Patient-Centered Quality Measures for Dialysis Care: A Report of a Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) Scientific Workshop Sponsored by the National Kidney Foundation

Providing high-quality patient-centered care is the central mission of dialysis facilities. Assessing quality and patient-centeredness of dialysis care is necessary for continuous dialysis facility improvement. Based predominantly on readily measured items, current quality measures in dialysis care emphasize biochemical and utilization outcomes, with very few patient-reported items. Additionally, current metrics often do not account for patient preferences and may compromise patient-centered care by limiting the ability of providers to individualize care targets, such as dialysis adequacy, based on patient priorities rather than a fixed numerical target. Developing, implementing, and maintaining a quality program using readily quantifiable data while also allowing for individualization of care targets that emphasize the goals of patients and their care partners provided the motivation for a September 2022 Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) Workshop on Patient-Centered Quality Measures for Dialysis Care. Workshop participants focused on 4 questions: (1) What are the outcomes that are most important to patients and their care partners? (2) How can social determinants of health be accounted for in quality measures? (3) How can individualized care be effectively addressed in population-level quality programs? (4) What are the optimal means for collecting valid and robust patient-reported outcome data? Workshop participants identified numerous gaps within the current quality system and favored a conceptually broader, but not larger, quality system that stresses highly meaningful and adaptive measures that incorporate patient-centered principles, individual life goals, and social risk factors. Workshop participants also identified a need for new, low-burden tools to assess patient goals and priorities.

[Implementing vascular access protection indicators (VAPI) in dialysis: an innovation in quality of care]

Between 2013 and 2021, indicators of vascular access protection (IPAV) integrating a census of haematomas and multiple punctures were set up on the active file of chronic kidney failure patients with a vascular access dialyzed in Monaco's private haemodialysis center. They could help reduce the occurrence of complications and improve the quality of care offered to patients. This article reports on the results obtained before and after the introduction of this quality approach.

Understanding the Tradeoffs Between Travel Burden and Quality of Care for In-center Hemodialysis Patients

BACKGROUND

Renal dialysis is a lifesaving but demanding therapy, requiring 3 weekly treatments of multiple-hour durations. Though travel times and quality of care vary across facilities, the extent to which patients are willing and able to engage in weighing tradeoffs is not known. Since 2015, Medicare has summarized and reported quality data for dialysis facilities using a star rating system. We estimate choice models to assess the relative roles of travel distance and quality of care in explaining patient choice of facility.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Using national data on 2 million patient-years from 7198 dialysis facilities and 4-star rating releases, we estimated travel distance to patients' closest facilities, incremental travel distance to the next closest facility with a higher star rating, and the difference in ratings between these 2 facilities. We fit mixed effects logistic regression models predicting whether patients dialyzed at their closest facilities.

RESULTS

Median travel distance was 4 times that in rural (10.9 miles) versus urban areas (2.6 miles). Higher differences in rating [odds ratios (OR): 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.50-0.62] and greater area deprivation (OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.48-0.53) were associated with lower odds of attending one's closest facility. Stratified models were also fit based on urbanicity. For rural patients, excess travel was associated with higher odds of attending the closer facility (per 10 miles; OR: 1.05; 95% CI: 1.04-1.06). Star rating differences were associated with lower odds of receiving care from the closest facility among urban (OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.51-0.63) and rural patients (OR: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.08-0.44).

CONCLUSIONS

Most dialysis patients have higher rated facilities located not much further than their closest facility, suggesting many patients could evaluate tradeoffs between distance and quality of care in where they receive dialysis. Our results show that such tradeoffs likely occur. Therefore, quality ratings such as the Dialysis Facility Compare (DFC) Star Rating may provide actionable information to patients and caregivers. However, we were not able to assess whether these associations reflect a causal effect of the Star Ratings on patient choice, as the Star Ratings served only as a marker of quality of care.

Top 100 cited articles on hemodialysis: A bibliometric analysis

INTRODUCTION

This study was conducted to better understand hemodialysis by reviewing the most-cited articles related to it.

METHODS

We searched articles on the Web of Science and selected the 100 most frequently cited articles. Subsequently, we reviewed these articles and identified their characteristics.

RESULTS

The 100 most frequently cited articles were published in 21 journals. The majority of these papers were published in the following journals: Kidney International (26 articles), New England Journal of Medicine (18 articles), Journal of the American Society of Nephrology (14 articles), and the American Journal of Kidney Disease (13 articles). The 100 most-cited articles were published in 25 countries. The United States of America was the country with the highest number of publications (65 articles). The University of Michigan was the institution with the highest number of articles (14 articles). FK Port was the author with the largest number of publications (13 articles).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study in the field of nephrology that provides a list of the 100 most-cited articles on hemodialysis. Through this study, clinicians will be able to recognize major academic interests and research trends in hemodialysis.

A breakthrough series collaborative to increase patient participation with hemodialysis tasks: A stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Compared to in-centre, home hemodialysis is associated with superior outcomes. The impact on patient experience and clinical outcomes of consistently providing the choice and training to undertake hemodialysis-related treatment tasks in the in-centre setting is unknown.

METHODS

A stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial in 12 UK renal centres recruited prevalent in-centre hemodialysis patients with sites randomised into early and late participation in a 12-month breakthrough series collaborative that included data collection, learning events, Plan-Study-Do-Act cycles, and teleconferences repeated every 6 weeks, underpinned by a faculty, co-production, materials and a nursing course. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients undertaking five or more hemodialysis-related tasks or home hemodialysis. Secondary outcomes included independent hemodialysis, quality of life, symptoms, patient activation and hospitalisation. ISRCTN Registration Number 93999549.

RESULTS

586 hemodialysis patients were recruited. The proportion performing 5 or more tasks or home hemodialysis increased from 45.6% to 52.3% (205 to 244/449, difference 6.2%, 95% CI 1.4 to 11%), however after analysis by step the adjusted odds ratio for the intervention was 1.63 (95% CI 0.94 to 2.81, P = 0.08). 28.3% of patients doing less than 5 tasks at baseline performed 5 or more at the end of the study (69/244, 95% CI 22.2-34.3%, adjusted odds ratio 3.71, 95% CI 1.66-8.31). Independent or home hemodialysis increased from 7.5% to 11.6% (32 to 49/423, difference 4.0%, 95% CI 1.0-7.0), but the remaining secondary endpoints were unaffected.

CONCLUSIONS

Our intervention did not increase dialysis related tasks being performed by a prevalent population of centre based patients, but there was an increase in home hemodialysis as well as an increase in tasks among patients who were doing fewer than 5 at baseline. Further studies are required that examine interventions to engage people who dialyse at centres in their own care.

Renal staffs' understanding of patients' experiences of transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis and their views on service improvement: A multi-site qualitative study in England and Australia

INTRODUCTION

Many studies have explored patients' experiences of dialysis and other treatments for kidney failure. This is the first qualitative multi-site international study of how staff perceive the process of a patient's transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis. Current literature suggests that transitions are poorly coordinated and may result in increased patient morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to understand staff perspectives of transition and to identify areas where clinical practice could be improved.

METHODS

Sixty-one participants (24 UK and 37 Australia), representing a cross-section of kidney care staff, took part in seven focus groups and sixteen interviews. Data were analysed inductively and findings were synthesised across the two countries.

RESULTS

For staff, good clinical practice included: effective communication with patients, well planned care pathways and continuity of care. However, staff felt that how they communicated with patients about the treatment journey could be improved. Staff worried they inadvertently made patients fear haemodialysis when trying to explain to them why going onto peritoneal dialysis first is a good option. Despite staff efforts to make transitions smooth, good continuity of care between modalities was only reported in some of the Australian hospitals where, unlike the UK, patients kept the same consultant. Timely access to an appropriate service, such as a psychologist or social worker, was not always available when staff felt it would be beneficial for the patient. Staff were aware of a disparity in access to kidney care and other healthcare professional services between some patient groups, especially those living in remote areas. This was often put down to the lack of funding and capacity within each hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

This research found that continuity of care between modalities was valued by staff but did not always happen. It also highlighted a number of areas for consideration when developing ways to improve care and provide appropriate support to patients as they transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis.

COVID-19 infection control measures and outcomes in urban dialysis centers in predominantly African American communities

BACKGROUND

Emory Dialysis serves an urban and predominantly African American population at its four outpatient dialysis facilities. We describe COVID-19 infection control measures implemented and clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 in the Emory Dialysis facilities.

METHODS

Implementation of COVID-19 infection procedures commenced in February 2020. Subsequently, COVID-19 preparedness assessments were conducted at each facility. Patients with COVID-19 from March 1-May 31, 2020 were included; with a follow-up period spanning March-June 30, 2020. Percentages of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 were calculated, and characteristics of COVID-19 patients were summarized as medians or percentage. Baseline characteristics of all patients receiving care at Emory Dialysis (i.e. Emory general dialysis population) were presented as medians and percentages.

RESULTS

Of 751 dialysis patients, 23 (3.1%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. The median age was 67.0 years and 13 patients (56.6%) were female. Eleven patients (47.8%) were residents of nursing homes. Nineteen patients (82.6%) required hospitalization and 6 patients (26.1%) died; the average number of days from a positive SARS-CoV-2 (COVID) test to death was 16.8 days (range 1-34). Two patients dialyzing at adjacent dialysis stations and a dialysis staff who cared for them, were diagnosed with COVID-19 in a time frame that may suggest transmission in the dialysis facility. In response, universal masking in the facility was implemented (prior to national guidelines recommending universal masking), infection control audits and re-trainings of PPE were also done to bolster infection control practices.

CONCLUSION

We successfully implemented recommended COVID-19 infection control measures aimed at mitigating the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Most of the patients with COVID-19 required hospitalizations. Dialysis facilities should remain vigilant and monitor for possible transmission of COVID-19 in the facility.

Health Technology Assessment of a new water quality monitoring technology: Impact of automation, digitalization and remoteness in dialysis units

Background

Water quality monitoring at the dialysis units (DU) is essential to ensure an appropriate dialysis fluid quality and guarantee an optimal and safe dialysis treatment to patients. This paper aims to evaluate the effectiveness, economic and organizational impact of automation, digitalization and remote water quality monitoring, through a New Water Technology (NWT) at a hospital DU to produce dialysis water, compared to a Conventional Water Technology (CWT).

Methods

A before-and-after study was carried out at the Hospital Clínic Barcelona. Data on CWT was collected during 1-year (control) and 7-month for the NWT (case). Data on water quality, resource use and unit cost were retrospective and prospectively collected. A comparative effectiveness analysis on the compliance rate of quality water parameters with the international guidelines between the NWT and the CWT was conducted. This was followed by a cost-minimization analysis and an organizational impact from the hospital perspective. An extensive deterministic sensitivity analysis was also performed.

Results

The NWT compared to the CWT showed no differences on effectiveness measured as the compliance rate on international requirements on water quality (100% vs. 100%), but the NWT yielded savings of 3,599 EUR/year compared to the CWT. The NWT offered more data accuracy (daily measures: 6 vs. 1 and missing data: 0 vs. 20 days/year), optimization of the DU employees’ workload (attendance to DU: 4 vs. 19 days/month) and workflow, through the remote and continuous monitoring, reliability of data and process regarding audits for quality control.

Conclusions

While the compliance of international recommendations on continuous monitoring was performed with the CWT, the NWT was efficient compared to the CWT, mainly due to the travel time needed by the technical operator to attend the DU. These results were scalable to other economic contexts. Nonetheless, they should be taken with caution either when the NWT equipment/maintenance cost are largely increased, or the workforce involvement is diminished.

Comparing Mortality of Peritoneal and Hemodialysis Patients in an Era of Medicare Payment Reform

BACKGROUND

Prior studies have shown peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients to have lower or equivalent mortality to patients who receive in-center hemodialysis (HD). Medicare's 2011 bundled dialysis prospective payment system encouraged expansion of home-based PD with unclear impacts on patient outcomes. This paper revisits the comparative risk of mortality between HD and PD among patients with incident end-stage kidney disease initiating dialysis in 2006-2013.

RESEARCH DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study comparing 2-year all-cause mortality among patients with incident end-stage kidney disease initiating dialysis via HD and PD in 2006-2013, using data from the US Renal Data System and Medicare. Analysis was conducted using Cox proportional hazards models fit with inverse probability of treatment weighting that adjusted for measured patient demographic and clinical characteristics and dialysis market characteristics.

RESULTS

Of the 449,652 patients starting dialysis between 2006 and 2013, the rate of PD use in the first 90 days increased from 9.3% of incident patients in 2006 to 14.2% in 2013. Crude 2-year mortality was 27.6% for patients dialyzing via HD and 16.7% for patients on PD. In adjusted models, there was no evidence of mortality differences between PD and HD before and after bundled payment (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.89-1.04; P=0.33).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall mortality for HD and PD use was similar and mortality differences between modalities did not change before versus after the 2011 Medicare dialysis bundled payment, suggesting that increased use of home-based PD did not adversely impact patient outcomes.

Precision medicine approach to dialysis including incremental and decremental dialysis regimens

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Conventional standardization of haemodialysis for treatment of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is predicated upon the fixed construct of one disease stage and one patient category. Increasingly recognized are subgroups of patients for whom less-intensive haemodialysis, such as incremental or decremental haemodialysis, could be employed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Almost 30% of patients with incident ESKD have clinical and residual kidney function (RFK) parameters that could accommodate less-intensive haemodialysis. In one study, patients with incident ESKD and substantial RKF treated with low-dose haemodialysis had similar mortality rate as those treated with standard-dose haemodialysis, adding to the evidence that endogenous kidney function -- when present -- can complement less-intensive haemodialysis schedules. Hazards related to incremental haemodialysis include insidious development of fluid overload and higher rates of fluid removal. Finally, deintensification of haemodialysis treatment could be employed in patients with ESKD who seek conservative care.

SUMMARY

A shift in approach to ESKD from a dichotomous frame -- disease presence versus absence -- to stages of dialysis-dependent kidney disease, each stage associated with attuned haemodialysis intensity, has been proposed. Haemodialysis standardization and personalization -- often considered mutually exclusive -- can be combined in incremental haemodialysis. Data from ongoing and future randomized clinical trials, comparing less-intensive with standard haemodialysis schedules, are required to change practice.

Contemporary Management of Severe Acute Kidney Injury and Refractory Cardiorenal Syndrome: JACC Council Perspectives

Acute kidney injury (AKI) and cardiorenal syndrome (CRS) are increasingly prevalent in hospitalized patients with cardiovascular disease and remain associated with poor short- and long-term outcomes. There are no specific therapies to reduce mortality related to either AKI or CRS, apart from supportive care and volume status management. Acute renal replacement therapies (RRTs), including ultrafiltration, intermittent hemodialysis, and continuous RRT are used to manage complications of medically refractory AKI and CRS and may restore normal electrolyte, acid-base, and fluid balance before renal recovery. Patients who require acute RRT have a significant risk of mortality and long-term dialysis dependence, emphasizing the importance of appropriate patient selection. Despite the growing use of RRT in the cardiac intensive care unit, there are few resources for the cardiovascular specialist that integrate the epidemiology, diagnostic workup, and medical management of AKI and CRS with an overview of indications, multidisciplinary team management, and transition off of RRT.

Development of a person-centered interdisciplinary plan-of-care program for dialysis

BACKGROUND

Dialysis care often focuses on outcomes that are of lesser importance to patients than to clinicians. There is growing international interest in individualizing care based on patient priorities, but evidence-based approaches are lacking. The objective of this study was to develop a person-centered dialysis care planning program. To achieve this objective we performed qualitative interviews, responsively developed a novel care planning program and then assessed program content and burden.

METHODS

We conducted 25 concept elicitation interviews with US hemodialysis patients, care partners and care providers, using thematic analysis to analyze transcripts. Interview findings and interdisciplinary stakeholder panel input informed the development of a new care planning program, My Dialysis Plan. We then conducted 19 cognitive debriefing interviews with patients, care partners and care providers to assess the program's content and face validities, comprehensibility and burden.

RESULTS

We identified five themes in concept elicitation interviews: feeling boxed in by the system, navigating dual lives, acknowledging an evolving identity, respecting the individual as a whole person and increasing individualization to enhance care. We then developed a person-centered care planning program and supporting materials that underwent 32 stakeholder-informed iterations. Data from subsequent cognitive interviews led to program revisions intended to improve contextualization and understanding, decrease burden and facilitate implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

My Dialysis Plan is a content-valid, person-centered dialysis care planning program that aims to promote care individualization. Investigation of the program's capacity to improve patient experiences and outcomes is needed.

[Management of the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) coronavirus epidemic in hemodialysis units]

The current outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 represents a special risk for renal patients due to their comorbidities and advanced age. The usual performance of hemodialysis treatments in collective rooms increases the risk. The specific information at this time in this regard is very limited. This manuscript includes a proposal for action to prevent infection in the Nephrology Services, and in particular in Hemodialysis Units, with the objective of early identification of patients who meet the definition of a suspected case of infection by SARS-CoV-2 and propose circuits and mechanisms to carry out hemodialysis treatments. They are recommendations in continuous review and can be modified if the epidemiological situation, the diagnostic and therapeutic options so require.

KDOQI Clinical Practice Guideline for Vascular Access: 2019 Update

The National Kidney Foundation's Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) has provided evidence-based guidelines for hemodialysis vascular access since 1996. Since the last update in 2006, there has been a great accumulation of new evidence and sophistication in the guidelines process. The 2019 update to the KDOQI Clinical Practice Guideline for Vascular Access is a comprehensive document intended to assist multidisciplinary practitioners care for chronic kidney disease patients and their vascular access. New topics include the end-stage kidney disease "Life-Plan" and related concepts, guidance on vascular access choice, new targets for arteriovenous access (fistulas and grafts) and central venous catheters, management of specific complications, and renewed approaches to some older topics. Appraisal of the quality of the evidence was independently conducted by using a Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, and interpretation and application followed the GRADE Evidence to Decision frameworks. As applicable, each guideline statement is accompanied by rationale/background information, a detailed justification, monitoring and evaluation guidance, implementation considerations, special discussions, and recommendations for future research.

Eco-dialysis: fashion or necessity

Hemodialysis (HD) is one of the resource hungry medical interventions. A huge volume of water (about 500 L) and significant amounts of energy (over 7 kW) are used for a hemodialysis session; over a kilogram of waste is produced during this procedure. Thus, HD contributes to global warming while saving patients' lives. In this paper, we showed these crucial points in HD treatment and possible ways (e.g. modifications in dialysate flow rate) to reduce environmental impact maintaining therapy standards.

Immunological Effects of a Single Hemodialysis Treatment

Immune disorders, involving both innate and adaptive response, are common in patients with end-stage renal disease under chronic hemodialysis. Endogenous and exogenous factors, such as uremic toxins and the extracorporeal treatment itself, alter the immune balance, leading to chronic inflammation and higher risk of cardiovascular events. Several studies have previously described the immune effects of chronic hemodialysis and the possibility to modulate inflammation through more biocompatible dialyzers and innovative techniques. On the other hand, very limited data are available on the possible immunological effects of a single hemodialysis treatment. In spite of the lacking information about the immunological reactivity related to a single session, there is evidence to indicate that mediators of innate and adaptive response, above all complement cascade and T cells, are implicated in immune system modulation during hemodialysis treatment. Expanding our understanding of these modulations represents a necessary basis to develop pro-tolerogenic strategies in specific conditions, like hemodialysis in septic patients or the last session prior to kidney transplant in candidates for receiving a graft.

Tunneled hemodialysis catheter care practices and blood stream infection rate in children: results from the SCOPE collaborative

OBJECTIVE

The Standardizing Care to Improve Outcomes in Pediatric End Stage Renal Disease (SCOPE) collaborative seeks to reduce hemodialysis (HD) catheter-associated blood stream infections (CA-BSI) by increasing implementation of standardized HD catheter care bundles. We report HD catheter care practices and HD CA-BSI rates from SCOPE.

METHODS

Catheter care practices and infection events were collected prospectively during the study period, from collaborative implementation in June 2013 through May 2017. For comparative purposes, historical data, including patient demographics and HD CA-BSI events, were collected from the 12 months prior to implementation. Catheter care bundle compliance in 5 care bundle categories was monitored across the post-implementation reporting period at each center via monthly care observation forms. CA-BSI rates were calculated monthly, and reported as number of infections per 100 patient months. Changes in CA-BSI rates were assessed using generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) techniques.

RESULTS

Three hundred twenty-five patients with tunneled HD catheters [median (IQR) age 12 years (6, 16), M 53%, F 47%] at 15 centers were included. A total of 3996 catheter care observations over 4170 patient months were submitted with a median (IQR) 5 (2, 14) observations per patient. Overall bundle compliance was high at 87.6%, with a significant and progressive increase (p < 0.001) in compliance for 4/5 bundle categories over the 48-month study period. The adjusted CA-BSI rate significantly decreased over time from 3.3/100 patient months prior to implementation of the care bundles to 0.8/100 patient months 48 months after care bundle implementation (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Using quality improvement methodology, SCOPE has demonstrated a significant increase in compliance with a majority of HD catheter care practices and a significant reduction in the rate of CA-BSI among children maintained on HD.

Protocol for a prospective, cluster randomized trial to evaluate routine and deferred dialysis initiation (RADDI) in Chinese population

BACKGROUND

The timing of when to initiate dialysis for progressive chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients has not been well established. There has been a strong trend for early dialysis initiation for these patients over the past decades. However, the perceived survival advantage of early dialysis has been questioned by a series of recent observational studies. The only randomized controlled trial (RCT) research on this issue found the all-cause mortality, comorbidities, and quality of life showed no difference between early and late dialysis starters. To better understand optimal timing for dialysis initiation, our research will evaluate the efficacy and safety of deferred dialysis initiation in a large Chinese population.

METHODS

The trial adopts a multicenter, cluster randomized, single-blind (outcomes assessor), and endpoint-driven design. Eligible participants are 18-80 years old, in stable CKD stages 4-5 (eGFR > 7 ml/min /1.73 m2), and with good heart function (NYHA grade I or II). Participants will be randomized into a routine or deferred dialysis group. The reference eGFR at initiating dialysis for asymptomatic patients is 7 ml/min /1.73 m2 (routine dialysis group) and 5 ml/min/1.73 m2 or less (deferred dialysis group) in each group. The primary endpoint will be the difference of all-cause mortality and acute nonfatal cerebro-cardiovascular events between the two groups. The secondary outcomes include hospitalization rate and other safety indices. The primary and secondary outcomes will be analyzed by appropriate statistical methods.

DISCUSSION

This study protocol represents a large, cluster randomized study evaluating deferred and routine dialysis intervention for an advanced CKD population. The reference eGFR to initiate dialysis for both treatment groups is targeted at less than 7 ml/min/1.73m2. With this design, we aim to eliminate lead-time and survivor bias and avoid selection bias and confounding factors. We acknowledge that the study has limitations. Even so, given the low-targeted eGFR values of both arms, this study still has potential economic, health, and scientific implications. This research is unique in that such a low targeted eGFR value has never been studied in a clinical trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial has been approved by ClinicalTrials.gov (Trial registration ID NCT02423655). The date of registration was April 22, 2015.

Clinical practice guideline management of blood borne viruses within the haemodialysis unit

Some people who are receiving dialysis treatment have virus infection such as hepatitis B, hepatitis C and/or HIV that is present in their blood. These infections can be transmitted to other patients if blood is contaminated by the blood of another with a viral infection. Haemodialysis is performed by passing blood from a patient through a dialysis machine, and multiple patients receive dialysis within a dialysis unit. Therefore, there is a risk that these viruses may be transmitted around the dialysis session. This documents sets out recommendations for minimising this risk.There are sections describing how machines and equipment should be cleaned between patients. There are also recommendations for dialysing patients with hepatitis B away from patients who do not have hepatitis B. Patients should be immunised against hepatitis B, ideally before starting dialysis if this is possible. There are guidelines on how and when to do this, for checking whether immunisation is effective, and for administering booster doses of vaccine. Finally there is a section on the measures that should be taken if a patient receiving dialysis is identified as having a new infection of hepatitis B, hepatitis C or HIV.

Renal Association Clinical Practice Guideline on Haemodialysis

This guideline is written primarily for doctors and nurses working in dialysis units and related areas of medicine in the UK, and is an update of a previous version written in 2009. It aims to provide guidance on how to look after patients and how to run dialysis units, and provides standards which units should in general aim to achieve. We would not advise patients to interpret the guideline as a rulebook, but perhaps to answer the question: "what does good quality haemodialysis look like?"The guideline is split into sections: each begins with a few statements which are graded by strength (1 is a firm recommendation, 2 is more like a sensible suggestion), and the type of research available to back up the statement, ranging from A (good quality trials so we are pretty sure this is right) to D (more like the opinion of experts than known for sure). After the statements there is a short summary explaining why we think this, often including a discussion of some of the most helpful research. There is then a list of the most important medical articles so that you can read further if you want to - most of this is freely available online, at least in summary form.A few notes on the individual sections: 1. This section is about how much dialysis a patient should have. The effectiveness of dialysis varies between patients because of differences in body size and age etc., so different people need different amounts, and this section gives guidance on what defines "enough" dialysis and how to make sure each person is getting that. Quite a bit of this section is very technical, for example, the term "eKt/V" is often used: this is a calculation based on blood tests before and after dialysis, which measures the effectiveness of a single dialysis session in a particular patient. 2. This section deals with "non-standard" dialysis, which basically means anything other than 3 times per week. For example, a few people need 4 or more sessions per week to keep healthy, and some people are fine with only 2 sessions per week - this is usually people who are older, or those who have only just started dialysis. Special considerations for children and pregnant patients are also covered here. 3. This section deals with membranes (the type of "filter" used in the dialysis machine) and "HDF" (haemodiafiltration) which is a more complex kind of dialysis which some doctors think is better. Studies are still being done, but at the moment we think it's as good as but not better than regular dialysis. 4. This section deals with fluid removal during dialysis sessions: how to remove enough fluid without causing cramps and low blood pressure. Amongst other recommendations we advise close collaboration with patients over this. 5. This section deals with dialysate, which is the fluid used to "pull" toxins out of the blood (it is sometimes called the "bath"). The level of things like potassium in the dialysate is important, otherwise too much or too little may be removed. There is a section on dialysate buffer (bicarbonate) and also a section on phosphate, which occasionally needs to be added into the dialysate. 6. This section is about anticoagulation (blood thinning) which is needed to stop the circuit from clotting, but sometimes causes side effects. 7. This section is about certain safety aspects of dialysis, not seeking to replace well-established local protocols, but focussing on just a few where we thought some national-level guidance would be useful. 8. This section draws together a few aspects of dialysis which don't easily fit elsewhere, and which impact on how dialysis feels to patients, rather than the medical outcome, though of course these are linked. This is where home haemodialysis and exercise are covered. There is an appendix at the end which covers a few aspects in more detail, especially the mathematical ideas. Several aspects of dialysis are not included in this guideline since they are covered elsewhere, often because they are aspects which affect non-dialysis patients too. This includes: anaemia, calcium and bone health, high blood pressure, nutrition, infection control, vascular access, transplant planning, and when dialysis should be started.

Sodium bicarbonate catheter lock solution reduces hemodialysis catheter loss due to catheter-related thrombosis and blood stream infection: an open-label clinical trial

BACKGROUND

There is no ideal lock solution that prevents hemodialysis (HD) catheter loss due to catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) and catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI). Catheter loss is associated with increased hospitalization and high inpatient costs. Sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) demonstrates anti-infective and anticoagulation properties with a good safety profile, making it an ideal lock solution development target.The objective of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of using sodium bicarbonate catheter lock solution (SBCLS) as a means of preventing HD catheter loss due to CRT and CRBSI.

METHODS

The study took place in a community hospital in Brooklyn, NY, USA. All admitted patients ≥18 years of age who needed HD treatment through CVC were included in the study. 451 patients included in the study were provided SBCLS or NSCLS post-dialysis. Catheter loss due to CRT or CRBSI was evaluated over a period of 546 days.

RESULTS

A total of 452 patients met the criteria; 1 outlier was excluded, 226 were in the NSCLS group and 225 were in the SBCLS group. There were no significant differences between groups in comorbidities at the outset. The NSCLS group had CRT and CRBSI rates of 4.1 and 2.6/1000 catheter days (CD), respectively, compared with 0.17/1000 CD for both outcomes in the SBCLS group. SBCLS patients had a significantly reduced catheter loss rate due to CRT (P < 0.0001) and CRBSI (P = 0.0004). NSCLS patients had higher odds of losing their catheter due to CRT {odds ratio [OR] 26.6 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.57-198.52]} and CRBSI [OR 15.9 (95% CI 2.09-121.61)] during the study period.

CONCLUSION

The novel approach of using SBCLS was found to be safe and was statistically superior to normal saline in preventing HD catheter loss due to CRT and CRBSI. NaHCO3 solution is inexpensive, readily available in various settings and holds the potential to decrease hospitalization, length of stay and dialysis-related costs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Maimonides Medical Center Investigational Review Board, Study IRB 2015-06-25-CIH. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03627884.

Assessment of dialysis initiation by a fuzzy mathematics equation (ADIFE): a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Starting dialysis early or late both result in a low quality of life and a poor prognosis in patients undergoing haemodialysis. However, there remains no consensus on the optimal timing of dialysis initiation, mainly because of a lack of suitable methods to assess variations in dialysis initiation time. We have established a novel equation named DIFE (Dialysis Initiation based on Fuzzy-mathematics Equation) through a retrospective, multicentre clinical cohort study in China to determine the most suitable timing of dialysis initiation. The predictors of the DIFE include nine biochemical markers and clinical variables that together influence dialysis initiation. To externally validate the clinical accuracy of DIFE, we designed the assessment of DIFE (ADIFE) study as a prospective, open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial to assess the clinical outcomes among patients who initiate dialysis in an optimal start dialysis group and a late-start dialysis group, based on DIFE.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A total of 388 enrolled patients with end-stage renal disease will be randomised 1:1 to the optimal start dialysis group, with a DIFE value between 30 and 35, or the late-start dialysis group, with a DIFE value less than 30, using the Randomization and Trial Supply Management system. Participants will be assessed for changes in signs and symptoms, dialysis mode and parameters, biochemical and inflammatory markers, Subjective Global Assessment, Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form, Cognitive Assessment, medical costs, adverse events and concomitant medication at baseline, predialysis visiting stage and postdialysis visiting stage, every 12-24 weeks. The following data will be recorded on standardised online electronic case report forms. The primary endpoint is 3-year all-cause mortality. The secondary endpoints include non-fatal cerebrocardiovascular events, annual hospitalisation rate, quality of life, medical costs and haemodialysis related complications.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University China (registration no: YJ-KY-2017-119) and the ethics committees of all participating centres. The final results of the ADIFE trial will be presented to the study sponsor, clinical researchers and the patient and public involvement reference group. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, Clinical Practice Guidelines and at scientific meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrial.gov. Registry (NCT03385902); pre-results.

[Incorporate hemodialysis patient's satisfaction to quality management]

INTRODUCTION

Application of Quality Function Deployment (QFD) methodology can be used to identify the requirements that determine patient perception of health care quality. The objective was to identify patient requirements in a Hemodialysis unit using QFD.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Setting was Hemodialysis unit at the Infanta Sofia Hospital (Madrid). Matrix analysis based on the QFD method was performed from the qualitative approaches of the patient satisfaction. This was expressed by the Donabedian quality measurement model with a focus group for qualitative data.

RESULTS

The analysis of the matrix revealed the characteristics of the process which have a major influence on the service quality, related to patient satisfaction, this were recorded for future designs, services and improvements of the process, through a reliable healthcare monitoring service.

CONCLUSIONS

QFD allows understanding patients requirements and to include them for continuous improvement of quality in services.

Hemodialysis Quality Metrics in the First Year Following a Failed Kidney Transplant

BACKGROUND

Failure of a previously transplanted kidney is a common cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and represents 5% of incident dialysis patients in the United States. Patients with native kidney failure ESRD (Nat-ESRD) who receive predialysis care from a nephrologist have better outcomes in the first 12 months on dialysis than those who don't. Because many patients with a failed kidney transplant ESRD (Tx-ESRD) receive care from nephrologists, they would also be expected to have good dialysis outcomes. We sought to compare the quality metrics of Tx-ESRD patients and Nat-ESRD patients during the first 12 months of hemodialysis.

METHODS

We used data from the United States Renal Data System to identify hemodialysis patients who began treatment between May 2012 and December 2013 and who received nephrology care prior to starting hemodialysis. Quality metrics by quarter for the first 12 months of treatment were dichotomized according to practice guidelines to determine the percentage of patients in each quarter who met quality of care goals.

RESULTS

Compared to Nat-ESRD (n = 96,063) patients, Tx-ESRD (n = 5,528) patients had 10-19% lower rates of at goal hemoglobin levels, 6-12% lower rates of at goal serum phosphorus, and 3-11% lower rates of at goal albumin levels. Compared to Nat-ESRD patients, -Tx-ESRD patients had a 6% higher rate of fistula use in the first quarter but a 3-7% lower rate in subsequent quarters.

CONCLUSIONS

Tx-ESRD patients have worse quality metrics related to anemia, phosphorus, albumin, and vascular access compared to Nat-ESRD patients. Nephrology care for patients with Tx-ESRD should be improved to address these quality metrics gaps.

Pediatric intradialytic hypotension: recommendations from the Pediatric Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy (PCRRT) Workgroup

Intradialytic hypotension (IDH) is a common adverse event resulting in premature interruption of hemodialysis, and consequently, inadequate fluid and solute removal. IDH occurs in response to the reduction in blood volume during ultrafiltration and subsequent poor compensatory mechanisms due to abnormal cardiac function or autonomic or baroreceptor failure. Pediatric patients are inherently at risk for IDH due to the added difficulty of determining and attaining an accurate dry weight. While frequent blood pressure monitoring, dialysate sodium profiling, ultrafiltration-guided blood volume monitoring, dialysate cooling, hemodiafiltration, and intradialytic mannitol and midodrine have been used to prevent IDH, they have not been extensively studied in pediatric population. Lack of large-scale studies on IDH in children makes it difficult to develop evidence-based management guidelines. Here, we aim to review IDH preventative strategies in the pediatric population and outlay recommendations from the Pediatric Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy (PCRRT) Workgroup. Without strong evidence in the literature, our recommendations from the expert panel reflect expert opinion and serve as a valuable guide.

Management of adults with diabetes on the haemodialysis unit: summary of guidance from the Joint British Diabetes Societies and the Renal Association

Diabetic nephropathy remains the principal cause of end-stage renal failure in the UK and its prevalence is set to increase. People with diabetes and end-stage renal failure on maintenance haemodialysis are highly vulnerable, with complex comorbidities, and are at high risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes, the leading cause of mortality in this population. The management of people with diabetes receiving maintenance haemodialysis is shared between diabetes and renal specialist teams and the primary care team, with input from additional healthcare professionals providing foot care, dietary support and other aspects of multidisciplinary care. In this setting, one specialty may assume that key aspects of care are being provided elsewhere, which can lead to important components of care being overlooked. People with diabetes and end-stage renal failure require improved delivery of care to overcome organizational difficulties and barriers to communication between healthcare teams. No comprehensive guidance on the management of this population has previously been produced. These national guidelines, the first in this area, bring together in one document the disparate needs of people with diabetes on maintenance haemodialysis. The guidelines are based on the best available evidence, or on expert opinion where there is no clear evidence to inform practice. We aim to provide clear advice to clinicians caring for this vulnerable population and to encourage and improve education for clinicians and people with diabetes to promote empowerment and self-management.

Is the mean platelet volume a predictive marker of a high in-hospital mortality of acute cardiorenal syndrome patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy?

A high mean platelet volume (MPV) level has been demonstrated to predict poor clinical outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease. However, the relationship between MPV and mortality in patients with acute cardiorenal syndrome (ACRS) is unknown. Therefore, we investigated the predictive value of MPV for in-hospital mortality of patients with ACRS who received continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) in this study.We retrospectively analyzed the demographics, etiology, severity of illness, prognosis, and risk factors of ACRS patients who underwent CRRT in our hospital from January 2009 to December 2014. Patients were classified into 2 groups based on the prognosis and timing of CRRT. The receiver operating characteristic curve was used to examine the performance of MPV in predicting in-hospital mortality. Baseline characteristics, clinical, and hematological parameters at CRRT initiation were compared between the 2 groups. Factors influencing in-hospital mortality were analyzed by univariate logistic regression analysis.The median age of patients was 74 years. Acute myocardial infarction was the most common cause of ACRS, followed by acute decompensated heart failure. The in-hospital mortality was 51.4%. Age, number of organ failure, APACHE II score, and MPV in the nonsurvivors were significantly higher than those in the survivors (P < .05). However, the cardiac function and mean arterial pressure were significantly lower in the nonsurvivors (P < .05). The prognosis of the early intervention group was better than the late-intervention group, but no significant difference was found (P > .05). The area under the curve (AUC) for in hospital mortality based on MPV was 0.735. Univariate analysis showed that age, cardiac function NYHA class, number of organ failure, APACHE II score, MAP, MPV, and use of vasopressors were associated with the prognosis of patients (P < .05).These findings suggest that the prognosis of patients with ACRS who received CRRT was poor, and MPV might be useful as a marker for predicting the in-hospital mortality of these patients.

Report of the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) Consensus Workshop on Establishing a Core Outcome Measure for Hemodialysis Vascular Access

Vascular access outcomes in hemodialysis are critically important for patients and clinicians, but frequently are neither patient relevant nor measured consistently in randomized trials. A Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) consensus workshop was convened to discuss the development of a core outcome measure for vascular access. 13 patients/caregivers and 46 professionals (clinicians, policy makers, industry representatives, and researchers) attended. Participants advocated for vascular access function to be a core outcome based on the broad applicability of function regardless of access type, involvement of a multidisciplinary team in achieving a functioning access, and the impact of access function on quality of life, survival, and other access-related outcomes. A core outcome measure for vascular access required demonstrable feasibility for implementation across different clinical and trial settings. Participants advocated for a practical and flexible outcome measure with a simple actionable definition. Integrating patients' values and preferences was warranted to enhance the relevance of the measure. Proposed outcome measures for function included "uninterrupted use of the access without the need for interventions" and "ability to receive prescribed dialysis," but not "access blood flow," which was deemed too expensive and unreliable. These recommendations will inform the definition and implementation of a core outcome measure for vascular access function in hemodialysis trials.

Clinicians' and researchers' perspectives on establishing and implementing core outcomes in haemodialysis: semistructured interview study

OBJECTIVES

To describe the perspectives of clinicians and researchers on identifying, establishing and implementing core outcomes in haemodialysis and their expected impact.

DESIGN

Face-to-face, semistructured interviews; thematic analysis.

STETTING

Twenty-seven centres across nine countries.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifty-eight nephrologists (42 (72%) who were also triallists).

RESULTS

We identified six themes: reflecting direct patient relevance and impact (survival as the primary goal of dialysis, enabling well-being and functioning, severe consequences of comorbidities and complications, indicators of treatment success, universal relevance, stakeholder consensus); amenable and responsive to interventions (realistic and possible to intervene on, differentiating between treatments); reflective of economic burden on healthcare; feasibility of implementation (clarity and consistency in definition, easily measurable, requiring minimal resources, creating a cultural shift, aversion to intensifying bureaucracy, allowing justifiable exceptions); authoritative inducement and directive (endorsement for legitimacy, necessity of buy-in from dialysis providers, incentivising uptake); instituting patient-centredness (explicitly addressing patient-important outcomes, reciprocating trial participation, improving comparability of interventions for decision-making, driving quality improvement and compelling a focus on quality of life).

CONCLUSIONS

Nephrologists emphasised that core outcomes should be relevant to patients, amenable to change, feasible to implement and supported by stakeholder organisations. They expected core outcomes would improve patient-centred care and outcomes.

Effect of Hybrid Blood Purification Treatment on Secondary Hyperparathyroidism for Maintenance Hemodialysis Patients

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the effects of hybrid blood purification treatment on secondary hyperparathyroidism for maintenance hemodialysis (HD) patients.

METHODS

A total of 40 patients were randomly divided into 2 groups: HD combined with hemoperfusion (HD + HP) group (n = 20) and HD group (n = 20). Changes in intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) in these 2 groups were compared before and after treatment, and iPTH levels in the HD + HP group were monitored before and after treatment.

RESULTS

iPTH, β2 microglobulin (β2-MG), and cystatin C (CysC) levels were significantly lower in the HD + HP group than in the HD group (p < 0.05), iPTH levels were significantly higher than at the first day after treatment (p < 0.05), and iPTH level was significantly higher (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The clearance effects of HD + HP on iPTH, β2-MG, and CysC are better than HD alone. Treatment with HD + HP every 2 weeks is recommended for maintenance HD patients.

Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio to Assess Performance of Transplant Referral among Dialysis Facilities

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

For patients with ESRD, referral from a dialysis facility to a transplant center for evaluation is an important step toward kidney transplantation. However, a standardized measure for assessing clinical performance of dialysis facilities transplant access is lacking. We describe methodology for a new dialysis facility measure: the Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Transplant referral data from 8308 patients with incident ESRD within 249 dialysis facilities in the United States state of Georgia were linked with US Renal Data System data from January of 2008 to December of 2011, with follow-up through December of 2012. Facility-level expected referrals were computed from a two-stage Cox proportional hazards model after patient case mix risk adjustment including demographics and comorbidities. The Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio (95% confidence interval) was calculated as a ratio of observed to expected referrals. Measure validity and reliability were assessed.

RESULTS

Over 2008-2011, facility Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios in Georgia ranged from 0 to 4.87 (mean =1.16, SD=0.76). Most (77%) facilities had observed referrals as expected, whereas 11% and 12% had Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios significantly greater than and less than expected, respectively. Age, race, sex, and comorbid conditions were significantly associated with the likelihood of referral, and they were included in risk adjustment for Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratio calculations. The Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios were positively associated with evaluation, waitlisting, and transplantation (r=0.46, 0.35, and 0.20, respectively; P<0.01). On average, approximately 33% of the variability in Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios was attributed to between-facility variation, and 67% of the variability in Standardized Transplantation Referral Ratios was attributed to within-facility variation.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of observed variation in dialysis facility referral performance was due to characteristics within a dialysis facility rather than patient factors included in risk adjustment models. Our study shows a method for computing a facility-level standardized measure for transplant referral on the basis of a pilot sample of Georgia dialysis facilities that could be used to monitor transplant referral performance of dialysis facilities.

Early winners and losers in dialysis center pay-for-performance

BACKGROUND

We examined the association of dialysis facility characteristics with payment reductions and change in clinical performance measures during the first year of the United States Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) End Stage Renal Disease Quality Incentive Plan (ESRD QIP) to determine its potential impact on quality and disparities in dialysis care.

METHODS

We linked the 2012 ESRD QIP Facility Performance File to the 2007-2011 American Community Survey by zip code and dichotomized the QIP total performance scores-derived from percent of patients with urea reduction rate > 65, hemoglobin < 10 g/dL, and hemoglobin > 12 g/dL-as 'any' versus 'no' payment reduction. We characterized associations between payment reduction and dialysis facility characteristics and neighborhood demographics, and examined changes in facility outcomes between 2007 and 2010.

RESULTS

In multivariable analysis, facilities with any payment reduction were more likely to have longer operation (OR 1.03 per year), a medium or large number of stations (OR 1.31 and OR 1.42, respectively), and a larger proportion of African Americans (OR 1.25, highest versus lowest quartile), all p < 0.05. Most improvement in clinical performance was due to reduced overtreatment of anemia, a decline in the percentage of patients with hemoglobin ≥ 12 g/dL; for-profits and facilities in African American neighborhoods had the greatest reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

In the first year of CMS pay-for-performance, most clinical improvement was due to reduced overtreatment of anemia. Facilities in African American neighborhoods were more likely to receive a payment reduction, despite their large decline in anemia overtreatment.

Willingness to participate in pragmatic dialysis trials: the importance of physician decisional autonomy and consent approach

BACKGROUND

Pragmatic clinical trials embedded in routine delivery of clinical care can lead to improvements in quality of care, but often have design features that raise ethical concerns.

METHODS

We performed a discrete choice experiment and used conjoint analysis to assess how specific attributes of pragmatic dialysis trials influenced patients' and physicians' willingness to have their dialysis facility participate in a hypothetical trial of hypertension management. Electronic survey data were collected from 200 patients enrolled from 11 outpatient hemodialysis units and from 203 nephrologists. The three attributes studied were physicians' treatment autonomy, participants' research burden, and the approach to consent. The influence of each attribute was quantified using mixed-effects logistic regression.

RESULTS

Similar proportions of patients were willing to have their facilities participate in a trial with high vs. low physician autonomy (77% vs. 79%; p = 0.13) and research burden (76% vs. 80%; p = 0.06). Opt-in, opt-out, and notification-only consent approaches were acceptable to most patients (84%, 82%, and 81%, respectively), but compared to each of these consent approaches, fewer patients (66%) were willing to have their facility participate in a trial that used no notification (p < 0.001 for each 2-way comparison). Among the physicians, similar proportions were willing to participate in trials with high and low physician autonomy (61% and 61%, respectively, p = 0.96) or with low and high burden (60 and 61%, respectively, p = 0.79). However, as for the patients, the consent approach influenced trial acceptability with 77%, 69%, and 62% willing to participate using opt-in, opt-out, and notification-only, respectively, compared to no notification (36%) (p < 0.001 for each 2-way comparison).

CONCLUSIONS

Curtailing physician's treatment autonomy and increasing the burden associated with participation did not influence patients' or physicians' willingness to participate in the hypothetical research, suggesting that pragmatic dialysis trials are generally acceptable to patients and physicians. Both patients and physicians preferred consent approaches that include at least some level of patient notification, but the majority of patients were still willing to participate in trials that did not notify patients of the research.

[10 years of external quality assurance in dialysis in Germany: Results and future prospects]

BACKGROUND

In 2006, the Federal Joint Committee introduced a quality assurance programme for ambulatory dialysis treatment in Germany. Regarding the impact of chronic dialysis treatment on the quality of life of patients and on health care costs, quality assurance in dialysis is considered highly relevant. The directive on Quality Assurance in Dialysis (QSD-RL) established an external quality assurance programme on the basis of the assessment of certain quality parameters combined with an internal quality management system based on benchmarking parameters in all dialysis practices and centres. Data on quality parameters are collected and analysed quarterly. Regional associations of statutory health insurance physicians take responsibility for quality improvement measures and sanctions. This article aims to provide an overview of the development of quality parameters from 2008 to 2015.

METHODS

We analysed the summarised annual quality reports published on the website of the Federal Joint Committee between 2009 and 2016. We present results on the so-called core quality parameters duration and frequency of dialysis sessions (both for haemodialysis patients), wKt/V for peritoneal dialysis patients, and percentage of haemodialysis patients with central venous catheters which has only been measured since 2014.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

In 2015, 92,000 patients received outpatient dialysis. Between 2008 and 2015, the results for the core quality parameters duration and frequency of haemodialysis improved while the results for wKt/V seemingly show an unfavourable trend. The percentage of patients with central venous catheters appears to be quite high, and thus indicates that there is potential for quality improvement.

FUTURE PERSPECTIVES

For the future, the Federal Joint Committee has resolved to merge the quality assurance programmes in dialysis and in kidney transplantation into a newly designed programme that has the potential to follow patients through all stages and kinds of renal replacement therapy and to focus on further aspects of treatment quality.

The Burden of Tunneled Central Venous Catheters for Hemodialysis in a County Hospital

Prolonged use of central venous catheters (CVCs) for hemodialysis (HD) is associated with greater morbidity and mortality when compared with autogenous arteriovenous fistulas (AVF). The objective was to assess compliance with CVC guidelines in adults referred for hemoaccess at a county teaching hospital. Out of 256 patients, 172 (67.2%) were male, with a mean age of 50.0 ± 12.4 years. Overall 62.5 per cent initiated dialysis via CVC. Patients were divided into two groups (those with CVC (62.5%) and those without (37.5%)). Male gender was associated with initiation of dialysis via CVC versus no CVC (72.5 vs 58.3%, P = 0.02), as was a history of prior vascular access (P < 0.01). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding age, diabetes, smoking, ambulatory status, or insurance status. There were no differences in gender, age, insurance status, or prior vascular access between prolonged CVC use (≥90 days) and short-term CVC use (<90 days). We conclude that most patients initiated HD with CVC and exceed the recommended CVC duration. Men are more likely to initiate HD via CVC. Insurance status was not associated with CVC use. Multidisciplinary action may address barriers to reducing CVC duration.