A pilot project evaluating a fixed drainage system (U-Drain) for automated peritoneal dialysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 089686082110359
Author(s):  
Dimitrios Poulikakos ◽  
Joanne Martin ◽  
Joanne Collier ◽  
David Lewis

U-Drain is a fixed drainage system for automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) connecting the dialysis effluent outflow directly to the household drainage system thus avoiding the need for drain bags, with considerable potential advantages for patient convenience and reduction of plastic clinical waste. Here we present a pilot project reporting on U-Drain patient and staff experience based on questionnaires and on the safety of the technology derived from analysis of characteristics of peritonitis episodes. Overall, 15 patients were included in the pilot project and were followed up over 3 years; 11 patients completed a questionnaire exploring their experiences of APD and U-Drain. A family member 55%, carer 10%, healthcare assistant 10% and patient themselves 25% would normally carry the full drainage bags for disposal. Following the installation of U-Drain, 90% of patients reported that the system saved them time setting up and clearing the machine after dialysis, 80% noted a reduction in storage space required for consumables and all patients noted a reduction in non-recyclable waste requiring disposal. All patients who completed the questionnaire were very satisfied with the installation. All staff members who completed the questionnaire reported that their role was easier and the system was time saving. In total, there were 8 peritonitis episodes, including 2 recurrent infections due to biofilm, over 313 patient months follow up. There was no increase in incidence of peritonitis infection (0.3 episodes per year at risk) compared to that in the unit’s population (0.64, 0.42 and 0.5 episodes per year at risk for the years 2017, 2018 and 2019, respectively) or delays in diagnosis. Approximately 0.8 kg of non-recyclable clinical waste was saved per treatment day from domestic waste by avoiding the use of PD drain bags. This pilot demonstrates increased patient satisfaction and acceptable safety profile of U-Drain technology.

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gianpaolo Amici ◽  
Antonina Lo Cicero ◽  
Mery Zuccolo ◽  
Rosella Ferraro Mortellaro ◽  
Dino Romanini ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and Aims We conducted an observational study in a group of patients in automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) to evaluate the impact of the introduction and the long-term use of a telemedicine system for remote patient monitoring (RPM, Claria Sharesource Baxter). Method From April 1 2017 to December 31 2019 (33 months) we followed 42 APD patients with RPM, sex F 20 M 22, age 70±14 years, on PD treatment for median 10 (IQR 3-23) months, distance from the center 18±14 km in mountain and hill area. Have been studied 505 months of RPM overall, per patient median 9 (IQR 3-19) months, corresponding to 11685 APD sessions overall, per patient median 206 (IQR 52-457) sessions. Results Have been registered 1125 alarms (red flags) overall, per patient median 9 (IQR 1-45) alarms, rate 2.2 alarms patient-month (0.1 alarms per session). Analyzing the causes of the alarms: “dwell time lost” (>45 min) 1006 (89%), “drain anticipation” (>2 times) 22 (2%), “fill or dwell bypass” (>3 times) 15 (1%), “various causes” (>10 times) 86 (8%). “Various causes” alarm group sums mainly slow drain for set kinking and insufficient drain volume. We count 195 remote modifications of dialysis program overall, median per patient 3 (IQR 1-7), rate 0.02 patient month with a ratio 0.2 modifications per alarm. Looking to program modification, the alarm type specifically linked to modifications has been insufficient drain volume of the “various causes” group (36 events, 18% of all modifications). We found a positive correlation between the number of treatments and alarms (r=0.534, p<0.001). In the observation period the overall hospitalization days were 403, rate 0.8 days patient month, ratio 0.02 hospitalization days per APD RPM session and ratio 0.4 hospitalization days per alarm. Conclusion The study shows that APD with RPM improves patients’ follow-up changing the organization of the center. In the long term the telemedicine system shows the advantages of a careful and daily monitoring. The rates of alarm, change of prescription and hospitalization resulted very low in our experience.


2013 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 327
Author(s):  
R Ram ◽  
P Charan ◽  
KV Dakshinamurty ◽  
CShyam Sunder Rao ◽  
GDiwaker Naidu ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto José Barone ◽  
María Inés Cámpora ◽  
Nélida Susana Gimenez ◽  
Liliana Ramirez ◽  
Sergio Alberto Panese ◽  
...  

For renal replacement therapy, overall survival is more important than the choice of currently available individual therapy.Objectives. To compare patients and technique survival on peritoneal dialysis as first treatment (PDF) versus after previous haemodialysis (HDPD) and other indicators of follow-up.Methods. We prospectively studied 110 incident patients, during the period from August 4, 1993, to June 30, 2012, for patients and technique survival (Kaplan-Meier) (log rankP< 0.05).Results. Groups: (A) PDF: 37 patients, 24 females, age: 52.2 ± 14.9 years old, time at risk: 2123 patient-months (p/m), mean: 57 ± 42 months; (B) HDPD: 73 patients, 42 females, age: 52.45 ± 14.7 years old, time in haemodialysis: 3569.2 (p/m), range: 3–216 months, mean: 49 ± 45 months, time at risk in PD: 3700 (p/m), mean: 51 ± 49 months. Patients’ survival: (A) PDF: 100%, 76.6%, 65.6%, and 19.7%; (B) HDPD: 95.4%, 65.6%, 43%, and 43% at 12, 60, 120, and 144 months, respectively,P=0.34. Technique: (A) PDF: 100%, 90%, 59.8%, and 24%; (B) HDPD: 94%, 75%, 32%, and 32% at 12, 60, 120, and 144 months, respectively,P=0.40.Conclusions. Comparable patient and technique survival were observed. Peritoneal dialysis enables a greater extension of renal replacement therapy for patients with serious difficulties continuing with haemodialysis.


2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 25-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xuemei Li ◽  
Hong Xu ◽  
Nan Chen ◽  
Zhaohui Ni ◽  
Menghua Chen ◽  
...  

Background There is an emerging practice pattern of automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) in China. We report on outcomes compared to continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) in a Chinese cohort. Methods Data were sourced from the Baxter Healthcare (China) Investment Co. Ltd Patient Support Program database, comprising an inception cohort commencing PD between 1 January 2005 and 13 August 2015. We used time-dependent cause-specific Cox proportional hazards and Fine-Gray competing risks (kidney transplantation, change to hemodialysis) models to estimate relative mortality risk between APD and CAPD. We adjusted or matched for age, gender, employment, insurance, primary renal disease, size of PD program, and year of dialysis inception. We used cluster robust regression to account for center effect. Results We modeled 100,351 subjects from 1,178 centers over 240,803 patient-years. Of these, 368 received APD at some time. Compared with patients on CAPD, those on APD were significantly younger, more likely to be male, employed, self-paying, and from larger programs. Overall, APD was associated with a hazard ratio (HR) for death of 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64 – 0.97) compared with CAPD in Cox proportional hazards models, and 0.76 (0.62 – 0.95) in Fine-Gray competing risks regression models. There was prominent effect modification by follow-up time: benefit was observed only up to 4 years follow-up, after which risk of death was similar. Conclusion Automated peritoneal dialysis is associated with an overall lower adjusted risk of death compared with CAPD in China. Analyses are limited by the likelihood of important selection bias arising from group imbalance, and residual confounding from unavailability of important clinical covariates such as comorbidity and Kt/V.


1999 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 253-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Rodríguez–Carmona ◽  
Miguel Pérez Fontán ◽  
Teresa García Falcón ◽  
Constantino Fernández Rivera ◽  
Francisco Valdés

Objective To compare the incidence of peritonitis and exit-site infection in an ample group of patients undergoing continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) and automated peritoneal dialysis in a single center during a 10-year period. Design Nonrandomized, prospective study. Setting Public, tertiary care hospital providing peritoneal dialysis care to a population of (approximately) 750 000 people. Patients We studied 213 patients on CAPD and 115 on automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) starting therapy between January 1989 and August 1998, with a minimum follow-up of 3 months. Main Outcome Measures Using a multivariate approach, we compared the incidence, clinical course, and outcome of peritonitis and exit-site infections in both groups, controlling for other risk factors for the complications studied. Results The incidence of peritonitis was higher in CAPD than in APD (adjusted difference 0.20 episodes/ patient/year, 95% confidence interval 0.08 – 0.32). There was a trend for CAPD patients to present earlier with peritonitis than APD patients, yet the incidence of and survival to the first exit-site infection were similar in both groups. The etiologic spectrum of infections displayed minor differences between groups. Automated PD patients were more frequently hospitalized for peritonitis, but otherwise, the complications and outcome of peritonitis and exit-site infections did not differ significantly between patients on CAPD and those on APD. Conclusions Automated PD is associated with a lower incidence of peritonitis than is CAPD, while exit-site infection is similarly incident under both modes of therapy. The etiologic spectrum, complications, and outcome of peritonitis and exit-site infection do not differ markedly between CAPD and APD. Prevention of peritonitis should be included among the generic advantages of APD over CAPD.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 245-257
Author(s):  
Mark Marshall ◽  
Gerald P Waters ◽  
Christian Verger

Peritonitis is the most important therapy-related complication of peritoneal dialysis (PD). Unfortunately, many PD centers around the world do not accurately record peritonitis rate, mainly because they cannot ascertain PD patient time-at-risk from “patient flow” data - that is, calculating PD patient-days from dates when patients start and finish PD. We propose a simplified method of calculating PD peritonitis rate using PD patient time-at-risk from “patient stock” data - - that is, calculating PD patient-days from the number of prevalent PD patients at the center at the start of the year and the corresponding number at the end. We compared gold-standard measurements of annual PD peritonitis rates with simplified ones in the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA) / New Zealand (NZ) PD Registry, and Le Registre de Dialyse Péritonéale de Langue Française et hémodialyse à domicile (the RDPLF). A total of 268 centers from 9 countries with 4311 center-years and 110,185 patient-years of follow-up were modelled. Overall agreement was excellent with a concordance correlation coefficient of 0.978 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.975-0.980) in ANZDATA / NZ PD Registry, and 0.978 (0.977-0.980) in the RDPLF. There was statistically significant lower agreement for smaller centers in the registries at 0.972 (0.966-0.976) and 0.973 (0.970-0.976) respectively, although the performance of the simplified formula remains clinically sound in even these centers. The simplified method of calculating PD peritonitis rate is accurate, and will allow more centers around the world to measure, report, and work on reducing PD peritonitis rates.


2001 ◽  
Vol 116 (6) ◽  
pp. 608-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virginia A Cardin ◽  
Richard M Grimes ◽  
Zhi Dong Jiang ◽  
Nancy Pomeroy ◽  
Luther Harrell ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document