A new assessment scale for post-dialysis fatigue in hemodialysis patients

Abstract

Development of the PDF scale Create item pool To create items for the PDF scale, a post-dialysis interview was conducted in five maintenance hemodialysis patients with different severities. The item pool was collected using three anonymous questions. The first asked, "Are there any symptoms that develop after dialysis and then recover?" The second asked, "What exactly is that symptom?" The third question, which was asked while showing the patient a health card (basic life study, symptom list), was, "Are there any other applicable items?" Fourteen items were extracted by the interviews according to the advice of dialysis specialist groups in order to ensure the content validity. Based on the opinion of the specialist group (dialysis specialist, kidney physician, dialysis room nurse, clinical engineering technician) and with reference to previous studies, PDF was defined as "a subjective fatigue syndrome that specifically occurs for about half a day immediately after undergoing hemodialysis therapy." Construction of a new PDF scale We asked the patients about symptoms that they notice from the end of dialysis treatment until bedtime, as follows: (1) fatigue, (2) general malaise, (3) feeling exhausted and weak, (4) Lightheadedness, (5) needing to lie down and take a nap or rest, (6) difficulty moving without taking

The reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the postdialysis fatigue scale

“…Both correlation coefficients were above the 0.30 required to show criterion validity. Kodama et al 9 who developed the PDF Scale, similarly used the VAS score and fatigue scale to evaluate criterion validity and found correlation coefficients of 0.670 and 0.732, respectively. They also found a significant relationship between the PDF Scale scores and both the VAS and Fatigue Scale scores 9 …”

“…One strength of this study is adding a measurement tool specific to PDF for the first time in our country. Another strength is the confirmation of the consistency over time with the test‐retest method, something that was not tested by Kodama et al 9 It was, therefore, possible to measure the consistency over time of the PDF Scale and show that it is a consistent measurement device. The final strength is the fact that the study was conducted at two dialysis centres in two different cities.…”

“…The 13‐item, Likert‐type scale developed by Kodama et al 9 is answered by using five options: definitely disagree – 1 point, disagree – 2 points, undecided – 3 points, agree – 4 points and definitely agree – 5 points. The score range is 13 to 65, and increased scores indicate increased fatigue severity (see Supplementary File).…”

“…The aim of this study was to translate, linguistically validate and determine the psychometric properties of the “Postdialysis Fatigue” Scale developed by Kodama et al when used in patients undergoing chronic HD treatment 9 …”

Factors Associated with Fatigue in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients Undergoing Hemodialysis: A Systematic Review

“…In situational factors, it was found that the length of time in undergoing hemodialysis with an average of above 6 years, has comorbid diseases (8,18,26) such as cardiovascular and diabetes mellitus (26), the frequency of hemodialysis of 3 times a week (22,24), has disease complications (21,24) have a higher rate of fatigue, but the relationship with fatigue is not clear enough. There are studies that found there is no relationship between comorbid diseases (p-value 0.938) (8), length of time in undergoing hemodialysis (r = −0.154, p-value 0.086), diabetes mellitus (r = 0.128, p-value 0.157), the frequency of dialysis (F = 2.156, p-value 0.119) (22), and cardiovascular disease (r = 0.151, p-value 0.092) (26) with fatigue in hemodialysis Factors Associated with Fatigue in Chronic.... patients. However, other studies found that there is a relationship between cardiovascular disease (standard error of 2.15, p-value 0.01) (19), comorbid diseases (pvalue 0.001) (17), the frequency of dialysis (mean 260.00, p-value <0.001) (24) with fatigue.…”