The use of nurse-administered vascular access audit in home hemodialysis patients: A quality initiative

Vascular Access Considerations in Home Hemodialysis

There is a global interest in expanding home dialysis utilization among patients with ESKD. Home hemodialysis (HHD) is an appealing KRT option for this population because of its multiple clinical and quality of life benefits. Central to successful HHD is the establishment and maintenance of a functioning vascular access that serves as a patient's lifeline while on therapy. While the selection of a vascular access type is influenced by individual patient circumstances, the arteriovenous fistula is generally the preferred access method. Training patients to use their dialysis access requires attention to safety, risk management, and monitoring for complications to minimize adverse events and technique failure. Policies incorporating systematic frameworks for quality improvement and assurance, in conjunction with the measurement of metrics relating to vascular access, are tools that should be used by HHD programs to enhance the value of care delivered. In this perspective, we aim to describe what is currently known about the various vascular access options in HHD and to elucidate what needs to be taken into consideration in the selection and care of this access.

Understanding Home Hemodialysis Patient Attrition: A Cohort Study

Background:

Home hemodialysis (HHD) offers a flexible, patient-centered modality for patients with kidney failure. Growth in HHD is achieved by increasing the number of patients starting HHD and reducing attrition with strategies to prevent the modifiable reasons for loss.

Objective:

Our primary objective was to describe a Canadian HHD population in terms of technique failure and time to exit from HHD in order to understand reasons for exit. Our secondary objectives include the following: (1) determining reasons for training failure, (2) reasons for early exit from HHD, and (3) timing of program exit.

Design:

A retrospective cohort study of incident adult HHD patients between January 1, 2013—June 30, 2020.

Setting:

Alberta Kidney Care South, AKC-S HHD program.

Participants:

Patients who started training for HHD in AKC-S.

Methods:

A retrospective, cohort study of incident adult HHD patients with primary outcome time on home hemodialysis, secondary outcomes include reason for train failure, time to and reasons for technique failure. Cox-proportional hazard model to determine associations between patient characteristics and technique failure. The cumulative probability of technique failure over time was reported using a competing risks model.

Results:

A total of 167 patients entered HHD. Training failure occurred in 20 (12%), at 3.1 [2.0, 5.5] weeks; these patients were older (P < .001) and had 2 or more comorbidities (P < .001). Reasons for HHD exit after training included transplant (35; 21%), death (8; 4.8%), and technique failure (24; 14.4%). Overall, the median time to HHD exit, was 23 months [11, 41] and the median time of technique failure was 17 months [8.9, 36]. Reasons for technique failure included: psychosocial reasons (37%) at a median time 8.9 months [7.7, 13], safety (12.5%) at 19 months [19, 36], and medical (37.5%) at 26 months [11, 50].

Limitations:

Small patient population with quality of data limited by the electronic-based medical record and non-standardized definitions of reasons for exit.

Conclusions:

Training failure is a particularly important source of patient loss. Reasons for exit differ according to duration on HHD. Early interventions aimed at reducing train failure and increasing psychosocial supports may help program growth.

Quality Assurance and Preventing Serious Adverse Events in the Home Hemodialysis Setting

Patient safety is of the utmost importance in home hemodialysis (HHD). Recognizing that there are risks related to vascular access (both infectious and noninfectious events), dialysis water quality, and procedural-related adverse events (including arteriovenous fistula needle dislodgement or air embolism), there is a need for systematic identification and management. Although adverse events are relatively infrequent in HHD, the potential consequences of these events may include significant morbidity, HHD treatment failure, or death. Therefore, having a systematic framework to review each event, audit and retrain patient technique, disclose and discuss events with patients, home unit staff and device companies (if relevant) and determine preventative measures to avoid future adverse events, is crucial. In this review, we will describe the literature around the types and relative frequency of serious adverse events in the HHD setting and we will outline a quality assurance framework for capturing, managing, and avoiding serious adverse events. Finally, we will describe some of the novel existing approaches to preventing or addressing serious adverse events and critical knowledge gaps that should be evaluated in future study.

Physical Infrastructure and Integrated Governance Structure for Home Hemodialysis

In view of the growing enthusiasm for home dialysis use, new dialysis centers may build or expend their home hemodialysis program in the next few years. This review will discuss the main challenges faced by small and large home hemodialysis programs in terms of physical spaces, human resource, training considerations, and overall governance. We will elaborate on the inclusion of home hemodialysis in the kidney replacement therapy care continuum, with a specific interest for collaboration and transition between peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis programs.

Should Buttonhole Cannulation of Arteriovenous Fistulas Be Used? Moderator Commentary

Podcast

This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/K360/2020_05_28_K3602020000168.mp3