We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Assisted automated peritoneal dialysis (AAPD) for the functionally dependent and elderly patient.
Peritoneal Dialysis International 2005 Februrary
OBJECTIVE: To describe basic demographics and clinical outcomes among elderly end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients physically dependent on a caregiver and maintained on an assisted automated peritoneal dialysis (AAPD) program.
DESIGN: Retrospective single-center study based on patient records and data files.
SETTING: University Hospital.
PATIENTS: 64 physically dependent AAPD patients followed for 1.012 treatment months. Assistance and care was delivered by 52 briefly trained teams of visiting nurses or nursing home staff.
RESULT: Crude 1-year survival was 58% and 2-year survival was 48%. Crude 1- and 2-year survivals, excluding deaths within 90 days, were 66% and 54% respectively. We found no significant effect on survival by main causes of ESRD, gender, age, late referral, need for acute start, social isolation, physical dependency on help at inclusion, or residence in a nursing home. 10% of patient-days on AAPD were spent in hospital. 13 (20%) of the patients were converted permanently to hemodialysis due to PD technique failure. The incidence of peritonitis was 1 in every 25.3 treatment-months.
CONCLUSIONS: AAPD may be a feasible and safe option for renal replacement therapy for frail, elderly, and physically dependent patients with ESRD. Despite the special patient selection for this AAPD program, we achieved results of international standards for patient survival, PD technique survival, and incidence of acute peritonitis. These results do notjustify withholding dialysis from this group of patients.
DESIGN: Retrospective single-center study based on patient records and data files.
SETTING: University Hospital.
PATIENTS: 64 physically dependent AAPD patients followed for 1.012 treatment months. Assistance and care was delivered by 52 briefly trained teams of visiting nurses or nursing home staff.
RESULT: Crude 1-year survival was 58% and 2-year survival was 48%. Crude 1- and 2-year survivals, excluding deaths within 90 days, were 66% and 54% respectively. We found no significant effect on survival by main causes of ESRD, gender, age, late referral, need for acute start, social isolation, physical dependency on help at inclusion, or residence in a nursing home. 10% of patient-days on AAPD were spent in hospital. 13 (20%) of the patients were converted permanently to hemodialysis due to PD technique failure. The incidence of peritonitis was 1 in every 25.3 treatment-months.
CONCLUSIONS: AAPD may be a feasible and safe option for renal replacement therapy for frail, elderly, and physically dependent patients with ESRD. Despite the special patient selection for this AAPD program, we achieved results of international standards for patient survival, PD technique survival, and incidence of acute peritonitis. These results do notjustify withholding dialysis from this group of patients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app