The aim of this multicenter, quantitative, observational study was to analyze compliance and re-training needs of patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD) through the assessment of patient knowledge (with a Patient Questionnaire; phase 1) and patient behavior (home visit with a Score Card; phase 2). A total of 353 patients from 11 Italian centers participated in the first phase and 191 patients from nine centers in the second phase. Overall, 66% of questions on the Patient Questionnaire were answered correctly. Correct answers were more frequent in females than males, in patients under 55 years of age, and in those with higher education. The lowest rate of correct answers involved questions related to diet and physical activity (67% and 51%, respectively). Data collected during the home visit showed that 25% of patients were partially compliant with their drug therapy. Twenty-three percent of patients were non-compliant with the exchange protocol procedures, with a significant association between compliance and the incidence of peritonitis, and 11% were non-compliant with the exit-site protocol procedures without a statistically significant correlation to peritonitis. By combining the two evaluations, we found that approximately one-third (29%) of patients needed reinforcement of knowledge and ability to correctly perform PD as related to infection control and 27% for the correct use of drugs. Looking at the combined evaluation of infection control and drug use, results showed that 47% of patients needed re-training. This need for re-training was greater for younger patients (less than 55 years old), patients with lower education degree and patients in the early or late phase of PD therapy (less than 18 months or more than 36 months). Gender and degree of autonomy had no effect on the need for re-training.
Four hundred and eighty CAPD and 373 HD patients started regular dialysis treatment between 1981 and 1987 in 6 dialysis centers. The CAPD patients were 6 years older, on average, than the HD patients and had more complicating conditions (43.3% with 3 or more coexisting risk factors versus 28.9% with coexisting complications). The 7-year patient survival rate was not significantly different. Cox's proportional hazards regression showed that age, cardiovascular disease, cerebrovasculardisease, peripheral vasculardisease, diabetes, malignancy and multisystem disease had significant adverse effects on patient survival. After correcting for the influence of these factors, no significant differences in patient survival were seen. However, after 53.5 years of age, the increase in the risk of death was significantly higher in HD than in CAPD patients. Technique survival was significantly different in the 6 centers and was better for HD than for CAPD. There was no statistically significant difference between CAPD and HD technique survival when peritonitis was eliminated as a cause of failure. Based on this 7 year analysis, CAPD would appear to be an excellent alternative to HD.
Sleep disorders have been reported as a frequent problem in dialysis patients. However, only one paper has compared the prevalence and possible causes of this complication in peritoneal (PD) and haemodialysis (HD) patients. We surveyed 84 PD and 87 HD patients about disordered sleep using a self-administered questionnaire. Forty-nine percent of PD and 56% of HD patients reported problems sleeping. These problems were rated as severe by 29 PD and 22 HD patients. Type of disturbances involved delayed sleeping (13 PD and 32 HD, p< 0.005), interrupted sleep (32 PD and 44 HD) and early morning awakening (25 PD and 37 HD). The number of hours of sleep varied widely among patients: it was 5 and 21 minutes in PD patients with sleep disorders and 7 and 37 min in PD pts without such problems. No statistically significant relationship was evidenced between sleep disorders and age, sex, body weight, obesity, duration of dialysis, dialysis dose, self-assessed sadness, anxiety, worry, pain, pruritus, dyspnoea, restless leg syndrome, use of cigarettes, caffeine, or sleeping pills. In conclusion, sleep disorders are a frequent problem in both PD and HD patients. Apparently the relationship with demographics, dialysis dose, lifestyle and personality traits is poor. The possible role of other causes should be investigated.
CAPD outcomes were compared between a group of 301 diabetic patients (mean age +/- SD, 58.9 +/- 12.7 years, 55.8% males) and a group of 1689 non-diabetic patients (mean age +/- SD 57.8 +/- 14.8 years, 55.9% males) treated in 30 centres participating in the Italian Cooperative Peritoneal Dialysis Study Group from 1980 to 1989, with follow-up observation periods of 444 years (mean +/- SD, 1.48 +/- 1.24) and of 3502 years (mean +/- SD, 2.07 +/- 1.91) respectively. CAPD was the first modality for 87.2% of diabetics and 78.1% of non-diabetics (P < 0.001). The percentage of patients who needed a partner for CAPD was 45.9% in diabetics and 30.2% in non-diabetics (P < 0.001). In diabetics compared with non-diabetics, cardiovascular diseases and cachexia were nearly twice and infections other than peritonitis more than three times as frequent in causing death. In diabetics, survival was significantly worse (P < 0.0001) and the relative risk of death 2.13 times higher (P < 0.001). The technique survival and the relative risk of drop-out were not significantly different in the two groups. Clinical problems were the most important cause of drop-out among diabetics. The probability and relative risk of drop-out due to peritonitis, as well as of the first peritonitis episode, were not significantly different between the two groups and between diabetics using or not using intraperitoneal insulin. Days per patient year of hospitalization, excluding the first, were 18.4 in diabetics and 14.3 in non-diabetics. CAPD-related problems caused hospitalization in a similar way in the two groups.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.