An ISN-DOPPS Survey of the Global Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Peritoneal Dialysis Services.

Introduction: Home dialysis may minimize SARS-CoV2 exposure risks compared to center-based dialysis. We explored how the pandemic may have introduced challenges related to peritoneal dialysis (PD) supply availability, routine patient care, and how facility practices changed during this time. Methods: The PD/Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (PDOPPS/DOPPS) and International Society of Nephrology (ISN) administered a web-based survey from November 2020 to March 2021. Medical director responses were compared across 10 ISN regions. Results: One hundered sixy-five PD facilities in 51 countries returned surveys. During the initial COVID-19 wave, the reported frequency of in-person patient visits decreased in 9 of 10 ISN regions. Before the pandemic, most facilities required a mask during PD exchanges which continued over the course of the pandemic. Although most facilities in different regions did not report PD supply disruptions, sites in Africa and South Asia reported major disruptions. Reductions in laparoscopic surgical procedures for PD catheters were reported by facilities in 9 of 10 regions whereas nonsurgical percutaneous procedures increased in facilities in 6 regions. Training of new PD patients declined in facilities in each region. Increased use of remote technology by patients to communicate with clinics was observed in all regions compared to prepandemic levels. Conclusion: Marked within-region and across-region variability was noted in PD facility burden, clinical practice, and adaptation to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study highlights opportunities to improve routine PD care, adapt to the ongoing pandemic, and increase preparedness for potential future interruptions in PD care.

The COVID-19 Pandemic Identifies Significant Global Inequities in Hemodialysis Care in Low and Lower-Middle Income Countries-An ISN/DOPPS Survey.

Introduction: It is unknown how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the care of vulnerable chronic hemodialysis (HD) patients across regions, particularly in low and lower-middle income countries (LLMICs). We aimed to identify global inequities in HD care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: The ISN and the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS) conducted a global online survey of HD units between March and November, 2020, to ascertain practice patterns and access to resources relevant to HD care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Responses were categorized according to World Bank income classification for comparisons. Results: Surveys were returned from 412 facilities in 78 countries: 15 (4%) in low-income countries (LICs), 111 (27%) in lower-middle income countries (LMICs), 145 (35%) in upper-middle income countries (UMICs), and 141 (34%) in high-income countries (HICs). Respondents reported that diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2 were unavailable or of limited availability in LICs (72%) and LMICs (68%) as compared with UMICs (33%) and HICs (20%). The number of patients who missed HD treatments was reported to have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic in LICs (64%) and LMICs (67%) as compared with UMICs (31%) and HICs (6%). Limited access to HD, intensive care unit (ICU) care, and mechanical ventilation among hospitalized patients on chronic dialysis with COVID-19 were also reportedly higher in LICs and LMICs as compared with UMICs and HICs. Staff in LLMICs reported less routine testing for SARS-CoV-2 when asymptomatic as compared with UMICs and HICs-14% in LICs and 11% in LMICs, compared with 26% and 28% in UMICs and HICs, respectively. Severe shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) were reported by the respondents from LICs and LMICs compared with UMICs and HICs, especially with respect to the use of the N95 particulate-air respirator masks. Conclusion: Striking global inequities were identified in the care of chronic HD patients during the pandemic. Urgent action is required to address these inequities which disproportionately affect LLMIC settings thereby exacerbating pre-existing vulnerabilities that may contribute to poorer outcomes.

The Global Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on In-Center Hemodialysis Services: An ISN-Dialysis Outcomes Practice Patterns Study Survey.

INTRODUCTION: To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic impact on hemodialysis (HD) centers, The Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study and ISN collaborated on a web-survey of centers. METHODS: A combined approach of random sampling and open invitation was used between March 2020 and March 2021. Responses were obtained from 412 centers in 78 countries and all 10 ISN regions. RESULTS: In 8 regions, rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection were <20% in most centers, but in North East Asia (NE Asia) and Newly Independent States and Russia (NIS & Russia), rates were ≥20% and ≥30%, respectively. Mortality was ≥10% in most centers in 8 regions, although lower in North America and Caribbean (N America & Caribbean) and NE Asia. Diagnostic testing was not available in 33%, 37%, and 61% of centers in Latin America, Africa, and East and Central Europe, respectively. Surgical masks were widely available, but severe shortages of particulate-air filter masks were reported in Latin America (18%) and Africa (30%). Rates of infection in staff ranged from 0% in 90% of centers in NE Asia to ≥50% in 63% of centers in the Middle East and 68% of centers in NIS & Russia. In most centers, <10% of staff died, but in Africa and South Asia (S Asia), 2% and 6% of centers reported ≥50% mortality, respectively. CONCLUSION: There has been wide global variation in SARS-CoV-2 infection rates among HD patients and staff, personal protective equipment (PPE) availability, and testing, and the ways in which services have been redesigned in response to the pandemic.

Worldwide Early Impact of COVID-19 on Dialysis Patients and Staff and Lessons Learned: A DOPPS Roundtable Discussion.

As the worst global pandemic of the past century, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a disproportionate effect on maintenance dialysis patients and their health care providers. At a virtual roundtable on June 12, 2020, Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS) investigators from 15 countries in Asia, Europe, and the Americas described and compared the effects of COVID-19 on dialysis care, with recent updates added. Most striking is the huge difference in risk to dialysis patients and staff across the world. Per-population cases and deaths among dialysis patients vary more than 100-fold across participating countries, mirroring burden in the general population. International data indicate that the case-fatality ratio remains at 10% to 30% among dialysis patients, confirming the gravity of infection, and that cases are much more common among in-center than home dialysis patients. This latter finding merits urgent study because in-center patients often have greater community exposure, and in-center transmission may be uncommon under optimal protocols. Greater telemedicine use is a welcome change here to stay, and our community needs to improve emergency planning and protect dialysis staff from the next pandemic. Finally, the pandemic's challenges have prompted widespread partnering and innovation in kidney care and research that must be sustained after this global health crisis.

Physical health-related quality of life at higher achieved hemoglobin levels among chronic kidney disease patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: The impact of anemia treatment with erythropoietin stimulating agents (ESA) on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients is controversial, particularly regarding optimal hemoglobin (Hb) target ranges. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCT) with ESA to estimate the effect of different achieved Hb values on physical HRQOL and functionality. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PEDro, PsycINFO and Web of Science databases, until May 2020. Two authors independently extracted data from studies. We included observational and RCTs that enrolled CKD patients undergoing anemia treatment with ESA with different achieved Hb levels among groups. We excluded studies with achieved Hb <9 g/dL. For the meta-analysis, we included RCTs with control groups achieving Hb 10-11.5 g/dL and active groups with Hb >11.5 g/dL. We analyzed the standardized mean difference (SMD) between groups for physical HRQOL. RESULTS: Among 8496 studies, fifteen RCTs and five observational studies were included for the systematic review. We performed the meta-analysis in a subset of eleven eligible RCTs. For physical role and physical function, SMDs were 0.0875 [95% CI: - 0.0025 - 0.178] and 0.08 [95% CI: - 0.03 - 0.19], respectively. For fatigue, SMD was 0.16 [95% CI: 0.09-0.24]. Subgroup analysis showed that trials with greater achieved Hb had greater pooled effects sizes - 0.21 [95% CI: 0.07-0.36] for Hb > 13 g/dL vs. 0.09 [95% CI: 0.02-0.16] for Hb 11.5-13 g/dL. Proportion of older and long-term diabetic patients across studies were associated with lower effect sizes. CONCLUSION: Achieved hemoglobin higher than currently recommended targets may be associated with small but potentially clinically significant improvement in fatigue, but not in physical role or physical function. Younger and non-diabetic patients may experience more pronounced benefits of higher Hb levels after treatment with ESAs.