ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) incidence is increasing and associated mortality and morbidity are high. Educating patients is effective in delaying progression and establishing optimal renal replacement therapy (RRT). Tele-education/telemedicine (TM) can be an effective tool to provide such education, but there are no available data quantifying its effectiveness. We attempted to establish such evidence correlating the effect of education in patient choices and with the start of actual RRT. We present results from a 3-year pilot study evaluating the effectiveness of comprehensive predialysis education (CPE) through TM for CKD patients compared with a standard care group [face to face (FTF)]. The patient's ability to choose RRT was the primary endpoint. METHODS: This was a randomized controlled study providing CPE over three classes at nine sites (one FTF and eight TM). Three assessment tools were utilized to compare groups: CKD knowledge, literacy and quality of life. RESULTS: A total of 47.1% of FTF and 52.2% of TM patients reported not having enough information to choose a modality. This decreased by the third visit (FTF 7.4%, TM 13.2%). Home modality choices more than doubled in both groups (FTF 25.8-67.7%, TM 22.2-50.1%). In patients that completed one visit and needed to start RRT, 47% started on a home modality or received a pre-emptive transplant (home hemodialysis 6%, peritoneal dialysis 38%, transplant 3%). CONCLUSIONS: Results show almost 90% (TM 87%, FTF 95%) of the attendees could choose a modality after education. Home modality choices doubled. Patients were able to make an informed choice regardless of the modality of education.
ABSTRACT
Central venous catheters are used frequently in patients on hemodialysis as a bridge to a permanent vascular access. They are prone to frequent complications, including catheter-related bloodstream infection, catheter dysfunction, and central vein obstruction. There is a compelling need to develop new drugs or devices to prevent central venous catheter complications. We convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts to propose standardized definitions of catheter end points to guide the design of future clinical trials seeking approval from the Food and Drug Administration. Our workgroup suggests diagnosing catheter-related bloodstream infection in catheter-dependent patients on hemodialysis with a clinical suspicion of infection (fever, rigors, altered mental status, or unexplained hypotension), blood cultures growing the same organism from the catheter hub and a peripheral vein (or the dialysis bloodline), and absence of evidence for an alternative source of infection. Catheter dysfunction is defined as the inability of a central venous catheter to (1) complete a single dialysis session without triggering recurrent pressure alarms or (2) reproducibly deliver a mean dialysis blood flow of >300 ml/min (with arterial and venous pressures being within the hemodialysis unit parameters) on two consecutive dialysis sessions or provide a Kt/V≥1.2 in 4 hours or less. Catheter dysfunction is defined only if it persists, despite attempts to reposition the patient, reverse the arterial and venous lines, or forcefully flush the catheter. Central vein obstruction is suspected in patients with >70% stenosis of a central vein by contrast venography or the equivalent, ipsilateral upper extremity edema, and an existing or prior history of a central venous catheter. There is some uncertainty about the specific criteria for these diagnoses, and the workgroup has also proposed future high-priority studies to resolve these questions.
