Implementation of a continuous quality improvement program reduces the occurrence of peritonitis in PD

Peritoneal dialysis in the Arabian Gulf countries: Challenges and opportunities

The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) is a regional organisation, consisting of six Arab countries that share common objectives and cultural identities, with a total population of 57.3 million. The prevalence of patients requiring dialysis in GCC countries is increasing, with a current mean prevalence of 551 per million population. Despite the several patient-level and healthcare system benefits of peritoneal dialysis (PD) compared to in-centre haemodialysis, the growth in PD utilisation has been limited. This is related to several factors, including deficiencies in modality education for chronic kidney disease patients, nephrology training and governmental policies advocating for this dialysis modality. Establishing a detailed PD registry in GCC countries is an important step towards understanding our patients' characteristics, outcomes, current PD practices and challenges in order to increase the use of PD and to facilitate future initiatives aimed at optimising the management of PD patients in this part of the world. This article reviews common challenges around PD practices and utilisation in GCC countries and provides possible solutions to overcome these challenges. It should be noted that the literature on PD patients, outcomes and treatment practices in GCC countries is limited, and as a result, many of our recommendations and discussion are based on clinical observations, experience and data when available.

A scoping review of continuous quality improvement in healthcare system: conceptualization, models and tools, barriers and facilitators, and impact

BACKGROUND

The growing adoption of continuous quality improvement (CQI) initiatives in healthcare has generated a surge in research interest to gain a deeper understanding of CQI. However, comprehensive evidence regarding the diverse facets of CQI in healthcare has been limited. Our review sought to comprehensively grasp the conceptualization and principles of CQI, explore existing models and tools, analyze barriers and facilitators, and investigate its overall impacts.

METHODS

This qualitative scoping review was conducted using Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework. We searched articles in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and EMBASE databases. In addition, we accessed articles from Google Scholar. We used mixed-method analysis, including qualitative content analysis and quantitative descriptive for quantitative findings to summarize findings and PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) framework to report the overall works.

RESULTS

A total of 87 articles, which covered 14 CQI models, were included in the review. While 19 tools were used for CQI models and initiatives, Plan-Do-Study/Check-Act cycle was the commonly employed model to understand the CQI implementation process. The main reported purposes of using CQI, as its positive impact, are to improve the structure of the health system (e.g., leadership, health workforce, health technology use, supplies, and costs), enhance healthcare delivery processes and outputs (e.g., care coordination and linkages, satisfaction, accessibility, continuity of care, safety, and efficiency), and improve treatment outcome (reduce morbidity and mortality). The implementation of CQI is not without challenges. There are cultural (i.e., resistance/reluctance to quality-focused culture and fear of blame or punishment), technical, structural (related to organizational structure, processes, and systems), and strategic (inadequate planning and inappropriate goals) related barriers that were commonly reported during the implementation of CQI.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing CQI initiatives necessitates thoroughly comprehending key principles such as teamwork and timeline. To effectively address challenges, it's crucial to identify obstacles and implement optimal interventions proactively. Healthcare professionals and leaders need to be mentally equipped and cognizant of the significant role CQI initiatives play in achieving purposes for quality of care.

Relationship between serum iPTH and peritonitis episodes in patients undergoing continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis

BACKGROUND

Peritonitis is considered as one of the most serious complications that cause hospitalization in patients undergoing continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). There is limited evidence on the impact of the parathyroid hormone (PTH) on the first peritoneal dialysis (PD)-associated peritonitis episode. We aimed to investigate the influence of serum intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) on peritonitis in patients undergoing PD.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study. Patients undergoing initial CAPD from a single center in China were enrolled. The baseline characteristics and clinical information were recorded. The primary outcome of interest was the occurrence of the first PD-associated peritonitis episode. Five Cox proportional hazard models were constructed in each group set. In group set 1, all participants were divided into three subgroups by tertiles of the serum concentration of iPTH; in group set 2, all participants were divided into three subgroups based on the serum concentration of iPTH with 150 pg/ml interval (<150, 150-300, and >300 pg/ml). Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each model. The multivariate linear regression analysis elimination procedure assessed the association between the clinical characteristics at baseline and the iPTH levels. Restricted cubic spline models were constructed, and stratified analyses were also conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 582 patients undergoing initial PD (40% women; mean age, 45.1 ± 11.5 years) from a single center in China were recruited. The median follow-up duration was 25.3 months. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that, in the fully adjusted model, a higher serum iPTH level (tertile 3, iPTH >300 pg/ml) was significantly associated with a higher risk of PD-associated peritonitis at 3 years [tertile 3: hazard ratio (HR) = 1.53, 95%CI = 1.03-2.55, p = 0.03; iPTH > 300 pg/ml: HR = 1.57, 95%CI = 1.08-2.27, p = 0.02]. The hazard ratio for every 100 pg/ml increase in serum iPTH level was 1.12 (95%CI = 1.05-1.20, p < 0.01) in the total cohort when treating iPTH as a continuous variable.

CONCLUSIONS

An elevated iPTH level was significantly associated with an increased risk of peritonitis in patients undergoing CAPD.

Epidemiology of peritoneal dialysis outcomes

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an important home-based treatment for kidney failure and accounts for 11% of all dialysis and 9% of all kidney replacement therapy globally. Although PD is available in 81% of countries, this provision ranges from 96% in high-income countries to 32% in low-income countries. Compared with haemodialysis, PD has numerous potential advantages, including a simpler technique, greater feasibility of use in remote communities, generally lower cost, lesser need for trained staff, fewer management challenges during natural disasters, possibly better survival in the first few years, greater ability to travel, fewer dietary restrictions, better preservation of residual kidney function, greater treatment satisfaction, better quality of life, better outcomes following subsequent kidney transplantation, delayed need for vascular access (especially in small children), reduced need for erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, and lower risk of blood-borne virus infections and of SARS-CoV-2 infection. PD outcomes have been improving over time but with great variability, driven by individual and system-level inequities and by centre effects; this variation is exacerbated by a lack of standardized outcome definitions. Potential strategies for outcome improvement include enhanced standardization, monitoring and reporting of PD outcomes, and the implementation of continuous quality improvement programmes and of PD-specific interventions, such as incremental PD, the use of biocompatible PD solutions and remote PD monitoring.

The use of peritoneal dialysis (PD) can be advantageous compared with haemodialysis treatment, although several barriers limit its broad implementation. This review examines the epidemiology of peritoneal dialysis (PD) outcomes, including clinical, patient-reported and surrogate PD outcomes.

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) has distinct advantages compared with haemodialysis, including the convenience of home treatment, improved quality of life, technical simplicity, lesser need for trained staff, greater cost-effectiveness in most countries, improved equity of access to dialysis in resource-limited settings, and improved survival, particularly in the first few years of initiating therapy.

Important barriers can hamper PD utilization in low-income settings, including the high costs of PD fluids (owing to the inability to manufacture them locally and the exorbitant costs of their import), limited workforce availability and a practice culture that limits optimal PD use, often leading to suboptimal outcomes.

PD outcomes are highly variable around the world owing in part to the use of variable outcome definitions, a heterogeneous practice culture, the lack of standardized monitoring and reporting of quality indicators, and kidney failure care gaps (including health care workforce shortages, inadequate health care financing, suboptimal governance and a lack of good health care information systems).

Key outcomes include not only clinical outcomes (typically defined as medical outcomes based on clinician assessment or diagnosis) — for example, PD-related infections, technique survival, mechanical complications, hospitalizations and PD-related mortality — but also patient-reported outcomes. These outcomes are directly reported by patients and focus on how they function or feel, typically in relation to quality of life or symptoms; patient-reported outcomes are used less frequently than clinical outcomes in day-to-day routine care.

Peritoneal Dialysis-Associated Peritonitis: Suggestions for Management and Mistakes to Avoid

Peritonitis is a common complication of peritoneal dialysis that is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Peritonitis increases treatment costs and hospitalization events and is the most common reason for transfer to hemodialysis. Although there is much focus on preventing peritoneal dialysis–associated peritonitis, equally as important is appropriate management to minimize the morbidity of a peritonitis episode when it has occurred. Despite the presence of international guidelines on peritonitis treatment, the evidence base to support optimal peritonitis treatment practices is lacking, leaving the practitioner to rely on clinical experience and extrapolate from across other infection treatment practices. This article reviews common mistakes and misconceptions that we have observed in the management of peritonitis that may compromise treatment success. It also provides suggestions on common controversial aspects of peritonitis management based on the best available literature. Although the use of the word mistakes is somewhat controversial and subjective, we acknowledge that evidence is lacking and have based many of our suggestions on clinical judgment, experience, and available data.

Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score as immune-nutritional predictor of outcomes in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score was designed to assess the immune-nutritional status in patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic value of the CONUT score at the commencement of peritoneal dialysis (PD) for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and technique failure.

METHODS

This is a STROBE-compliant, retrospective, observational, single center study. A total of 252 patients with end stage renal disease initially undergoing PD were enrolled in the study. Baseline data were collected from The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University Peritoneal Dialysis database. The primary outcome during follow-up was all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes were CVD and technique failure. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to estimate the association between confounding factors and outcomes. The area under the curve represented the test discriminative power of CONUT score and relevant clinical parameters. The Kaplan-Meier curve was used to compare the outcomes of the patients according to the cut-off CONUT score.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up period of 1.9 years, 35 patients (13.9%) died, 38 (15.1%) experienced CVD events, 58 (23.0%) experienced technique failure. The high CONUT group (CONUT score > 3) had significantly higher all-cause mortality (p = 0.02), CVD prevalence (p < 0.01), and technique failure rates (p < 0.01) than the low CONUT group (CONUT score ≤ 3). The CONUT score was an independent predictor of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.565; 95% CI: 1.305-1.876; p < 0.001), CVD (HR: 1.346; 95% CI: 1.136-1.594; p = 0.001), and technique failure (HR: 1.144; 95% CI: 1.006-1.302; p = 0.041).

CONCLUSION

The CONUT score is a straightforward and inexpensive indicator to evaluate the immune-nutritional status; it could be a reliable prognostic marker of all-cause mortality, CVD, and technique failure risk in patients undergoing PD.

Peritoneal Dialysis-Associated Peritonitis

Peritonitis is a common and severe complication in peritoneal dialysis (PD). Detailed recommendations on the prevention and treatment of PD-associated peritonitis have been published by the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD), but there is a substantial variation in clinical practice among dialysis units. Prophylactic antibiotics administered before PD catheter insertion, colonoscopy, or invasive gynecologic procedures, daily topical application of antibiotic cream or ointment to the catheter exit site, and prompt treatment of exit site or catheter infection are key measures to prevent PD-associated peritonitis. When a patient on PD presents with clinical features compatible with PD-associated peritonitis, empirical antibiotic therapy, with coverage of both Gram-positive and Gram-negative organisms (including Pseudomonas species), should be started once the appropriate microbiologic specimens have been obtained. Intraperitoneal is the preferred route of administration. Antifungal prophylaxis, preferably oral nystatin, should be added to prevent secondary fungal peritonitis. Once the PD effluent Gram stain or culture and sensitivity results are available, antibiotic therapy can be adjusted accordingly. A detailed description on the dosage of individual antibiotic can be found in the latest recommendations by the ISPD. The duration of antibiotics is usually 2-3 weeks, depending on the specific organisms identified. Catheter removal and temporary hemodialysis support is recommended for refractory, relapsing, or fungal peritonitis. In some patients, a new PD catheter could be inserted after complete resolution of the peritonitis. PD catheter removal should also be considered for refractory exit site or tunnel infections. After the improvement in clinical practice, there is a worldwide trend of reduction in PD-associated peritonitis rate, supporting the use of PD as a first-line dialysis modality.

Reducing the occurrence rate of catheter dysfunction in peritoneal dialysis: a single-center experience about CQI

To reduce the occurrence rate of peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter dysfunction caused by catheter displacement or plugging, this study screened all patients with peritoneal dialysis catheterization from 2002 to 2015 from the Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University. There were 256 patients before continuous quality improvement (CQI) (from 2002 to 2007) and 813 patients after CQI (from 2008 to 2015). The occurrence rate of catheter dysfunction was 5.9% in the preCQI group: seven cases were associated with peritonitis, six cases were involved in omentum wrapping, one case was blocked by oviduct, and one case was blocked by blood clot. Through PDCA (plan-do-check-act) four-step of CQI, the following measures were adopted: (1) Preoperative: treat complications, enema and urine catheterization (2) Intraoperative: strengthen analgesia, Lower the insert position of catheter to 7.5 ∼ 8.5 cm above the pubic symphysis, extending the straight distance of catheter in rectus abdominis and decrease the times of peritoneal dialysis catheter implantation. (3) Postoperative: strengthen the training of nurses, patients and their families. (4) strengthen anticoagulation therapy during peritonitis treatment. (5) use laparoscopic technology for refractory patients, and so on. The occurrence of catheter dysfunction was 1.5% in the postCQI group (p < 0.05): two cases were associated with peritonitis, ten cases were involved in omentum wrapping. The measures we adopted in CQI reduce the occurrence rate of catheter displacement or plugging in peritoneal dialysis.

Lean interventions in healthcare: do they actually work? A systematic literature review

Purpose

Lean is a widely used quality improvement methodology initially developed and used in the automotive and manufacturing industries but recently expanded to the healthcare sector. This systematic literature review seeks to independently assess the effect of Lean or Lean interventions on worker and patient satisfaction, health and process outcomes, and financial costs.

Data sources

We conducted a systematic literature review of Medline, PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, ABI/Inform, ERIC, EMBASE and SCOPUS.

Study selection

Peer reviewed articles were included if they examined a Lean intervention and included quantitative data. Methodological quality was assessed using validated critical appraisal checklists. Publically available data collected by the Saskatchewan Health Quality Council and the Saskatchewan Union of Nurses were also analysed and reported separately.

Data extraction

Data on design, methods, interventions and key outcomes were extracted and collated.

Results of data synthesis

Our electronic search identified 22 articles that passed methodological quality review. Among the accepted studies, 4 were exclusively concerned with health outcomes, 3 included both health and process outcomes and 15 included process outcomes. Our study found that Lean interventions have: (i) no statistically significant association with patient satisfaction and health outcomes; (ii) a negative association with financial costs and worker satisfaction and (iii) potential, yet inconsistent, benefits on process outcomes like patient flow and safety.

Conclusion

While some may strongly believe that Lean interventions lead to quality improvements in healthcare, the evidence to date simply does not support this claim. More rigorous, higher quality and better conducted scientific research is required to definitively ascertain the impact and effectiveness of Lean in healthcare settings.