Barriers for implementation of intensified hemodialysis: survey results from the International Pediatric Dialysis Network
- 286 Downloads
In patients on conventional hemodialysis (HD), morbidity is high and quality of life is poor. Intensified HD programs have been developed to help overcome these shortcomings, , but very few pediatric dialysis centers have reported the implementation of such a HD program.
An online survey was sent to all 221 pediatric dialysis centers which participate in the International Pediatric Dialysis Network (IPDN). The aim of the survey was to assess the attitude of pediatric nephrologists towards intensified HD, the penetrance of intensified HD into their clinical practice and barriers to implementation.
Of the 221 pediatric dialysis centers sent the survey, respondents from 61% (134) replied. Among these respondents, 69% acknowledged being aware of the evidence in support of the use of intensified HD, independent of whether intensified HD was offered at their own center, and 50% associated the use of daily nocturnal HD with the best overall patient outcome. In contrast, only 2% of respondents were in favor of conventional HD. Overall, 38% of the respondents stated that at their center intensified HD is prescribed to a subgroup of patients, most commonly in the form of short daily HD sessions. The most important barriers to expansion of intensified HD programs were lack of adequate funding (66%) and shortage of staff (63%), whereas lack of expertise and of motivation were reported infrequently as obstacles (21 and 14%, respectively).
Intensified HD is considered by many pediatric nephrologists to be the dialysis modality most likely associated with the best patient outcome. The limited use of this treatment approach highlights the importance of defining and successfully addressing the barriers to implementation.
KeywordsChildren Home dialysis Financial barriers Intensified hemodialysis Nocturnal hemodialysis
We are grateful to Dr. Sandip Mitra for providing help with the survey.
All listed authors contributed to this article.
This survey was financially supported by the German Society of Pediatric Nephrology GPN. IPDN is financially supported by Fresenius and Baxter Healthcare.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
CP Schmitt received travel grants and lecturing honoraria from Fresenius and Baxter and consulting honoraria from Baxter. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
- 8.Nistor I, Palmer SC, Craig JC, Saglimbene V, Vecchio M, Covic A, Strippoli GF (2015) Haemodiafiltration, haemofiltration and haemodialysis for end-stage kidney disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 5:CD006258Google Scholar
- 12.Unruh ML, Larive B, Chertow GM, Eggers PW, Garg AX, Gassman J, Tarallo M, Finkelstein FO, Kimmel PL, FHN Trials Group (2013) Effects of 6-times-weekly versus 3-times-weekly hemodialysis on depressive symptoms and self-reported mental health: frequent hemodialysis network (FHN) trials. Am J Kidney Dis 61:748–758CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 14.Suri RS, Larive B, Sherer S, Eggers P, Gassman J, James SH, Lindsay RM, Lockridge RS, Ornt DB, Rocco MV, Ting GO, Kliger AS, Frequent Hemodialysis Network Trial Group (2013) Risk of vascular access complications with frequent hemodialysis. J Am Soc Nephrol 24:498–505CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 16.Movilli E, Gaggia P, Zubani R, Camerini C, Vizzardi V, Parrinello G, Savoldi S, Fischer MS, Londrino F, Cancarini G (2007) Association between high ultrafiltration rates and mortality in uraemic patients on regular haemodialysis. A 5-year prospective observational multicentre study. Nephrol Dial Transplant 22:3547–3552CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.FHN Trial Group, Chertow GM, Levin NW, Beck GJ, Depner TA, Eggers PW, Gassman JJ, Gorodetskaya I, Greene T, James S, Larive B, Lindsay RM, Mehta RL, Miller B, Ornt DB, Rajagopalan S, Rastogi A, Rocco MV, Schiller B, Sergeyeva O, Schulman G, Ting GO, Unruh ML, Star RA, Kliger AS (2010) In-center hemodialysis six times per week versus three times per week. N Engl J Med 363:2287–2300Google Scholar
- 20.Culleton BF, Walsh M, Klarenbach SW, Mortis G, Scott-Douglas N, Quinn RR, Tonelli M, Donnelly S, Friedrich MG, Kumar A, Mahallati H, Hemmelgarn BR, Manns BJ (2007) Effect of frequent nocturnal hemodialysis vs conventional hemodialysis on left ventricular mass and quality of life: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 298:1291–1299CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 22.Daugirdas JT, Depner TA, Inrig J, Mehrotra R, Rocco MV, Suri RS, Weiner DE, Greer N, Ishani A, MacDonald R, Olson C, Rutks I, Slinin Y, Wilt TJ, Rocco M, Kramer H, Choi MJ, Samaniego-Picota M, Scheel PJ, Willis K, Joseph J, Brereton L (2015) KDOQI clinical practice guideline for hemodialysis adequacy: 2015 update. Am J Kidney Dis 66:884–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Hoppe A, von Puttkamer C, Linke U, Kahler C, Booss M, Braunauer-Kolberg R, Hofmann K, Joachimsky P, Hirte I, Schley S, Utsch B, Thumfart J, Briese S, Gellermann J, Zimmering M, Querfeld U, Müller D (2011) A hospital-based intermittent nocturnal hemodialysis program for children and adolescents. J Pediatr 158:95–99 99.e1CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 31.Lime Survey Project Team (2015) LimeSurvey: an open source survey tool. LimeSurvey Project Team, LimeSurvey GmbH, Hamburg. http://www.limesurvey.org
- 32.R Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org
- 34.Shafi T, Jaar BG, Plantinga LC, Fink NE, Sadler JH, Parekh RS, Powe NR, Coresh J (2010) Association of residual urine output with mortality, quality of life, and inflammation in incident hemodialysis patients: the choices for healthy outcomes in caring for end-stage renal disease (CHOICE) study. Am J Kidney Dis 56:348–358CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 35.Schaefer F, Borzych-Duzalka D, Azocar M, Munarriz RL, Sever L, Aksu N, Barbosa LS, Galan YS, Xu H, Coccia PA, Szabo A, Wong W, Salim R, Vidal E, Pottoore S, Warady BA, IPPN investigators (2012) Impact of global economic disparities on practices and outcomes of chronic peritoneal dialysis in children: insights from the International Pediatric Peritoneal Dialysis Network registry. Perit Dial Int 32:399–409CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar