Centre variation in home dialysis uptake: A survey of kidney centre practice in relation to home dialysis organisation and delivery in England

BACKGROUND

Disparities in home dialysis uptake across England suggest inequity and unexplained variation in access. We surveyed staff at all English kidney centres to identify patterns in service organisation/delivery and explore correlations with home therapy uptake, as part of a larger study ('Inter-CEPt'), which aims to identify potentially modifiable factors to address observed variations.

METHODS

Between June and September 2022, staff working at English kidney centres were surveyed and individual responses combined into one centre-level response per question using predetermined data aggregation rules. Descriptive analysis described centre practices and their correlation with home dialysis uptake (proportion of new home dialysis starters) using 2019 UK Renal Registry 12-month home dialysis incidence data.

RESULTS

In total, 180 responses were received (50/51 centres, 98.0%). Despite varied organisation of home dialysis services, most components of service delivery and practice had minimal or weak correlations with home dialysis uptake apart from offering assisted peritoneal dialysis and 'promoting flexible decision-making about dialysis modality'. Moderate to strong correlations were identified between home dialysis uptake and centres reporting supportive clinical leadership (correlation 0.32, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.05-0.55), an organisational culture that values trying new initiatives (0.57, 95% CI: 0.34-0.73); support for reflective practice (0.38, 95% CI: 0.11-0.60), facilitating research engagement (0.39, 95% CI: 0.13-0.61) and promoting continuous quality improvement (0.29, 95% CI: 0.01-0.53).

CONCLUSIONS

Uptake of home dialysis is likely to be driven by organisational culture, leadership and staff attitudes, which provide a supportive clinical environment within which specific components of service organisation and delivery can be effective.

Nutrition in Peritoneal Dialysis

The use of peritoneal dialysis (PD) has been associated with improved quality of life, cost-effectiveness, and better outcomes for patients with kidney failure. However, many patients utilizing PD for replacement therapy face numerous nutritional hurdles. As the use of PD continues to increase worldwide, malnutrition has become an increasingly recognized concern for patients undergoing PD. The nephrology community needs to recognize and treat malnutrition to promote optimal nutritional states for our patients. In this review, we discuss several factors that contribute to malnutrition and protein-energy wasting and explore the benefits and limitations of nutritional parameters used to assess protein-calorie malnutrition. We also emphasize updated guidelines on daily caloric, protein, and micronutrient recommendations, as well as their effects on electrolyte homeostasis.

Evaluation of the experience with the use of telemedicine in a home dialysis program-a qualitative and quantitative study

INTRODUCTION

Assisted home hemodialysis is a therapeutic modality for patients diagnosed with end-stage renal disease who require dialysis replacement therapy and have concomitant health limitations that prevent them from attending a satellite dialysis unit or performing their own treatment.

OBJECTIVE

The main objective of this study was to evaluate whether telemedicine provided through telemonitoring can improve the ongoing relationship between the doctor, the nurse and the patient.

METHOD

This prospective longitudinal, qualitative and quantitative study analyzes the impact of telemedicine through an evaluation of the experiences of patients and nurses. During the study, we performed remote weekly monitoring for 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 17 patients and 12 nurses were included. We observed that the patients and nurses had positive experiences with telemonitoring and highlighted feelings of being cared for and improved confidence, although they indicated that telemonitoring does not replace face-to-face visits.

CONCLUSION

Telemonitoring is a useful tool to increase satisfaction with and confidence in home hemodialysis.

ETC Model: How One Small Dialysis Organization Is Navigating Uncharted Policy Waters

The ETC model proposes to increase access to home dialysis and transplant for patients with ESRD. Implementation of this model is happening while many dialysis organizations are still suffering the far-reaching effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In addition, the model has the potential to negatively affect small and independent dialysis organizations disproportionately. It incentivizes home dialysis over transplant and promotes development of new home dialysis programs, rewards achievement over improvement, and places an excessive burden on small and independent dialysis organizations. Advantages of the program include the focus on self-care as an acceptable alternative to home dialysis for some patients and the potential for some organizations to make improvements in care with increased reimbursements. The authors hope that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services will address many of these concerns in updated rulemaking and guidance.

Key elements in selection of pre-dialysis patients for home dialysis

BACKGROUND

Most pre-dialysis patients are medically eligible for home dialysis, and home dialysis has several advantages over incentre dialysis. However, accurately selecting patients for home dialysis appears to be difficult, since uptake of home dialysis remains low. The aim of this study was to investigate which medical or psychosocial elements contribute most to the selection of patients eligible for home dialysis.

METHODS

All patients from a Dutch teaching hospital, who received treatment modality education and subsequently started dialysis treatment, were included. The pre-dialysis programme consisted of questionnaires for the patient, nephrologist and social worker, followed by an assessment of eligibility for home dialysis by a multidisciplinary team. Clinimetric assessment and logistic regression were used to identify domains and questions associated with home dialysis treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 135 patients were included, of whom 40 were treated with home dialysis and 95 with incentre haemodialysis. The key elements associated with long-term home dialysis treatment were part of the domains 'suitability of the housing', 'self-care', 'social support' and 'patient capacity', with adjusted odds ratios ranging from 0.13 for negative to 18.3 for positive associations.

CONCLUSION

The assessment of contraindications by a nephrologist followed by the assessment of possibilities by a social worker or dialysis nurse who investigates four key elements, ideally during a home visit, and subsequent detailed education offered by specialized nurses is an optimal way to select patients for home dialysis.

Expanding Utilization of Home Dialysis: An Action Agenda From the First International Home Dialysis Roundtable

In a groundbreaking meeting, leading global kidney disease organizations came together in the fall of 2020 as an International Home Dialysis Roundtable (IHDR) to address strategies to increase access to and uptake of home dialysis, both peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis. This challenge has become urgent in the wake of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, during which patients with advanced kidney disease, who are more susceptible to viral infections and severe complications, must be able to safely physically distance at home. To boost access to home dialysis on a global scale, IHDR members committed to collaborate, through the COVID-19 public health emergency and beyond, to promote uptake of home dialysis on a broad scale. Their commitments included increasing the reach and influence of key stakeholders with policy makers, building a cooperative of advocates and champions for home dialysis, working together to increase patient engagement and empowerment, and sharing intelligence about policy, education, and other programs so that such efforts can be operationalized globally. In the spirit of international cooperation, IHDR members agreed to document, amplify, and replicate established efforts shown to improve access to home dialysis and support new policies that facilitate access through procedures, innovation, and reimbursement.

Tackling Dialysis Burden around the World: A Global Challenge

CKD is a global problem that causes significant burden to the healthcare system and the economy in addition to its impact on morbidity and mortality of patients. Around the world, in both developing and developed economies, the nephrologists and governments face the challenges of the need to provide a quality and cost-effective kidney replacement therapy for CKD patients when their kidneys fail. In December 2019, the 3rd International Congress of Chinese Nephrologists was held in Nanjing, China, and in the meeting, a symposium and roundtable discussion on how to deal with this CKD burden was held with opinion leaders from countries and regions around the world, including Australia, Canada, China, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, the UK, and the USA. The participants concluded that an integrated approach with early detection of CKD, prompt treatment to slow down progression, promotion of home-based dialysis therapy like peritoneal dialysis and home HD, together with promotion of kidney transplantation, are possible effective ways to combat this ongoing worldwide challenge.

COVID-19 incidence and outcomes in a home dialysis unit in Madrid (Spain) at the height of the pandemic

INTRODUCTION

The 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19) is a viral infection caused by a new coronavirus that is affecting the entire world. There have been studies of patients on in-center hemodialysis (HD), but home dialysis population data are scarce. Our objective is to study the incidence and course of COVID-19 in a home dialysis unit (HDU) at the height of the pandemic.

METHODS

an observational, retrospective study enrolling all patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from the HDU of Hospital Universitario La Paz [La Paz University Hospital] (Madrid, Spain) between March 10 and May 15, 2020. We collected clinical data from the HDU (57 patients on peritoneal dialysis [PD] and 22 patients on home hemodialysis [HHD]) and compared the clinical characteristics and course of patients with and without COVID-19 infection.

RESULTS

twelve patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 (9 PD; 3 HHD). There were no statistically significant differences in terms of clinical characteristics between patients with COVID-19 and the rest of the unit. The mean age was 62 ± 18.5 years; most were men (75%). All patients but one required hospitalization. Ten patients (83%) were discharged following a mean of 16.4 ± 9.7 days of hospitalization. Two patients were diagnosed while hospitalised for other conditions, and these were the only patients who died. Those who died were older than those who survived.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of COVID-19 in our HDU in Madrid at the height of the pandemic was high, especially in patients on PD. No potential benefit for preventing the infection in patients on home dialysis was observed. Advanced age and nosocomial transmission were the main factors linked to a worse prognosis.

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.

Home Dialysis: A Majority Chooses It, a Minority Gets It

INTRODUCTION

When choosing a modality for outpatient renal replacement therapy, patients and medical providers have 3 options to choose from in-center hemodialysis (HD), home HD (HHD), and peritoneal dialysis (PD). In 2017, just over 10% of incident ESKD patients were on a home dialysis modality. We set out to determine outcomes of dialysis modality education in both pre-dialysis and dialysis patients. Moreover, we examined barriers that preclude patients from choosing home dialysis.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective study looking at patients who were referred to the CKD educator for dialysis modality education between January 1, 2019, and March 31, 2020. Patient demographics, preferred language of communication, stage of renal disease, and reasons for patients' refusal to undertake a home dialysis modality were recorded. Patients' average household income and driving distance to our home dialysis unit were calculated using their home zip code.

RESULTS

167 patients were referred for CKD education. Mean age was 60 years, and 59% male, 42% African American, 22% White, 7% Asian, and 28% were Hispanic or Latino. Only 23% of the total cohort chose in-center HD, while 74% chose a home dialysis modality (59% PD and 15% HHD), and the remaining patients remained undecided. 56% of in-center HD patients chose a home dialysis modality. The most commonly cited barriers to home dialysis were lack of a care partner, lack of home space, and patient preference.

LIMITATIONS

Over 90% of our patients reside in NY City where home space is limited. We require in our home HD program that patients have a trained care partner present during their treatments. We cannot assume that all CKD stage-4 patients or higher were either referred for CKD education or followed through on the referral.

CONCLUSIONS

A large discrepancy between informed patients' choices and the reality of the current dialysis landscape. Absence of a care partner, lack of home space, and patients not deemed appropriate surgical candidates were the main driving forces in their not opting for a home modality.

[COVID-19 incidence and outcomes in a home dialysis unit in Madrid (Spain) at the height of the pandemic]

Introducción

La enfermedad por coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) es una infección viral causada por un nuevo coronavirus que está afectando a todo el mundo. Hay estudios previos de pacientes en hemodiálisis en centro, pero hay pocos datos sobre población en diálisis domiciliaria. Nuestro objetivo es estudiar la incidencia y evolución de la COVID-19 en una unidad de diálisis domiciliaria (UDD) durante el pico de la pandemia.

Métodos

Estudio observacional y retrospectivo que incluye todos los pacientes diagnosticados de COVID-19 de la UDD del Hospital Universitario La Paz (Madrid, España) entre el 10 de marzo y el 15 de mayo de 2020. Se recogieron los datos clínicos de la UDD (57 pacientes en diálisis peritoneal y 22 pacientes en hemodiálisis domiciliaria) y comparamos las características clínicas y la evolución de los pacientes con o sin infección por COVID-19.

Resultados

Doce pacientes fueron diagnosticados de COVID-19 (9 diálisis peritoneal, 3 hemodiálisis domiciliaria). No hubo diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre las características clínicas de los pacientes con COVID-19 y el resto de la unidad. La edad media fue 62 ± 18,5 años; la mayoría eran varones (75%). Todos los pacientes menos uno necesitaron hospitalización. Diez pacientes (83%) fueron dados de alta tras una media de 16,4 ± 9,7 días de hospitalización. Dos pacientes fueron diagnosticados durante su hospitalización por otro motivo y fueron los únicos que fallecieron. Los fallecidos eran de mayor edad que los supervivientes.

Conclusión

La incidencia de COVID-19 en nuestra UDD en Madrid durante el pico de la pandemia fue alto, especialmente en los pacientes en diálisis peritoneal, sin observarse un potencial beneficio para prevenir la infección en los pacientes en diálisis domiciliaria. La edad avanzada y la transmisión nosocomial fueron los principales factores relacionados con peor pronóstico.

Home Dialysis in the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Era

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has had a significant impact on patients with end-stage kidney disease and their care, especially given the potential for severe coronavirus disease 2019 in those with a depressed immune status. Patients receiving in-center hemodialysis have been particularly affected by this pandemic because of their need to travel multiple times a week to receive treatment. Although patients on home dialysis are able to avoid such exposure, they face their own unique challenges. In this review, we will discuss the challenges posed by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic for patients on home dialysis, the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on various aspects of their care, and the resultant rapid adaptations in policy/health-care delivery mechanisms with implications for the future care of patients on home dialysis.

Health-Related Quality of Life in Home Dialysis Patients Compared to In-Center Hemodialysis Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Dialysis patients judge health-related quality of life (HRQoL) as an essential outcome. Remarkably, little is known about HRQoL differences between home dialysis and in-center hemodialysis (HD) patients worldwide.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING & STUDY POPULATIONS

Search strategies were performed on the Cochrane Library, Pubmed, and EMBASE databases between 2007 and 2019. Home dialysis was defined as both peritoneal dialysis and home HD.

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES

Randomized controlled trials and observational studies that compared HRQoL in home dialysis patients versus in-center HD patients.

DATA EXTRACTION

The data extracted by 2 authors included HRQoL scores of different questionnaires, dialysis modality, and subcontinent.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Data were pooled using a random-effects model and results were expressed as standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was explored using subgroup analyses.

RESULTS

Forty-six articles reporting on 41 study populations were identified. Most studies were cross-sectional in design (90%), conducted on peritoneal dialysis patients (95%), and used the 12-item or 36-item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaires (83%). More than half the studies showed moderate or high risk of bias. Pooled analysis of 4,158 home dialysis patients and 7,854 in-center HD patients showed marginally better physical HRQoL scores in home dialysis patients compared with in-center HD patients (SMD, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.24), although heterogeneity was high (I 2>80%). In a subgroup analysis, Western European home dialysis patients had higher physical HRQoL scores (SMD, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.61), while home dialysis patients from Latin America had lower physical scores (SMD, -0.20; 95% CI, -0.28 to -0.12). Mental HRQoL showed no difference in all analyses.

LIMITATIONS

No randomized controlled trials were found and high heterogeneity among studies existed.

CONCLUSIONS

Although pooled data showed marginally better physical HRQoL for home dialysis patients, the quality of design of the included studies was poor. Large prospective studies with adequate adjustments for confounders are necessary to establish whether home dialysis results in better HRQoL.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO 95985.

Comparing Patient Survival of Home Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis Patients

BACKGROUND

It is not clear whether peritoneal dialysis (PD) and home hemodialysis (HHD) have similar outcomes, and little is known about how mortality associated with HHD versus PD differs according to the duration of dialysis.

METHODS

We examined a national cohort of incident end-stage renal disease patients that was comprised of 1,993 and 16,514 patients transitioning to HHD and PD, respectively, from 2007 to 2011. The HHD patients were matched with PD patients using propensity score (PS). Demographics, comorbidities, duration of dialysis, and body mass index were adjusted for in logistic regression models using PS matching. We matched 1,915 HHD patients with 1,915 PD patients based on the PS. The patients were categorized by their vintage (duration of dialysis) at the time of the transition to HHD or PD (<3, 3 to <12, and ≥12 months).

RESULTS

In the matched cohort, 237 and 359 deaths occurred in the HHD and PD patients, respectively (cumulative incidence 9.6 vs. 12.9/100 patient-years, p < 0.001). PD patients who transitioned within 12 months of starting dialysis had similar mortality risks, while PD patients who transitioned >12 months after starting dialysis had an 83% higher risk for mortality (hazard ratio 1.83; 95% CI 1.33-2.52).

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas there was no meaningful survival difference in the first 12 months between HHD and PD, patients who transitioned to PD after 12 months of dialysis had worse survival than their HHD counterparts. Additional studies are warranted to investigate clinical implications of these differences.

Predictors of Care Gaps in Home Dialysis: The Home Dialysis Virtual Ward Study

BACKGROUND

Home dialysis patients may be at an increased risk of adverse events after transitional states. The home dialysis virtual ward (HDVW) trial was conducted in Canadian dialysis centers and aimed to evaluate potential care gaps and patient satisfaction during the HDVW.

METHODS

The HDVW was a multicenter single-arm trial including peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis patients after 4 different events (hospital discharge, medical procedure, antibiotics, completion of training). Telephone-led interviews using a standardized assessment tool were performed over a 2-week period to assess a patient's care and adjust treatment as required. Upon completion, patients were surveyed to evaluate their perceived impact on domains of care using a rating scale; 1 not satisfied to 10 completely satisfied.

RESULTS

The HDVW trial included 193 patients with a median number of potential care gaps/interventions of 1 (0-2) per patient. Patients admitted to the HDVW after hospital discharge were at a higher risk of potential gaps in care (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.29-3.62), while longer dialysis vintage was -associated with a lower number of gaps/interventions (OR 0.97 per year, 95% CI 0.95-0.98). A total of 105/193 (54%) patients completed satisfaction surveys. Patients were highly satisfied with the HDVW (median rating scale score 8, IQR 2) and felt it had a positive impact (rating scale score ≥7) on their overall health, understanding of treatment and access to a nephrologist.

CONCLUSION

The HDVW was effective at identifying several potential care gaps, and patients were satisfied across several domains of care. This intervention may be valuable in supporting home dialysis patients during care transitions.

Dutch nOcturnal and hoME dialysis Study To Improve Clinical Outcomes (DOMESTICO): rationale and design

Background

More than 6200 End Stage Renal Disease patients in the Netherlands are dependent on dialysis, either performed at home or in a dialysis centre. Visiting a dialysis centre three times a week is considered a large burden by many patients. However, recent data regarding the effects of dialysis at home on quality of life, clinical outcomes, and costs compared with in-centre haemodialysis are lacking.

Methods

The Dutch nOcturnal and hoME dialysis Study To Improve Clinical Outcomes (DOMESTICO) is a nationwide, prospective, observational cohort study that will include adult patients starting with a form of dialysis. Health-related quality of life, as the primary outcome, clinical outcomes and costs, as secondary outcomes, will be measured every 3–6 months in patients on home dialysis, and compared with a control group consisting of in-centre haemodialysis patients. During a 3-year period 800 home dialysis patients (600 peritoneal dialysis and 200 home haemodialysis patients) and a comparison group of 800 in-centre haemodialysis patients will be included from 53 Dutch dialysis centres (covering 96% of Dutch centres) and 1 Belgian dialysis centre (covering 4% of Flemish centres).

Discussion

DOMESTICO will prospectively investigate the effect of home dialysis therapies on health-related quality of life, clinical outcomes and costs, in comparison with in-centre haemodialysis. The findings of this study are expected to ameliorate the shared decision-making process and give more guidance to healthcare professionals, in particular to assess which type of patients may benefit most from home dialysis.

Trial registration

The DOMESTICO study is registered with the National Trial Register on (number: NL6519, date of registration: 22 August 2017) and the Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (CCMO) (number: NL63277.029.17).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12882-019-1526-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Advanced chronic renal failure (ACRF) study. Baseline characteristics, evaluation of the application of the structured information for the election of renal replacement therapy and one-year evolution of the incident patients in the ACRF medical office

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Analyze evolution Renal Chronic Failure stage 4-5 (ACRF) patients and influence information they receive (educational process, EP) in modality Renal Replacement Therapy (RRT) or conservative treatment (CT) in multidisciplinar ACRF Office.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospective, multicenter study (3 centers). Inclusion: from June-01-2014 to October-01-2015; observation: 12 months or until start RRT or death if they occur before 12 months; ends October-01-2016.

RESULTS

336 patients were included (60% males), median and intercuartile rank 71.5 (17), 55% ≥ 70 years; Follow up initiation eGFR CKD-EPI: 21 (9) ml / min / 1.73m²; Charlson Index (ChI) with / without age 8 (3) / 4 (2); Diabetic patients: 52,4%. The EP was carried out in 168, eGFR 15 (10) ml / min / 1.73m². The initial treatment election: 26% peritoneal dialysis (PD), 45% hemodyalisis (HD), 26% CT, kidney trasplant 3%; 60 patients started RRT: 3.3% kidney traspant; 30% PD, 66% HD; 104 admissions in 73 patients, the most frequent cause: cardiovascular disease (42%). Fallecimiento: 23 patients (6.8%). Age was higher (78.4 (6) vs. 67.8 (13.4), P<.001), higher ChI 9.8 (2.1) vs. 7.4 (2.5), P<.001). All deceased who received EP had chosen CT; 61% of deceased had at least one hospital admission vs. 39% alive (P<0.001). Cox regression: age and Charlson index were the predictive mortality variables.

CONCLUSIONS

The population of ACRF patients is elder, comorbid, with high rate hospitalizations rate. The PD election is higher than usual. The EP has been very useful tool and has favored the PD choice.

Leading Integrated Kidney Care Entities of the Future

The leaders of 20th century kidney failure treatment took chances; 21st century leaders of integrated kidney care must do the same. Some risks are clinical, some are organizational, and some are financial. Decent and constructive leadership entails humility. A working practitioner is a better leader. Effective leaders empower their employees and collaborators to lead and encourage them to work together. Integrated kidney care leadership supports exchange of ideas within and among organizations, uninhibited by competitive considerations. ESRD Seamless Care Organizations lead us toward the kidney care of the future; they will be strengthened by expansion to include patients who have advanced kidney disease not yet requiring renal replacement therapy and patients treated by transplant. Adjustment of reimbursement policy to realign incentives will be essential to the long-term success of care coordination. Population health management, with downside risk for participating organizations, is the future of integrated kidney care. Critical goals for integrated kidney care are to delay or avoid dialysis; increase use of home dialysis, transplantation, nondialytic care, and hospice; and to improve end of life care. It's about the patients, stupid.

Barriers for implementation of intensified hemodialysis: survey results from the International Pediatric Dialysis Network

BACKGROUND

In patients on conventional hemodialysis (HD), morbidity is high and quality of life is poor. Intensified HD programs have been developed to help overcome these shortcomings, , but very few pediatric dialysis centers have reported the implementation of such a HD program.

METHODS

An online survey was sent to all 221 pediatric dialysis centers which participate in the International Pediatric Dialysis Network (IPDN). The aim of the survey was to assess the attitude of pediatric nephrologists towards intensified HD, the penetrance of intensified HD into their clinical practice and barriers to implementation.

RESULTS

Of the 221 pediatric dialysis centers sent the survey, respondents from 61% (134) replied. Among these respondents, 69% acknowledged being aware of the evidence in support of the use of intensified HD, independent of whether intensified HD was offered at their own center, and 50% associated the use of daily nocturnal HD with the best overall patient outcome. In contrast, only 2% of respondents were in favor of conventional HD. Overall, 38% of the respondents stated that at their center intensified HD is prescribed to a subgroup of patients, most commonly in the form of short daily HD sessions. The most important barriers to expansion of intensified HD programs were lack of adequate funding (66%) and shortage of staff (63%), whereas lack of expertise and of motivation were reported infrequently as obstacles (21 and 14%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Intensified HD is considered by many pediatric nephrologists to be the dialysis modality most likely associated with the best patient outcome. The limited use of this treatment approach highlights the importance of defining and successfully addressing the barriers to implementation.

Telehealth in the Delivery of Home Dialysis Care: Catching up With Technology

Geographic and socioeconomic barriers may pose a significant difficulty in delivering home dialysis care to remote underserved populations leading to low utilization rates and poor outcomes. Telehealth may serve as a solution to overcome geographic barriers in delivering home dialysis care. Although technologic advances in telehealth have progressed rapidly making it accessible and inexpensive, it has been underused by nephrologists. Components of a regular face-to-face visit that can be successfully accomplished remotely using telehealth techniques include physician-patient communication, physical examination, laboratory and treatment data monitoring, nursing and nutrition education. Regulatory and reimbursement-related policies continue to present barriers that need to be overcome in operationalizing telehealth and widespread adoption of telehealth solutions. Although more quality evidence is needed to study the impact of telehealth on home dialysis outcomes and uptake, telehealth holds the promise of increasing access to care, improving quality of life, and improving quality of care for current and would be home dialysis patients.

A Qualitative Assessment of Mismatch Between Dialysis Modality Selection and Initiation

At our institution, we have noted that end-stage renal disease patients choosing a home dialysis modality after education often initiate renal replacement therapy with in-center hemodialysis (HD) instead. We interviewed 24 such patients (23 choosing peritoneal dialysis [PD], one choosing home HD) to determine reasons for this mismatch. The most common reasons cited for not starting home dialysis were: lack of confidence/concerns about complications, lack of space or home-related issues, a feeling of insufficient education, and perceived medical or social contraindications. We propose several potential strategies to help patients start with their preferred modality.

The WISHED Trial: implementation of an interactive health communication application for patients with chronic kidney disease

Background

Despite many advantages over facility-based therapies, less than 25 % of prevalent dialysis patients in Ontario are on a home therapy. Interactive health communication applications, web-based packages for patients, have been shown to have a beneficial effect on knowledge, social support, self-efficacy, and behavioral and clinical outcomes but have not been evaluated in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Web-based tools designed for patients with CKD exist but to our knowledge have not been assessed in their ability to influence dialysis modality decision-making.

Objective

To determine if a web-based tool increases utilization of a home-based therapy in patients with CKD starting dialysis.

Design

This is a multi-centered randomized controlled study.

Setting

Participants will be recruited from sites in Canada.

Participants

Two hundred and sixty-four consenting patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) less than 20 ml/min/1.73 m² who have received modality education will be enrolled in the study.

Measurements

The primary outcome will be the proportion of participants who are on dialysis using a home-based therapy within 3 months of dialysis initiation. Secondary outcomes will include the proportion of patients intending to perform a home-based modality and measures of dialysis knowledge, decision conflict, and social support.

Methods

The between-group differences in frequencies will be expressed as either absolute risk differences and/or by calculating the odds ratio and its associated 95 % confidence interval.

Conclusions

This study will assess whether access to a website dedicated to supporting and promoting home-based dialysis therapies will increase the proportion of patients with CKD who initiate a home-based dialysis therapy.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT01403454, registration date: July 21, 2011.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40697-016-0120-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

How to Diagnose Solutions to a Quality of Care Problem

To change a particular quality of care outcome within a system, quality improvement initiatives must first understand the causes contributing to the outcome. After the causes of a particular outcome are known, changes can be made to address these causes and change the outcome. Using the example of home dialysis (home hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis), this article within this Moving Points feature on quality improvement will provide health care professionals with the tools necessary to analyze the steps contributing to certain outcomes in health care quality and develop ideas that will ultimately lead to their resolution. The tools used to identify the main contributors to a quality of care outcome will be described, including cause and effect diagrams, Pareto analysis, and process mapping. We will also review common change concepts and brainstorming activities to identify effective change ideas. These methods will be applied to our home dialysis quality improvement project, providing a practical example that other kidney health care professionals can replicate at their local centers.

Palliative peritoneal dialysis: Implementation of a home care programme for terminal patients treated with peritoneal dialysis (PD)

Terminal-stage patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD) are often transferred to haemodialysis as they are unable to perform the dialysis technique themselves since their functional capacities are reduced. We present our experience with five patients on PD with a shortterm life-threatening condition, whose treatment was shared by primary care units and who were treated with a PD modality adapted to their circumstances, which we call Palliative Peritoneal Dialysis.

Brief communication: patient satisfaction with the use of tablet computers: a pilot study in two outpatient home dialysis clinics

Background

Electronic capture of patients’ reports of their health is significant in clinical nephrology research because health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for patients with end-stage renal disease is compromised and assessment by patients of their HRQOL in practice is relatively uncommon.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient satisfaction with and time involved in administering HRQOL and symptom assessment measures using tablet computers in two outpatient home dialysis clinics.

Design

A cross-sectional observational study design was employed.

Setting

The study was conducted in two home dialysis clinics.

Patients

Fifty-six patients participated in the study; 35 males (63%) and 21 females (37%) with a mean age of 66 ± 12 (36-90 years old) were included. Forty-nine participants were on peritoneal dialysis (87%), 6 on home hemodialysis (11%), and 1 on nocturnal home hemodialysis (2%).

Measurements

Measures included the Kidney Disease Quality of Life-36 (KDQOL-36), the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and Participant’s Level of Satisfaction in Using a Tablet Computer.

Methods

Using a tablet computer, participants completed the three measures. Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations were calculated.

Results

Participants’ satisfaction with use of the tablet computer was high; 66% were “very satisfied”, 7% “satisfied”, 2% “slightly satisfied”, and 18% “neutral”. On the 7-point Likert-type scale, the mean satisfaction score was 5.11 (SD = 1.6). Mean time to complete the measures was: Level of Satisfaction 1.15 minutes (SD = 0.41), ESAS 2.55 minutes (SD = 1.04), and KDQOL 9.56 minutes (SD = 2.03); the mean time to complete all three instruments was 13.19 minutes (SD = 2.42). There were no significant correlations between level of satisfaction and age, gender, HRQOL, time taken to complete surveys, computer experience, or comfort with technology. Comfort with technology and computer experience were highly correlated, r = .7, p (one-tailed) < 0.01.

Limitations

Limitations include lack of generalizability because of a small self-selected sample of relatively healthy patients and a lack of psychometric testing on the measure of satisfaction.

Conclusions

Participants were satisfied with the platform and the time involved for completion of instruments was modest. Routine use of HRQOL measures for clinical purposes may be facilitated through use of tablet computers.

Thinking outside the box-identifying patients for home dialysis

Home dialysis modalities are underutilized in the USA with only 8% of the dialysis patients undergoing renal replacement therapy at home versus 92% being treated with center hemodialysis. This is in contrast to the nephrology professionals’ opinion about the best dialysis therapy and their potential choice in the hypothetical situation of choosing a dialysis modality for themselves. Pre-dialysis education changes the distribution of dialysis modality significantly, as 50% of informed patients choose home dialysis. Close collaboration among nephrology professionals, patients and providers is required to make home therapy a reality for any interested patient.