Mental Health Care for Adults Treated With Dialysis in Canada: A Scoping Review

Pharmacological treatment for mental health illnesses in adults receiving dialysis: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Pharmacologic management of mental health illnesses in patients receiving dialysis is complex and lacking data.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to synthesize published data for the treatment of depression, bipolar and related disorders, schizophrenia or psychotic disorders, and anxiety disorders in adults receiving hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis.

METHODS

We undertook a scoping review, searching the following databases: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science. Data on patients who received only short-term dialysis, a kidney transplant, or non-pharmacologic treatments were excluded.

RESULTS

Seventy-three articles were included: 41 focused on depression, 16 on bipolar disorder, 13 on schizophrenia and psychotic disorders, 1 on anxiety disorders, and 2 addressing multiple mental health illnesses. The majority of depression studies reported on selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) as a treatment. Sertraline had the most supporting data with use of doses from 25 to 200 mg daily. Among the remaining SSRIs, escitalopram, citalopram, and fluoxetine were studied in controlled trials, whereas paroxetine and fluvoxamine were described in smaller reports and observational trials. There are limited published data on other classes of antidepressants and on pharmacological management of anxiety. Data on treatment for patients with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia and related disorders are limited to case reports.

CONCLUSION

Over half of the studies included were case reports, thus limiting conclusions. More robust data are required to establish effect sizes of pharmacological treatments prior to providing specific recommendations for their use in treating mental health illnesses in patients receiving dialysis.

Development and Validation of a Treatment Algorithm for Osteoarthritis Pain Management in Patients With End-Stage Kidney Disease Undergoing Hemodialysis

Background

Although osteoarthritis is common in the hemodialysis population and leads to poor health outcomes, pain management is challenged by the absence of clinical guidance. A treatment algorithm was developed and validated to aid hemodialysis clinicians in managing osteoarthritis pain.

Objective

The objective was to develop and validate a treatment algorithm for managing osteoarthritis pain in patients undergoing hemodialysis.

Design

A validation study was conducted based on Lynn's method for content validation.

Setting

To develop and validate a treatment algorithm, interviews were conducted virtually by the primary researcher with clinicians from various institutions across the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area in Ontario.

Patients

The treatment algorithm was developed and validated for the management of osteoarthritis pain in patients on hemodialysis. Patients were not involved in the development or validation of the tool.

Measurements

The algorithm was measured for content and face validity. Content validity was measured by calculating the content validity index of each component (I-CVI) of the algorithm and the overall scale validity index (S-CVI). Face validity was assessed by calculating the percentage of positive responses to the face validity statements.

Methods

A draft algorithm was developed based on literature searches and expert opinion and validated by interviewing nephrology and pain management clinicians. Through consecutive rounds of 1:1 interviews, content and face validity were assessed by asking participants to rate the relevance of each component of the algorithm and indicate their level of agreeability with a series of statements. Following each round, the I-CVI of the algorithm as well as the S-CVI was calculated and the percentage of positive responses to the statements was determined. The research team revised the algorithm in response to the findings. The final algorithm provides a stepwise approach to the non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic management of pain, including topical, oral, and opioid use.

Results

A total of 18 clinicians from 7 institutions across the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area were interviewed (10 pharmacists, 5 nurse practitioners, and 3 physicians). The average S-CVI of the algorithm across all 3 rounds was 0.93. At least 78% of participants provided positive responses to the face validity statements.

Limitations

An algorithm was developed based on input from clinicians working in the province of Ontario, limiting the generalizability of the algorithm across provinces. In addition, the algorithm did not include the perspectives of primary care providers or patients/caregivers.

Conclusions

An algorithm for the management of osteoarthritis pain in the hemodialysis population was developed and validated through expert review to standardize practices and encourage clinicians to use evidence-based treatments and address the psychosocial symptoms of pain. As the algorithm possesses a high degree of content and face validity, it may improve osteoarthritis pain management among patients undergoing hemodialysis. Future research will assess the implementation of the algorithm across hemodialysis settings.

Global research trends and mapping knowledge structure of depression in dialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Depression is one of the most common and important psychological issues faced by dialysis patients. It can make it more difficult for them to adhere to their treatment regimen, which, in turn, can worsen their physical symptoms and lead to poorer health outcomes.

AIM

To examine the evolution and growth of publications related to dialysis and depression. The objectives were to identify the number of publications, the top active countries, the contributed institutions, funding agencies and journals, as well as to perform citation and research theme analysis.

METHODS

The search was conducted using the Scopus database for publications related to dialysis and depression between 1970 and 2022. Subsequently, bibliometric analysis was carried out on the data obtained using VOSviewer software, version 1.6.9. This analysis included visualization analysis, co-occurrence analysis and examination of publication trends in dialysis and depression.

RESULTS

We identified 800 publications that met the search criteria. The number of publications related to dialysis and depression has increased significantly in the past two decades. The USA led the way with 144 publications, which is 18% of all publications on this topic. Turkey came second with 88 publications (11%), followed by China with 55 publications (6.88%) and Iran with 52 publications (6.5%). Analysis of the research theme identified three main clusters related to gender differences in prevalence, identification of depression as a risk factor, and effective interventions to relieve depression. Future research direction analysis shows a shift toward effective interventions to relieve depression in dialysis patients.

CONCLUSION

This study provides a comprehensive overview of growth, trends and research themes related to dialysis and depression that could help researchers identify gaps in the literature and develop future research.

How Are Albertans "Adjusting to and Coping With" Dialysis? A Cross-Sectional Survey

Background

Depression and anxiety are commonly reported (40% and 11%-52%) among adults receiving dialysis, compared with ~10% among all Canadians. Mental health in dialysis care is underrecognized and undertreated.

Objective

(1) To describe preferences for mental health support reported by Albertans receiving dialysis; (2) to compare depression, anxiety, and quality-of-life (QOL) domains for people who would or would not engage in support for mental health; and (3) to explore sociodemographic, mental health, and QOL domains that explain whether people would or would not engage in support for mental health.

Design

A cross-sectional survey.

Setting

Alberta, Canada.

Patients

Adults receiving all modalities of dialysis (N = 2972).

Measurements

An online survey with questions about preferences for mental health support and patient-reported outcome measures (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9], Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 [GAD-7], and Kidney Disease QOL Instrument-36 [KDQOL-36]).

Methods

To address objectives 1 and 2, we conducted chi-square tests (for discrete variables) and t tests (for continuous variables) to compare the distributions of the above measures for two groups: Albertans receiving dialysis who would engage or would not engage in support for mental health. We subsequently conducted a series of binary logistic regressions guided by the purposeful variable selection approach to identify a subset of the most relevant explanatory variables for determining whether or not people are more likely to engage in support for mental health (objective 3). To further explain differences between the two groups, we analyzed open-text comments following a summative content analysis approach.

Results

Among 384 respondents, 72 did not provide a dialysis modality or answer the PHQ-9. The final data set included responses from 312 participants. Of these, 59.6% would consider engaging in support, including discussing medication with a family doctor (72.1%) or nephrologist (62.9%), peer support groups (64.9%), and talk therapy (60%). Phone was slightly favored (73%) over in person at dialysis (67.6%), outpatient (67.2%), or video (59.4%). Moderate to severe depressive symptoms (PHQ-9 score ≥10) was reported by 33.4%, and most respondents (63.9%) reported minimal anxiety symptoms; 36.1% reported mild to severe anxiety symptoms (GAD-7 score ≥5). The mean (SD) PHQ-9 score was 8.9 (6.4) for those who would engage in support, and lower at 5.8 (4.8) for those who would not. The mean (SD) GAD-7 score was 5.2 (5.6) for those who would engage in support and 2.8 (4.1) for those who would not. In the final logistic regression model, people who were unable to work had 2 times the odds of engaging in support than people who are able to work. People were also more likely to engage in support if they had been on dialysis for fewer years and had lower (worse) mental health scores (odds ratios = 1.06 and 1.38, respectively). The final model explained 15.5% (Nagelkerke R2) of the variance and with 66.6% correct classification. We analyzed 146 comments in response to the question, "Is there anything else you like to tell us." The top 2 categories for both groups were QOL and impact of dialysis environment. The third category differed: those who would engage wrote about support, whereas those who would not engage wrote about "dialysis is the least of my worries."

Limitations

A low response rate of 12.9% limits representativeness; people who chose not to participate may have different experiences of mental health.

Conclusions

Incorporating patients' preferences and willingness to engage in support for mental health will inform future visioning for person-centered mental health care in dialysis.