations on the days of HD sessions and early in the week are a public-health concern that should stimulate research to explain these patterns and reduce the excessive morbidity and associated costs among patients on thrice-weekly HD, while improving quality of care and patient experience with dialysis.