In-Center Nutrition Practices of Clinics within a Large Hemodialysis Provider in the United States

Questionnaire survey of the frequency of dietary intake during hemodialysis and the impact of COVID-19 in Japan

BACKGROUND

There have been no coherent reports on the effects of dietary intake during hemodialysis in Japan. Furthermore, few studies have reported the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on them. This study aimed to investigate dietary intake during hemodialysis and its impact on the spread of COVID-19.

METHODS

This consecutive cross-sectional study included a survey of all hemodialysis facilities in the Niigata Prefecture. The survey form was sent via e-mail or fax.

RESULTS

Fifty four facilities (98%) responded to the 2018 survey. Twenty-eight facilities (52%) provided meals, with 18% of all patients undergoing dialysis and 41% of patients undergoing nocturnal dialysis consuming meals during hemodialysis. In the 2020 survey, the number of facilities decreased to 17 (33%), and the number of all patients undergoing dialysis and nocturnal dialysis consuming meals decreased to 13% and 32%, respectively. In the 2022 survey, the number of facilities decreased to 14 (27%), and the number of all patients undergoing dialysis and nocturnal dialysis decreased to 9% and 19%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a decrease in both facilities serving meals and patients' food consumption during hemodialysis. To prevent the loss of meal opportunities, establishing safe methods for food intake and alternatives in hemodialysis facilities is necessary.

Effects of oral nutritional supplements on the nutritional status and inflammatory markers in patients on maintenance dialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Background and aims

Patients on hemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD) often have insufficient energy and protein intake, resulting in poor nutritional status and adverse outcomes. Oral nutritional supplements (ONSs) are the most commonly used to increase such patients' energy and protein intakes.

Methods

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we analyzed studies on nutritional status, inflammatory markers, and electrolyte levels in patients on dialysis receiving ONSs. We searched four electronic databases from inception until 31 December 2022, for randomized controlled trials comparing ONS treatment versus placebo or routine care.

Results

22 studies with 1185 patients on dialysis were included in our meta-analysis. Compared with the control group, the ONS group exhibited significantly increased serum albumin levels [1.26 g/l (95%CI, 0.50-2.02, P < 0.0001; I2 = 80.4%)], body mass indexes (BMIs) [0.30 kg/m2 (95%CI, 0.09-0.52, P = 0.005; I2 = 41.4%)], and handgrip strength (HGS) [0.96 kg (95%CI, 0.07-1.84, P = 0.034; I2 = 41.4%)] from baseline to the end of intervention. No significant differences were observed between the groups in lean body mass, phase angle, C-reactive protein, and serum phosphorus and potassium levels. In terms of improving albumin, the subgroup analyses show that ONS use seems to be more inclined to three variations: HD patients, short-term use, and non-intradialytic supplementation.

Conclusion

In conclusion, ONS use can improve the nutritional status of patients on dialysis in terms of their serum albumin, BMI, and HGS without significant effects on serum phosphorus, potassium, and C-reactive protein levels. However, it remains uncertain whether these results translate to improvement in clinically relevant outcomes. Large-scale high-quality studies are still required in this population.

Food Insecurity and Chronic Kidney Disease: Considerations for Practitioners

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has exacerbated existing health disparities related to food security status. Emerging literature suggests individuals with Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) who are also food insecure have a greater likelihood of disease progression compared to food secure individuals. However, the complex relationship between CKD and food insecurity (FI) is understudied relative to other chronic conditions. The purpose of this practical application article is to summarize the recent literature on the social-economic, nutritional, to care through which FI may negatively impact health outcomes in individuals with CKD. While several studies have reported on the cross-sectional prevalence of FI among persons with CKD, literature is lacking about the severity and duration of exposure to FI on CKD outcomes. Future research is needed to better understand how FI impairs CKD care, nutritional and structural barriers that impact disease prevention and disease progression, and effective strategies to support patients.

Changes in US Dialysis Dietitian Responsibilities and Patient Needs During the COVID-19 Pandemic

OBJECTIVE

This study described the job responsibilities and modalities of care among dialysis dietitians in the United States and their observations regarding the nutrition needs of their patients, during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Cross-sectional online survey captures dietitian characteristics and responsibilities, dialysis facility characteristics, and patient needs. We recruited US dialysis dietitians. We used chi-square tests to compare respondent stress and facility-level policies regarding eating/drinking and oral nutrition supplements based on facility ownership type.

RESULTS

We received 191 complete or partial survey responses. Sixty-three percent of respondents stated that their center banned eating/drinking during dialysis due to COVID-19 masking policies. DaVita and non-profit facilities were significantly more likely to still allow eating/drinking during dialysis (31% and 29%, respectively) compared to Fresenius facilities (7%). A common theme in open-ended responses regarding nutrition care for COVID-19-positive patients was providing less care to these patients. A majority of respondents admitted to stress from working in healthcare during COVID-19. The majority of respondents indicated that patients were taking precautions such as having a family member or friend grocery shop for them (69%) or going to the store less often (60%). Just over a quarter of respondents indicated that affordability of food was a concern among patients. Seventy-two percent reported that patients were cooking at home more often, 60% had observed an increase in serum phosphorus, and 72% an increase in interdialytic weight gain.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to the increased risk of malnutrition and symptoms that can affect dietary intake in COVID-positive patients, and the economic conditions leading to increased rates of food insecurity, dietitians must be proactive in preventing and/or treating malnutrition through adequate protein and energy intake. Eating/drinking bans should not become permanent and dialysis centers should take precautions to allow intradialytic meals and oral nutrition supplement protocols to continue during the pandemic.

Meal timing and frequency implications in the development and prognosis of chronic kidney disease

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have a higher risk of death than the general population, the main cause being cardiovascular disease (CVD). Nutrition plays a key role in the prevention and treatment of CVD and kidney diseases. Currently, new evidence reinforces the importance of specific foods and general dietary patterns rather than isolated nutrients for cardiovascular risk. In addition, dietary patterns and healthy eating habits seem extremely relevant in decreasing risk factors. Epidemiologic and clinical intervention studies have suggested that late-night dinner and skipping breakfast are associated with an increased risk of obesity, insulin resistance, and CVD. In CKD, despite important changes in nutritional counseling in recent decades, less attention has been paid to meal timing and frequency. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to discuss the evidence of meal timing and frequency in CKD development and prognosis, presented under three main topics: risk of developing CKD, importance of dietary habits, and implications of fasting.

Eating during the Hemodialysis Session: A Practice Improving Nutritional Status or a Risk Factor for Intradialytic Hypotension and Reduced Dialysis Adequacy?

Historically, eating during the hemodialysis treatment has been associated with increased risk for adverse intradialytic symptoms and events, risks that have resulted in the implementation of restrictive in-center nutrition policies. Recent studies, however, have recorded a shift in clinical practice with a higher proportion of physicians following the view that administration of intradialytic meals and supplements represents a simple and effective approach to enhance caloric intake and improve nutritional status among patients on hemodialysis. This shift towards less restrictive in-center nutrition practices is mainly supported by evidence from observational studies associating intradialytic nutritional supplementation with improvements in protein-energy wasting, inflammatory state, and health-related quality of life. In sharp contrast, earlier and recent interventional studies have documented that feeding during the hemodialysis treatment provokes a rapid postprandial decline in blood pressure and raises the incidence of symptomatic intradialytic hypotension. Furthermore, other studies have shown that postprandial redistribution in intravascular volume and enhanced blood supply to the gastrointestinal circulation may interfere with the adequacy of the delivered hemodialysis. Those who defend the position that intradialytic nutritional support is beneficial do not dispute the physiology of postprandial hemodynamic response, but they argue against its clinical significance. In this article, we provide an overview of studies that explored the effect of eating during the hemodialysis treatment on intradialytic hemodynamic stability and adequacy of the delivered hemodialysis. We reason that these risks have important clinical implications that are not counteracted by anticipated benefits of this strategy on caloric intake and nutritional status.

Intradialytic Nutrition and Hemodialysis Prescriptions: A Personalized Stepwise Approach

Dialysis and nutrition are two sides of the same coin—dialysis depurates metabolic waste that is typically produced by food intake. Hence, dietetic restrictions are commonly imposed in order to limit potassium and phosphate and avoid fluid overload. Conversely, malnutrition is a major challenge and, albeit to differing degrees, all nutritional markers are associated with survival. Dialysis-related malnutrition has a multifactorial origin related to uremic syndrome and comorbidities but also to dialysis treatment. Both an insufficient dialysis dose and excessive removal are contributing factors. It is thus not surprising that dialysis alone, without proper nutritional management, often fails to be effective in combatting malnutrition. While composite indexes can be used to identify patients with poor prognosis, none is fully satisfactory, and the definitions of malnutrition and protein energy wasting are still controversial. Furthermore, most nutritional markers and interventions were assessed in hemodialysis patients, while hemodiafiltration and peritoneal dialysis have been less extensively studied. The significant loss of albumin in these two dialysis modalities makes it extremely difficult to interpret common markers and scores. Despite these problems, hemodialysis sessions represent a valuable opportunity to monitor nutritional status and prescribe nutritional interventions, and several approaches have been tried. In this concept paper, we review the current evidence on intradialytic nutrition and propose an algorithm for adapting nutritional interventions to individual patients.

Feeding during dialysis-risks and uncertainties

Allowing dialysis patients to eat during the treatment is controversial. It is, therefore, no surprise that practices and policies with respect to intradialytic food consumption vary considerably from unit to unit and from country to country. Those who defend the position of feeding during dialysis reason that intradialytic meals offer a supervised and effective therapy for protein-energy wasting. Those who take the opposite view argue that intradialytic food intake should be avoided for the following three reasons. First, interventional studies show that eating during dialysis causes a clinically significant reduction in systemic blood pressure during the postprandial period and elevates the risk of symptomatic intradialytic hypotension; the latter is associated with increased mortality risk. Second, clinical studies have shown that eating during dialysis interferes with the adequacy of the delivered dialysis, whereas eating 2-3 h before the dialysis session has no impact on the efficiency of the subsequent dialysis treatment. And third, randomized studies show that eating during dialysis focus on the positive outcomes but do not adequately balance this potential benefit against the risk of intradialytic hemodynamic instability and poor quality of delivered dialysis. Even after half a century of providing long-term dialysis, definitive randomized trials that balance risks and benefits of eating during dialysis are missing. These knowledge gaps require randomized trials. Since there is a real possibility of harm with eating during dialysis, we caution that instead of encouraging the widespread use of intradialytic meals, practices and policies should focus on adequate nutrient intake during the interdialytic interval.

Pilot Study of the Effects of High-Protein Meals During Hemodialysis on Intradialytic Hypotension in Patients Undergoing Maintenance Hemodialysis

OBJECTIVE

Patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD) have high protein and energy requirements, and protein-energy wasting is common and associated with poor outcomes. Eating during dialysis may improve nutritional status by counteracting the catabolic effects of HD treatment; but eating during HD may be discouraged because of concerns of postprandial hypotension. However, little data are available to support this practice. In this study, we hypothesized that high-protein meals during HD do not lead to symptomatic intradialytic hypotension events.

DESIGN

A 9-week, nonrandomized, parallel-arm study.

SETTING

A single in-center HD clinic.

SUBJECTS

Eighteen patients undergoing HD from 2 shifts completed the study. Patients were aged 62 ± 16 years with dialysis vintage of 3.4 ± 2.6 years.

INTERVENTION

Patients in the intervention group (n = 9) undergoing HD received meals of ∼30 g protein and ∼1/3 daily recommended intakes of sodium, potassium, phosphorus, and fluid during dialysis for 25 consecutive HD sessions. The control group (n = 9) completed all aspects of the study including a visit by study personnel but were not given meals. The 25 consecutive sessions before the start of the intervention/control phase were used as a baseline comparison for each patient.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Symptomatic hypotension event frequency.

RESULTS

In the intervention arm, there were 19 symptomatic hypotension events in 5 patients prestudy and 18 events in 6 patients during the study. In the control arm, there were 16 events in 7 patients prestudy and 13 events in 7 patients during the study. Change in the frequency of symptomatic hypotension events from prestudy to during study was not different between groups (P = .71). There was no effect of meals on nutritional status, but patients reported positive attitudes toward receiving meals during dialysis.

CONCLUSION

High-protein meals during HD did not increase symptomatic hypotension events. Larger, longer term studies are needed to confirm these results and evaluate whether high-protein meals on dialysis benefit nutritional status and clinical outcomes.

The Relationship Between Intradialytic Nutrition and Gastrointestinal Symptoms Using a Modified Version of the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale

OBJECTIVE

Intradialytic nutrition has been shown to improve nutritional status in maintenance hemodialysis (HD) patients but remains controversial due in part to concerns over hemodynamic stability and gastrointestinal (GI) distress. There are limited data on the relationship between intradialytic nutrition and GI symptoms, possibly due to the lack of a validated tool. Therefore, we intended to validate a questionnaire to measure GI symptoms associated with a single HD treatment and determine the relationship between intradialytic nutrition and GI symptoms.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study. Forty-eight maintenance HD patients.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

GI symptoms and dietary intake during HD treatment.

RESULTS

In general, we found acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha >0.5, exception reflux domain) and repeatability in all 5 domains of a modified version of the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale. The prevalence of GI symptoms associated with a single HD treatment (generalized score greater than 1) was 54.2, 43.7, 6.2, 41.7, and 45.8% for the abdominal pain, indigestion, reflux, diarrhea, and constipation domains, respectively. More than two-thirds of patients chose to eat during treatment (168.6 ± 165.6 kcal) with the most commonly consumed items being candy, oral supplements, and cookies. There was no difference in GI symptoms among patients who did or did not eat (P > .05). However, the amount of total dietary fat and fiber consumed during treatment was associated with greater indigestion (P < .05) prior to accounting for outliers or multiple comparisons.

CONCLUSION

In this sample, the modified version of the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale was a generally valid tool for measuring GI symptoms associated with a single HD treatment. Patients who ate during treatment did not experience greater GI symptoms than those who did not; however, high amounts of fat and fiber may be associated with greater GI symptoms. Prospective trials should examine the relationship between GI symptoms and dietary intake during treatment in HD patients.

Children tolerate intradialytic oral nutrition

BACKGROUND

People undergoing haemodialysis (HD) often have poor nutrition, which in turn can contribute to worse outcomes. Inadequate nutrition has a particularly deleterious effect on growth and neurocognitive development, as well as mortality, in children and adolescents. Nutritional supplementation can improve outcomes but can be difficult to administer.

OBJECTIVE

Determine the tolerability of intradialytic oral nutrition in children and adolescents.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional quality improvement study in an outpatient paediatric HD unit. Intervention was intradialytic oral nutritional supplementation provided as protein bars and/or meals.

SUBJECTS

Children and adolescents undergoing outpatient HD who were able to participate in surveys and eat by mouth.

MEASUREMENTS

Adverse effects and symptoms on nurse- and patient-reported surveys, respectively. Relationships between the predictor variables and the outcomes were assessed using generalised estimating equations.

RESULTS

The majority of children felt better after eating on dialysis (72%) with no adverse effects (80%). On unadjusted analyses and confirmed with generalised estimating equation modelling, children who reported being hungry felt better after eating on dialysis, despite being more likely to have adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrates that our children and adolescents feel better after eating on HD with minimal adverse effects. The finding that hungry patients are more likely to feel better despite having a higher likelihood of an adverse effect demonstrates the tolerability of eating on HD. Intradialytic oral nutrition could be a safe and well-tolerated opportunity to provide supplemental nutrition to paediatric HD patients and improve outcomes.

PATHOPHYSIOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT OF HYPOGLYCEMIAIN END-STAGE RENAL DISEASE PATIENTS: A REVIEW

OBJECTIVE

This review focuses on hypoglycemia in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). It discusses the pathophysiology of glucose metabolism in the kidney, the impact of dialysis on glucose and insulin metabolism, and the challenges of glucose monitoring in ESRD. The clinical relevance of these changes is reviewed in relation to altered blood glucose targets and modification of antidiabetes therapy to prevent hypoglycemia. Based on current data and guidelines, recommendations for the outpatient and inpatient setting are provided for diabetes management in ESRD.

METHODS

PubMed, OVID, and Google Scholar were searched to identify related articles through May 2016 using the following keywords: "glucose metabolism," "kidney," "diabetes," "hypoglycemia," "ESRD," and "insulin" in various combinations for this review.

RESULTS

In ESRD, a combination of impaired insulin clearance, changes in glucose metabolism, and the dialysis process make patients vulnerable to low blood glucose levels. Hypoglycemia accounts for up to 3.6% of all ESRD-related admissions. At admission or during hospitalization, hypoglycemia in ESRD has a poor prognosis, with mortality rates reported at 30%. Several guidelines suggest a modified hemoglobin A1c (A1c) goal of 7 to 8.5% (53 to 69 mmol/mol) and an average blood glucose goal of 150 to 200 mg/dL. Noninsulin antidiabetes agents like dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, repaglinide, and glipizide in appropriate doses and reduction of insulin doses up to 50% may help decrease hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSION

Patients with ESRD are at high risk for hypoglycemia. Increased awareness by providers regarding these risks and appropriate diabetes regimen adjustments can help minimize hypoglycemic events.

ABBREVIATIONS

ADA = antidiabetes agent BG = blood glucose CKD = chronic kidney disease DPP-4 = dipeptidyl peptidase 4 eGFR = estimated glomerular filtration rate ESRD = end-stage renal disease GFR = glomerular filtration rate HD = hemodialysis NPH = neutral protamine Hagedorn PD = peritoneal dialysis SA = short acting SU = sulfonylurea.