home hemodialysis
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

525
(FIVE YEARS 98)

H-INDEX

31
(FIVE YEARS 3)

Author(s):  
Sullivan John D

From the establishment of nearly universal health coverage for end stage renal disease in 1972 to 2021, the primary treatment modality has been in-center hemodialysis despite significant advances in home therapies such as peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis. There are many theories as to why peritoneal and home hemodialysis lack so far behind in prescriptions with profitability and or a patient’s compliance or support leading the logical explanations. But 2020 was a different year with the surge in COVID-19 cases.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilyas Khan ◽  
Liliane Pintelon ◽  
Harry Martin ◽  
Rahmat Ali Khan

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-237
Author(s):  
Christian Verger ◽  
Emmanuel Fabre ◽  
Pierre-Yves Durand ◽  
Jacques Chanliau ◽  
Isabelle Vernier ◽  
...  

Aims of the study: to assess the frequency of symptomatic Covid-19 in home dialysis patients and its influence on the number of patients treated at home in dialysis units of centers included in the French-speaking peritoneal and home hemodialysis Registry (RDPLF). Focus is placed on patients treated by peritoneal dialysis (PD) in mainland France. Results: in home hemodialysis (HHD)the incidence is 6% in Belgium and 4.8% in mainland France. On peritoneal dialysis it is 10.6% in Belgium, 6.7% in mainland France, 10.8% in Morocco and 11.5% in Tunisia. Lethality is less than 5% in HHD and between 8.4% and 42.7% in PD depending on age and associated comorbidities. In France, the percentage of patients who have had symptomatic Covid-19 is lower on home dialysis, all methods combined. Nevertheless, among the home methods, the higher frequencies and severities are observed in mainland France in home assisted PD: these are the oldest and most co-morbid patients. Transfers from PD to in center hemodialysis have increased during Covid-19 pandemic while the number of transplants has decreased. Conclusion: if the drop in the number of transplants can be explained by a reduced availability of operating theaters and surgical teams during a pandemic period, it is paradoxical that the prescription of home dialysis, which should be supposed to limit the risk of contagion, has decreased. More investigation should be performed to understand this paradox.  


2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-48
Author(s):  
Andreas Pierratos ◽  
Athanasios Roumeliotis
Keyword(s):  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. e0253966
Author(s):  
James Fotheringham ◽  
Tania Barnes ◽  
Louese Dunn ◽  
Sonia Lee ◽  
Steven Ariss ◽  
...  

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.


Author(s):  
David J. Semple ◽  
Matthew Sypek ◽  
Shahid Ullah ◽  
Christopher Davies ◽  
Stephen McDonald

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document