Peritoneal dialysis practice in Australia and New Zealand: A call to sustain the action

This paper updates a previous 'Call to Action' paper (Nephrology 2011; 16: 19-29) that reviewed key outcome data for Australian and New Zealand peritoneal dialysis patients and made recommendations to improve care. Since its publication, peritonitis rates have improved significantly, although they have plateaued more recently. Peritoneal dialysis patient and technique survival in Australian and New Zealand have also improved, with a reduction in the proportion of technique failures attributed to 'social reasons'. Despite these improvements, technique survival rates overall remain lower than in many other parts of the world. This update includes additional practical recommendations based on published evidence and emerging initiatives to further improve outcomes.

Non-adherence in patients on peritoneal dialysis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

It has been increasingly recognized that non-adherence is an important factor that determines the outcome of peritoneal dialysis (PD) therapy. There is therefore a need to establish the levels of non-adherence to different aspects of the PD regimen (dialysis procedures, medications, and dietary/fluid restrictions).

METHODS

A systematic review of peer-reviewed literature was performed in PubMed, PsycINFO and CINAHL databases using PRISMA guidelines in May 2013. Publications on non-adherence in PD were selected by two reviewers independently according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Relevant data on patient characteristics, measures, rates and factors associated with non-adherence were extracted. The quality of studies was also evaluated independently by two reviewers according to a revised version of the Effective Public Health Practice Project assessment tool.

RESULTS

The search retrieved 204 studies, of which a total of 25 studies met inclusion criteria. Reported rates of non-adherence varied across studies: 2.6-53% for dialysis exchanges, 3.9-85% for medication, and 14.4-67% for diet/fluid restrictions. Methodological differences in measurement and definition of non-adherence underlie the observed variation. Factors associated with non-adherence that showed a degree of consistency were mostly socio-demographical, such as age, employment status, ethnicity, sex, and time period on PD treatment.

CONCLUSION

Non-adherence to different dimensions of the dialysis regimen appears to be prevalent in PD patients. There is a need for further, high-quality research to explore these factors in more detail, with the aim of informing intervention designs to facilitate adherence in this patient population.