Association between quality of life and various aspects of intradialytic hypotension including patient-reported intradialytic symptom score.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing awareness that, besides patient survival, Quality of Life (QOL) is a relevant outcome factor for patients who have a chronic disease. In haemodialysis (HD) patients, intradialytic hypotension (IDH) is considered one of the most frequent complications, and this is often accompanied by symptoms. Several studies have investigated QOL in dialysis patients, however, research on the association between intradialytic symptoms and QOL is minimal. The goal of this study was to determine whether the occurrence of IDH has an influence on the perception of QOL. METHODS: During 3 months, haemodynamic data, clinical events, and interventions of 2623 HD-sessions from 82 patients were prospectively collected. The patients filled out a patient-reported intradialytic symptom score (PRISS) after each HD session. IDH was defined according to the EBPG as a decrease in SBP ≥20 mmHg or in MAP ≥10 mmHg associated with a clinical event and need for nursing interventions. Patient's self-assessment of QOL was evaluated by the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey. RESULTS: There were no significant associations between the mental summary score or the physical summary score and the proportion of dialysis sessions that fulfilled the full EBPG definition. A lower PRISS was significantly associated with the proportion of dialysis sessions that fulfilled the full EBPG definition (R = - 0.35, P = 0.0011), the proportion of dialysis sessions with a clinical event (R = - 0.64, P = 0.001), and the proportion of dialysis sessions with nursing interventions (R = - 0.41, P = 0.0001). The physical component summary and mental component summary were significantly negatively associated with the variable diabetes and positively with PRISS (P = 0.003 and P = 0.005, respectively). UF volume was significantly negatively associated with mental health (P = 0.02) and general health (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the EBPG definition of IDH does not capture aspects of intradialytic symptomatology that are relevant for the patient's QOL. In contrast, we found a significant association between QOL and a simple patient-reported intra-dialytic symptom score, implying that how patients experience HD treatment influences their QOL.

Prevalence of intradialytic hypotension, clinical symptoms and nursing interventions--a three-months, prospective study of 3818 haemodialysis sessions.

BACKGROUND: Intradialytic hypotension (IDH) is considered one of the most frequent complications of haemodialysis with an estimated prevalence of 20-50 %, but studies investigating its exact prevalence are scarce. A complicating factor is that several definitions of IDH are used. The goal of this study was, to assess the prevalence of IDH, primarily in reference to the European Best Practice Guideline (EBPG) on haemodynamic instability: A decrease in systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥20 mmHg or in mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥10 mmHg associated with a clinical event and the need for nursing intervention. METHODS: During 3 months we prospectively collected haemodynamic data, clinical events, and nursing interventions of 3818 haemodialysis sessions from 124 prevalent patients who dialyzed with constant ultrafiltration rate and dialysate conductivity. Patients were considered as having frequent IDH if it occurred in >20 % of dialysis sessions. RESULTS: Decreases in SBP ≥20 mmHg or MAP ≥10 mmHg occurred in 77.7 %, clinical symptoms occurred in 21.4 %, and nursing interventions were performed in 8.5 % of dialysis sessions. Dialysis hypotension according to the full EBPG definition occurred in only 6.7 % of dialysis sessions. Eight percent of patients had frequent IDH. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of IDH according to the EBPG definition is low. The dominant determinant of the EBPG definition was nursing intervention since this was the component with the lowest prevalence. IDH seems to be less common than indicated in the literature but a proper comparison with previous studies is complicated by the lack of a uniform definition.

Variability of predialytic, intradialytic, and postdialytic blood pressures in the course of a week: a study of Dutch and US maintenance hemodialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients with thrice-weekly hemodialysis have higher predialysis weights and ultrafiltration rates at the first compared with subsequent dialysis sessions of the week. We hypothesized that these variations in weight and ultrafiltration rate are associated with a systematic difference in blood pressure. STUDY DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: During 3 months, we prospectively collected hemodynamic data for 4,007 hemodialysis sessions involving 124 Dutch patients. A similar analysis was performed with 789 US patients, comprising 6,060 hemodialysis sessions. FACTOR: First versus subsequent hemodialysis sessions of the week. OUTCOMES: Blood pressure. MEASUREMENTS: Blood pressure, weight, and ultrafiltration rate were analyzed separately for the first, second, and third dialysis sessions of the week. Comparisons were made with linear mixed models. RESULTS: In Dutch patients, predialysis weight and ultrafiltration rate were significantly greater at the first compared with subsequent hemodialysis sessions of the week (P < 0.001). Predialysis systolic and diastolic blood pressures were higher at the first than at subsequent sessions of the week (P < 0.001). Predialysis blood pressure differences persisted throughout the session: systolic and diastolic blood pressures were on average 5.0 and 2.5 mm Hg higher during the first compared to the third session of the week. Postdialysis blood pressures followed a similar pattern (P < 0.001). Blood pressure differences between the first and subsequent days of the week persisted after adjustment for possible confounders. Results in the US cohort were materially identical despite differences in patient characteristics and treatment practice between the 2 cohorts. LIMITATIONS: Dry weight was not assessed by objective methods. CONCLUSIONS: Blood pressure of patients on a thrice-weekly dialysis schedule varies systematically over the week. Predialysis blood pressure is highest at the first hemodialysis session of the week, most likely due to greater interdialytic weight gain. Intra- and postdialytic blood pressures also are highest at the first session of the week despite higher ultrafiltration rates.

Comparison of different risk-adjustment models in assessing short-term surgical outcome after transthoracic esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Different risk-prediction models have been developed, but none is generally accepted in selecting patients for esophagectomy. This study evaluated 5 most frequently used risk-prediction models, including the American Society of Anesthesiologists, Portsmouth-modified Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and morbidity (P-POSSUM), and the adjusted version for Oesophagogastric surgery (O-POSSUM), Charlson and the Age adjusted Charlson score to assess postoperative mortality after transthoracic esophagectomy. METHODS: Data were obtained from 278 consecutive esophageal cancer patients between 1991 and 2007. Performance in predicting postoperative mortality (in-hospital and 90-day mortality) were analyzed regarding calibration (Hosmer and Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test) and discrimination (area under the receiver operator curve). RESULTS: The Hosmer and Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test was applied to each model and showed a significant outcome for only the P-POSSUM score (P = .035). The receiver operator curve indicated discriminatory power for P-POSSUM (.766) and for O-POSSUM (.756), other models did not exceed the minimal surface of .7. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative mortality after esophagectomy was best predicted by O-POSSUM. However, it still overpredicted postoperative mortality.