The advantages and disadvantages of home hemodialysis

Low-Volume Home Haemodialysis and In-Centre Haemodialysis: Comparison of Dialysis Adequacy in Obese Individuals

Background Although frequent low-flow, low-volume haemodialysis using the NxStage System One is now well-established as an option for home therapy of end-stage chronic kidney disease, its ability to deliver adequate dialysis in people with high BMI remains questionable. This doubt may lead to obese individuals being denied the potential benefits of this modality. To establish if this doubt is justified, we compared dialysis adequacy in two groups of obese individuals; one receiving standard thrice-weekly in-centre haemodialysis and the other receiving frequent haemodialysis at home using the NxStage System One. Methods This is a retrospective observational cohort study of 105 adult dialysis patients with obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2). All had been on dialysis for at least six months. Fifty-five patients receiving in-centre haemodialysis were compared with 50 patients receiving home haemodialysis using NxStage System One. Dialysis adequacy (standard Kt/V calculated by the Daugirdas equation) was compared between the two groups. The clinical characteristics, laboratory test results, and treatment regimens of each group were also compared. Results The in-centre haemodialysis group was older (63.6 ± 12.8 years vs. 58.5 ± 10.9 years, p=0.033) and had a higher Charlson comorbidity score (5.9 ± 2.1 vs. 4.5 ± 2.5, p=0.003). Standard Kt/V was significantly higher in the home haemodialysis group (2.4 ± 0.5) than in the in-centre haemodialysis group (2.2 ± 0.2) (p = 0.006). The mean serum inorganic phosphate was significantly lower in the home haemodialysis group than in the in-centre haemodialysis group (1.6 ± 0.4 mmol/l vs. 1.8 ± 0.5 mmol/l, p = 0.010). There were no statistically significant differences in the usage of antihypertensives, phosphate binders, or erythropoiesis-stimulating agents between the two groups. Conclusions In this study, dialysis adequacy (expressed as standard Kt/V) was superior to that of standard thrice-weekly in-center haemodialysis delivered by frequent low-volume home haemodialysis using the NxStage System One. Hesitancy about recommending frequent low-volume home haemodialysis to obese individuals is therefore unjustified.

Risk assessment of failure during transitioning from in-centre to home haemodialysis

BACKGROUND

Introducing a de-novo home haemodialysis (HHD) program often raises safety concerns as errors could potentially lead to serious adverse events. Despite the complexity of performing haemodialysis at home without the supervision of healthcare staff, HHD has a good safety record. We aim to pre-emptively identify and reduce the risks to our new HHD program by risk assessment and using failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) to identify potential defects in the design and planning of HHD.

METHODS

We performed a general risk assessment of failure during transitioning from in-centre to HHD with a failure mode and effects analysis focused on the highest areas of failure. We collaborated with key team members from a well-established HHD program and one HHD patient. Risk assessment was conducted separately and then through video conference meetings for joint deliberation. We listed all key processes, sub-processes, step and then identified failure mode by scoring based on risk priority numbers. Solutions were then designed to eliminate and mitigate risk.

RESULTS

Transitioning to HHD was found to have the highest risk of failure with 3 main processes and 34 steps. We identified a total of 59 areas with potential failures. The median and mean risk priority number (RPN) scores from failure mode effect analysis were 5 and 38, with the highest RPN related to vascular access at 256. As many failure modes with high RPN scores were related to vascular access, we focussed on FMEA by identifying the risk mitigation strategies and possible solutions in all 9 areas in access-related medical emergencies in a bundled- approach. We discussed, the risk reduction areas of setting up HHD and how to address incidents that occurred and those not preventable.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a safety framework for a de-novo HHD program by performing FMEA in high-risk areas. The involvement of two teams with different clinical experience for HHD allowed us to successfully pre-emptively identify risks and develop solutions.

Quality Assurance and Preventing Serious Adverse Events in the Home Hemodialysis Setting

Patient safety is of the utmost importance in home hemodialysis (HHD). Recognizing that there are risks related to vascular access (both infectious and noninfectious events), dialysis water quality, and procedural-related adverse events (including arteriovenous fistula needle dislodgement or air embolism), there is a need for systematic identification and management. Although adverse events are relatively infrequent in HHD, the potential consequences of these events may include significant morbidity, HHD treatment failure, or death. Therefore, having a systematic framework to review each event, audit and retrain patient technique, disclose and discuss events with patients, home unit staff and device companies (if relevant) and determine preventative measures to avoid future adverse events, is crucial. In this review, we will describe the literature around the types and relative frequency of serious adverse events in the HHD setting and we will outline a quality assurance framework for capturing, managing, and avoiding serious adverse events. Finally, we will describe some of the novel existing approaches to preventing or addressing serious adverse events and critical knowledge gaps that should be evaluated in future study.

Urgent-start peritoneal dialysis versus haemodialysis for people with chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) who require urgent initiation of dialysis but without having a permanent dialysis access have traditionally commenced haemodialysis (HD) using a central venous catheter (CVC). However, several studies have reported that urgent initiation of peritoneal dialysis (PD) is a viable alternative option for such patients.

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to examine the benefits and harms of urgent-start PD compared to HD initiated using a CVC in adults and children with CKD requiring long-term kidney replacement therapy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 25 May 2020 for randomised controlled trials through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. For non-randomised controlled trials, MEDLINE (OVID) (1946 to 11 February 2020) and EMBASE (OVID) (1980 to 11 February 2020) were searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and non-RCTs comparing urgent-start PD to HD initiated using a CVC.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted data and assessed the quality of studies independently. Additional information was obtained from the primary investigators. The estimates of effect were analysed using random-effects model and results were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The GRADE framework was used to make judgments regarding certainty of the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

Overall, seven observational studies (991 participants) were included: three prospective cohort studies and four retrospective cohort studies. All the outcomes except one (bacteraemia) were graded as very low certainty of evidence given that all included studies were observational studies and few events resulting in imprecision, and inconsistent findings. Urgent-start PD may reduce the incidence of catheter-related bacteraemia compared with HD initiated with a CVC (2 studies, 301 participants: RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.41; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence), which translated into 131 fewer bacteraemia episodes per 1000 (95% CI 89 to 145 fewer). Urgent-start PD has uncertain effects on peritonitis risk (2 studies, 301 participants: RR 1.78, 95% CI 0.23 to 13.62; I² = 0%; very low certainty evidence), exit-site/tunnel infection (1 study, 419 participants: RR 3.99, 95% CI 1.2 to 12.05; very low certainty evidence), exit-site bleeding (1 study, 178 participants: RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.33; very low certainty evidence), catheter malfunction (2 studies; 597 participants: RR 0.26, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.91; I² = 66%; very low certainty evidence), catheter re-adjustment (2 studies, 225 participants: RR: 0.13; 95% CI 0.00 to 18.61; I² = 92%; very low certainty evidence), technique survival (1 study, 123 participants: RR: 1.18, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.61; very low certainty evidence), or patient survival (5 studies, 820 participants; RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.07; I² = 0%; very low certainty evidence) compared with HD initiated using a CVC. Two studies using different methods of measurements for hospitalisation reported that hospitalisation was similar although one study reported higher hospitalisation rates in HD initiated using a catheter compared with urgent-start PD.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with HD initiated using a CVC, urgent-start PD may reduce the risk of bacteraemia and had uncertain effects on other complications of dialysis and technique and patient survival. In summary, there are very few studies directly comparing the outcomes of urgent-start PD and HD initiated using a CVC for patients with CKD who need to commence dialysis urgently. This evidence gap needs to be addressed in future studies.

Home haemodialysis in Ireland

BACKGROUND

Home haemodialysis (HHD) has the potential to impact positively on patient outcomes and health resource management. There has been rejuvenated international interest in HHD in recent years.

AIM

We aimed to review the activity and outcomes of the Irish HHD Programme since inception (2009-16).

DESIGN

Retrospective review.

METHODS

Patient data were collected using the national electronic Renal Patient database (eMEDRenal version 3.2.1) and individual centre records. All data were recorded in a coded fashion on a Microsoft Excel Spread-sheet and analysed with Stata SE software.

RESULTS

One hundred and one patients completed training and commenced HHD; a further fourty-five patients were assessed for HHD suitability but did not ultimately dialyse at home. Twenty patients switched to nocturnal HHD when this resource became available. The switch from conventional in-centre dialysis to HHD led to an increase in the mean weekly hours on haemodialysis (HD) and a reduction in medication burden for the majority of patients. The overall rate of arteriovenous fistula (AVF) as primary vascular access was 62%. Most HHD complications were related to access function or access-related infection. Over the 7-years, 29 HHD patients were transplanted and 9 patients died. No deaths resulted directly from a HHD complication or technical issue.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient and technique survival rates compared favourably to published international reports. However, we identified several aspects that require attention. A small number of patients were receiving inadequate dialysis and require targeted education. Ongoing efforts to increase AVF and self-needling rates in HD units must continue. Psychosocial support is critical during the transition between dialysis modalities.

Is replacement modality choice knowledge important in the non-renal multidisciplinary team? Experience from a single UK centre

Dialysis remains the mainstay treatment for patients with end stage renal disease. In the UK, there has been a significant decline in home dialysis despite its benefits and cost effectiveness. Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are often known to other specialties who they may continue to consult when approaching dialysis. We wished to assess the knowledge of the non-renal multidisciplinary team (MDT) regarding home dialysis and establish whether further education was warranted. This was assessed using an online survey sent to specialties likely to deal with CKD patients. In total, 364 questionnaires were sent out with a 26.4% response rate. According to the survey responses, 81.5% of non-renal MDTs lack confidence in discussing home dialysis options with patients and 74.55% feel that they need further education about home dialysis. Targeted education may increase home dialysis uptake by multimorbid CKD patients who have a consistent message delivered by all relevant healthcare teams about the benefits of home dialysis.

Conformity Scores Differentiate Older Hemodialyzed Patients and Patients with Continuous Peritoneal Dialysis

Background

Conformity is a psychological variable related to the propensity of an individual to match his or her behavior and opinion to the perceived social and cultural norm, even if these do not represent the true beliefs of the person. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the psychological variable of conformity is different in two distinct modes of renal replacement therapy (RRT) in end-stage renal disease (ESRD).

Material/Methods

A total of 56 hemodialyzed patients (HD group), 45 continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis patients (CAPD group) and 62 healthy volunteers (CONTR group) were enrolled in the study. The Social Appraisal Questionnaire (SAQ) was employed, and chart review was performed to collect clinical data.

Results

When age was not a factor, the conformity measure was significantly higher in the HD group compared with the CAPD and CONTR groups. The lowest conformity was found in healthy participants who were asked to imagine an acute medical problem. The highest conformity was found in older HD and CAPD patients.

Conclusions

Being chronically ill and having adaptable views may be more favorable traits for coping with ESRD in dialyzed patients, especially in elderly HD patients. On the other hand, conformity can be deleterious if CAPD patients decide to overlook certain facts or not confront the medical aspects of their condition.

Funding and planning: what you need to know for starting or expanding a home hemodialysis program

Planning and funding a home hemodialysis (HD) program requires a well-organized effort and close collaboration between clinicians and administrators. This resource provides guidance on the processes that are involved, including a thorough situational analysis of the dialysis landscape, emphasizing the opportunity for a home HD program; careful consideration of the clinical and operational characteristics of a proposed home HD program at your institution; the development of a compelling business case, highlighting the clinical and organizational benefits of a home HD program; and careful construction and evaluation of a request for proposal.

SURVEY OF STAFF OPINIONS ABOUT EXTENDED HAEMODIALYSIS TREATMENT TIME AND SERVICE IMPLICATIONS

BACKGROUND

We explored the potential impact of staff opinions and service provision upon patient's willingness to recruit to a clinical trial studying the effects of extended treatment time (TT) on haemodialysis (HD), six hours versus four hours for a period of twenty-four weeks.

METHODS

We conducted a local survey of dialysis nurses and a national survey of multidisciplinary HD staff opinions to extended TT including clinical benefits, tolerance to, prescription and ability to accommodate extended TT on in-centre HD programmes.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 56/134 (42%) local nurses and the national survey by 15/72 (21%) of dialysis providers across the UK (35% nurses and 75% other healthcare professionals). The majority of respondents felt extended TT was clinically beneficial but only 42% of nurses would recommend extended TT compared to 95% of non-nursing healthcare professionals (p < 0.0001). Although 45% of nurses felt that it was well tolerated, non-nursing healthcare professionals suggested this was significantly higher at 75% (p < 0.05). The negative impact on service provision was agreed by 83% of nurses with the need to facilitate shifts within a finite time period and pressure to find session spaces being cited.

CONCLUSION

There is conflict between the understanding that extended TT is clinically beneficial and its prescription & delivery to patients. Enrolment to studies examining HD delivery strategies may be influenced by service provision and staff attitudes. In centre HD has been designed to maximise patient throughput and we may need to consider more flexible settings in which to deliver longer treatment time: Home HD maybe a solution.

Debate: Should dialysis at home be mandatory for all suitable ESRD patients?: home-based dialysis therapies are the second choice after transplantation

Since their inception in the 1960s, home-based dialysis therapies have been viable alternatives to conventional thrice weekly in center hemodialysis. In spite of this, uptake of these therapies has been steadily declining over past decades with utilization varying globally; dependent on training support, funding models, and prevailing Nephrologist beliefs. In the Australian context, home dialysis (predominantly peritoneal dialysis and extended hours nocturnal hemodialysis) is now again increasing in popularity--with enthusiasm driven not only by evidence of an array of physiological and psychological patient benefit but also significant economic advantage: critical in the current climate where dialysis therapies in Australia take approximately $1 billion dollars per year from the healthcare budget. When assessing the significant advantages of home-based therapies, it is important to consider not only the increasing body of evidence around improved survival but also that for dramatically better health-related quality of life, decreased economic burden and the overall benefits of undertaking treatment in the home. With patient-centered care an increasingly important aspect of our decision making paradigm, home-based dialysis should be considered as the default option in all patients transitioning to renal replacement therapy.

Home haemodialysis dose: how much of a good thing?

BACKGROUND

Home dialysis (peritoneal or haemodialysis) in any reasonable guise offers potential benefits compared with in-centre dialysis. Benefits may be overtly patient centred (independence, quality of life), outcome oriented (survival, resolution of left ventricular hypertrophy) or resource friendly (savings on staff costs). The priority placed on each of these areas is likely to vary from patient to patient, and possibly provider to provider. This is the one strength of home haemodialysis (HHD) rather than being viewed as a weakness, as it can offer different benefits to different people. Intuitively, more haemodialysis is better than less, and this is most realistically achieved at home. Indications are that both long nocturnal dialysis and short daily dialysis can offer real objective benefits.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Critics argue correctly that there is a paucity of robust randomised controlled study data. The complexity of HHD regimens and practice and in-homogeneity of patients means such firm data are unlikely to be forthcoming. However, the positive reports both subjective and objective of patients dialysing at home, and results from the available research suggest that advantages may be seen purely with changing the location of dialysis to home, and independently with enhancing dialysis schedules.

CONCLUSION

The logical conclusion is that patients undertaking haemodialysis at home should have at least the recommended minimum of four hours three times per week (or equivalent), preferably avoiding the long inter-dialytic interval, but beyond that rigid adherence to a schedule as dogma should be subjugated to patient choice and flexibility, albeit by prior agreement with supervising medical and nursing staff.

Multipass haemodialysis: a novel dialysis modality

Heaf et al. describe the novel multipass system as a most useful application in the setting of daily extended dialysis at home and suggests a number of modifications to our classical dialysis paradigm aimed at reducing water consumption. Their paper shows how continued creative thinking can modify the classical set-up of dialysis to obtain a system which at the same time could be more economical, ecological and simple.

Introduction

Most home haemodialysis (HD) modalities are limited to home use since they are based on a single-pass (SP) technique, which requires preparation of large amounts of dialysate. We present a new dialysis method, which requires minimal dialysate volumes, continuously recycled during treatment [multipass HD (MPHD)]. Theoretical calculations suggest that MPHD performed six times weekly for 8 h/night, using a dialysate bath containing 50% of the calculated body water, will achieve urea clearances equivalent to conventional HD 4 h thrice weekly, and a substantial clearance of higher middle molecules.

Methods

Ten stable HD patients were dialyzed for 4 h using standard SPHD (dialysate flow 500 mL/min). Used dialysate was collected. One week later, an 8-h MPHD was performed. The dialysate volume was 50% of the calculated water volume, the dialysate inflow 500 mL/min−0.5 × ultrafiltration/min and the outflow 500 mL/min + 0.5 × ultrafiltration/min. Elimination rates of urea, creatinine, uric acid, phosphate and β2-microglobulin (B2M) and dialysate saturation were determined hourly.

Results

Three hours of MPHD removed 49, 54, 50, 51 and 57%, respectively, of the amounts of urea, creatinine, uric acid, phosphate and B2M that were removed by 4 h conventional HD. The corresponding figures after 8 h MPHD were 63, 78, 74, 78 and 111%.

Conclusions

Clearance of small molecules using MPHD 6 × 8 h/week will exceed traditional HD 3 × 4 h/week. Similarly, clearance of large molecules will significantly exceed traditional HD and HD 5 × 2.5 h/week. This modality will increase patients' freedom of movement compared with traditional home HD. The new method can also be used in the intensive care unit and for automated peritoneal dialysis.

Water quality in conventional and home haemodialysis

Dialysis water can be contaminated by chemical and microbiological factors, all of which are potentially hazardous to patients on haemodialysis. The quality of dialysis water has seen incremental improvements over the years, with advances in water preparation, monitoring and disinfection methods, and high standards are now readily achievable in clinical practice. Advances in dialysis membrane technology have refocused attention on water quality and its potential role in the bioincompatibility of haemodialysis circuits and adverse patient outcomes. The role of ultrapure dialysate is increasingly being advocated, given its proposed clinical benefits and relative ease of production as a result of the widespread use of reverse osmosis and ultrafiltration. Many of the issues pertaining to water quality in hospital-based dialysis units are also pertinent to haemodialysis in the home. Furthermore, an increased awareness of the environmental and financial consequences of home haemodialysis has resulted in the development of automated and more efficient dialysis machines. These new machines have an increased emphasis on water conservation and recycling along with a decreased need for a complex infrastructure for water purification and maintenance.

The experience of individuals with renal failure participating in home haemodialysis: An interpretative phenomenological analysis

This study explored the experience of individuals with renal failure undertaking home haemodialysis (HHD). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with six participants who were active HHD users in a UK region. Participants’ accounts were transcribed verbatim and analysed using an interpretative phenomenological approach. Three main themes were identified: (1) embracing treatment and lifestyle freedom and flexibility; (2) re-establishing a sense of self and preferred self-identity; and (3) integrating aspects of active engagement and aspects of supported, life-sustaining dependence. A ‘good fit’ between the HHD user (an independent, self-determined health participant) and the healthcare provision (personalized, enabling) is proposed.

Satisfaction with renal replacement therapy and education: the American Association of Kidney Patients survey

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

This study was undertaken by the American Association of Kidney Patients (AAKP) to better understand ESRD patients' satisfaction with their current renal replacement therapy (RRT) and the education they received before initiating therapy.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

In addition to an open invitation on the AAKP website, nearly 9000 ESRD patients received invitations to complete the survey, which consisted of 46 questions. Satisfaction was measured on a 1 (extremely dissatisfied) to 7 (extremely satisfied) scale.

RESULTS

Survey respondents were younger, more highly educated, and more likely to be white as well as employed as compared with the U.S. dialysis population. A total of 977 patients responded. Overall patient satisfaction with current RRT treatment varied from a low of 4.5 for in-center hemodialysis (ICHD) to a high of 6.1 in transplant (TX) patients. Peritoneal dialysis (PD) and home hemodialysis (HHD) mean scores were 5.2 and 5.5, respectively. PD, HHD, and TX patients' satisfaction scores were significantly higher than those of ICHD patients (P < 0.05). Approximately 31% of respondents felt that the therapies were not equally and fairly presented as treatment options, and 32% responded that they were not educated regarding HHD.

CONCLUSIONS

ESRD patients are not uniformly advised about all possible treatment methods and hence were only moderately satisfied with their pretreatment education. Once on RRT, those on a home therapy or with a kidney TX are more satisfied than those with ICHD.

International variations and trends in home hemodialysis

Home hemodialysis, once a valid, viable dialysis choice, faded as facility-based care was preferentially funded and supported through the 1970s and 1980s. It was simply more comfortable for providers, physicians, and nurses to capture dialysis patients through clinic schedules and clinical protocols. Home patients were unpredictable, out of sight and out of control, trouble, and best avoided. This was so except in Australia and New Zealand where funding and support remained strong for what was seen there as an effective, outcome-rich, and cost-effective modality. The renaissance of home hemodialysis began in Canada when home-based nocturnal dialysis emerged in the 1990s. Home patients soon appreciated the self-determination and re-employment opportunities that overnight dialysis delivered. This article explores the origins, the near demise, the foundations of renewal, and the now-expanding potential of home and nocturnal hemodialysis in regions as diverse as North America, Australia and New Zealand, South East Asia, the United Kingdom, and Finland. Home dialysis fed by cost containment, outcome success, patient acceptance, and new smart equipment has emerged as a bright new modality option. Trainee nephrologists would be wise to take more notice as this near ghost of the past forges an exciting future.