No abstract

The aim was to assess the effects of exercise training on aerobic and fuctional capacity of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Patients completed an incremental exercise test on a cycle ergometer to determine VO2 peak and VO2 at ventilatory threshold (VT; V-slope). On a separate day they performed two constant load exercise tests on a cycle ergometer at 90% of VT and at a workload of 33 W, to determine VO2 kinetics. Functional capacity was assessed using measurements of sit-to-stands (STS-5, STS-60) and a walk test. Dialysis patients were randomly allocated to an exercise (ET: n = 18, age = 57.3 years) or control (C: n = 15, age = 50.5 - 5 years) group. The ET group participated in an exercise training programme involving cycling for 3 months. Repeated measures ANOVA revealed significant time by group interactions (P < 0.05) following training for VO2 peak (ET: 17 +/- 6.1 versus 19.9 +/- 6-3, C: 19.5 +/- 4.7 versus 188 +/- 4.9 ml kg min(-1)) and VO2-VT (ET: 10.7 +/- 3.5 versus 11.8 +/- 3.3, C:12.9 +/- 3.2 versus 119 +/- 3.5 ml kg min(-10). VO2 kinetics remained unchanged in both groups at 90% -VT, but a trend (P = 0.059) towards faster kinetics at the 33 W was observed (ET: 49.6 +/- 19.5 versus 37.8 +/- 12.7, C: 42.8 +/- 13 versus 49.4 +/- 20.2 s). Significant time by group interactions (P < 0.05) were also observed for STS-5 (ET: 14.7 +/- 6.2 versus 11.0 +/- 3.3, C: 12.8 +/- 4.4 versus 12.7 +/- 4.8 s) and STS-60 measurements (ET: 21.2 + 7.2 versus 26.9 +/- 6.2, C: 23.7 +/- 6.8 versus 24.1 +/- 7.2). Three months of exercise rehabilitation significantly improves peak exercise capacity of patients with ESRD. Measurements of VO2 kinetics and functional capacity suggest that longer time might be needed to induce peripheral adaptations.

This guideline is written primarily for doctors and nurses working in dialysis units and related areas of medicine in the UK, and is an update of a previous version written in 2009. It aims to provide guidance on how to look after patients and how to run dialysis units, and provides standards which units should in general aim to achieve. We would not advise patients to interpret the guideline as a rulebook, but perhaps to answer the question: “what does good quality haemodialysis look like?”The guideline is split into sections: each begins with a few statements which are graded by strength (1 is a firm recommendation, 2 is more like a sensible suggestion), and the type of research available to back up the statement, ranging from A (good quality trials so we are pretty sure this is right) to D (more like the opinion of experts than known for sure). After the statements there is a short summary explaining why we think this, often including a discussion of some of the most helpful research. There is then a list of the most important medical articles so that you can read further if you want to – most of this is freely available online, at least in summary form.A few notes on the individual sections: This section is about how much dialysis a patient should have. The effectiveness of dialysis varies between patients because of differences in body size and age etc., so different people need different amounts, and this section gives guidance on what defines “enough” dialysis and how to make sure each person is getting that. Quite a bit of this section is very technical, for example, the term “eKt/V” is often used: this is a calculation based on blood tests before and after dialysis, which measures the effectiveness of a single dialysis session in a particular patient.This section deals with “non-standard” dialysis, which basically means anything other than 3 times per week. For example, a few people need 4 or more sessions per week to keep healthy, and some people are fine with only 2 sessions per week – this is usually people who are older, or those who have only just started dialysis. Special considerations for children and pregnant patients are also covered here.This section deals with membranes (the type of “filter” used in the dialysis machine) and “HDF” (haemodiafiltration) which is a more complex kind of dialysis which some doctors think is better. Studies are still being done, but at the moment we think it’s as good as but not better than regular dialysis.This section deals with fluid removal during dialysis sessions: how to remove enough fluid without causing cramps and low blood pressure. Amongst other recommendations we advise close collaboration with patients over this.This section deals with dialysate, which is the fluid used to “pull” toxins out of the blood (it is sometimes called the “bath”). The level of things like potassium in the dialysate is important, otherwise too much or too little may be removed. There is a section on dialysate buffer (bicarbonate) and also a section on phosphate, which occasional...

No abstract

Background. Physical activity has the potential to positively impact upon aerobic and functional ability, and the quality of life of all chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients independent of the stage of the disease process. Physical activity is recommended in a number of national CKD guidelines, but its incorporation into routine care has been slow. The translation of research-led physical activity programmes into an established procedure appears to be a particular obstacle. This study included 263 patients, consecutively referred over a 4-year period, to a pragmatic 12-week renal rehabilitation (RR) programme delivered within a National Health Service (NHS). Methods. One hundred and thirty-one patients were assessed and started the RR programme. Anxiety and depression were measured using the hospital anxiety and depression (HAD) scale. The self-reported level of fitness was measured with the Duke's activity status index (DASI), and exercise capacity was assessed with the incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT), sit-to-stand transfers in 60 s (STS60), timed up and go (TUAG) and stairclimb descent (SCD) tests. All measures were assessed at baseline and at 12 weeks. Attendance and completion of the RR programme were recorded for all patients. Results. There were significant improvements in exercise capacity and functional ability ranging from 21 to 44%, and significant improvements in anxiety (15%) and depression (29%) in the 77 patients who completed the RR programme. The self-reported level of fitness was found to be significantly associated with completion (P = 0.01), with older participants showing a trend towards being more likely to complete (P = 0.07). Fifty-four patients, out of the 131 patients who commenced the RR programme, failed to complete 12 or more of the 24 scheduled sessions. Patients requiring haemodialysis (HD) treatment constituted the largest number of dropouts/non-completers (49%) in the study. Conclusions. This study demonstrates that a pragmatically constructed, NHS-delivered exercise-based RR can substantially improve both physical function and mental well-being for the wide range of CKD patients who regularly participated (55%). Compliance/adherence data indicate that this type of rehabilitation programme is particularly well received by pre-dialysis (PD) CKD and post-transplantation patients.

In conclusion, exercise appeared to be beneficial in renal rehabilitation by correcting the fibre atrophy, increasing the cross-section fibre area and improving the capillarization in the skeletal muscle of renal failure patients.

Low-volume high-intensity interval training is a feasible and well tolerated training modality in cardiac rehabilitation settings, but is not more effective than continuous aerobic exercise training.

BackgroundThis pilot study examined long-term pulse wave velocity (PWV) and peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) outcomes following a 12-week moderate-intensity aerobic or resistance training programme in kidney transplant recipients.MethodSingle-blind, bi-centre randomised controlled parallel trial. 42 out of 60 participants completed a 9-month follow-up assessment (Aerobic training = 12, Resistance training = 10 and usual care = 20). Participants completed 12 weeks of twice-weekly supervised aerobic or resistance training. Following the 12-week exercise intervention, participants were transitioned to self-managed community exercise activity using motivational interviewing techniques. Usual care participants received usual encouragement for physical activity during routine clinical appointments in the transplant clinic. PWV, VO2peak, blood pressure and body weight were assessed at 12 weeks and 12 months, and compared to baseline.ResultsANCOVA analysis, covarying for baseline values, age, and length of time on dialysis pre-transplantation, revealed a significant mean between-group difference in PWV of -1.30 m/sec (95%CI -2.44 to -0.17, p = 0.03) between resistance training and usual care groups. When comparing the aerobic training and usual care groups at 9-month follow-up, there was a mean difference of -1.05 m/sec (95%CI -2.11 to 0.017, p = 0.05). A significant mean between-group difference in relative VO2peak values of 2.2 ml/kg/min (95% CI 0.37 to 4.03, p = 0.02) when comparing aerobic training with usual care was revealed. There was no significant between group differences in body weight or blood pressure. There were no significant adverse effects associated with the interventions.ConclusionsSignificant between-group differences in 9-month follow-up PWV existed when comparing resistance exercise intervention with usual care. A long-term between-group difference in VO2peak was only evident when comparing aerobic intervention with usual care. This pilot study, with a small sample size, did not aim to elucidate mechanistic mediators related to the exercise interventions. It is however suggested that a motivational interviewing approach, combined with appropriate transition to community training programmes, could maintain the improvements gained from the 12-week exercise interventions and further research in this area is therefore warranted.Trial registrationstudy number: ISRCTN43892586.