Cross-sectional study of quality of life in relation with vascular access in hemodialysis patients

Maria Maldonado, Cristina Fuentes, C. Santos-Alonso, M. A. Navas, Laura Álvarez, R. Sánchez-Villanueva, María Pilar Martínez, I. Leblic, M. Ossorio, G. Del Peso, M. Bajo
{"title":"Cross-sectional study of quality of life in relation with vascular access in hemodialysis patients","authors":"Maria Maldonado, Cristina Fuentes, C. Santos-Alonso, M. A. Navas, Laura Álvarez, R. Sánchez-Villanueva, María Pilar Martínez, I. Leblic, M. Ossorio, G. Del Peso, M. Bajo","doi":"10.22265/acnef.10.2.647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Vascular access for hemodialysis (HD) is essential for the patient. Even though Arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is the preferred access, in certain age groups, the central venous catheter (CVC) may provide advantages. This study aims to investigate the quality of life related to vascular access.\nMethods: Cross-sectional study including patients from a hospital, a home HD unit and a satellite hemodialysis center. Clinical data was collected from the patients, who went through a quality-of-life questionnaire SF12 and a Vascular Access Questionnaire (VAQ).\nResults: 91 patients participated, mostly male (70%), with a mean age of 68.9 ± 16.2 years. AVF was the current vascular access in 60.4%, the rest used a CVC. Home HD was performed in 12.1% of patients and 76% started it via CVC. Regarding patients who have had both AVF and CVC, 58% prefer AVF and only 26.5% of current CVC carriers would have a new AVF, mostly due to fear of pain (52%). Most people (72.5%) reported having received sufficient information, with no differences between both accesses.\nThe SF12 results showed no differences between patients with AVF or CVC. Regarding the VAQ, patients with AVF were more satisfied with the social aspect (p = 0.036) and complications (p = 0.006).\nConclusion: Patients with AVF had better outcomes than those using CVC regarding complications and social aspects. These differences are not attributable to a worse overall quality of life status of CVC patients. Most patients with CVCs refuse to go through a new AVF for fear of puncture pain.","PeriodicalId":121036,"journal":{"name":"Revista Colombiana de Nefrología","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Colombiana de Nefrología","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22265/acnef.10.2.647","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Vascular access for hemodialysis (HD) is essential for the patient. Even though Arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is the preferred access, in certain age groups, the central venous catheter (CVC) may provide advantages. This study aims to investigate the quality of life related to vascular access. Methods: Cross-sectional study including patients from a hospital, a home HD unit and a satellite hemodialysis center. Clinical data was collected from the patients, who went through a quality-of-life questionnaire SF12 and a Vascular Access Questionnaire (VAQ). Results: 91 patients participated, mostly male (70%), with a mean age of 68.9 ± 16.2 years. AVF was the current vascular access in 60.4%, the rest used a CVC. Home HD was performed in 12.1% of patients and 76% started it via CVC. Regarding patients who have had both AVF and CVC, 58% prefer AVF and only 26.5% of current CVC carriers would have a new AVF, mostly due to fear of pain (52%). Most people (72.5%) reported having received sufficient information, with no differences between both accesses. The SF12 results showed no differences between patients with AVF or CVC. Regarding the VAQ, patients with AVF were more satisfied with the social aspect (p = 0.036) and complications (p = 0.006). Conclusion: Patients with AVF had better outcomes than those using CVC regarding complications and social aspects. These differences are not attributable to a worse overall quality of life status of CVC patients. Most patients with CVCs refuse to go through a new AVF for fear of puncture pain.
血液透析患者生活质量与血管通路关系的横断面研究
血液透析(HD)的血管通路对患者至关重要。尽管动静脉瘘(AVF)是首选途径,但在某些年龄组,中心静脉导管(CVC)可能具有优势。本研究旨在探讨与血管通路相关的生活质量。方法:横断面研究包括来自医院,家庭HD单位和卫星血液透析中心的患者。通过生活质量问卷SF12和血管通路问卷VAQ收集患者的临床数据。结果:91例患者参与,男性居多(70%),平均年龄68.9±16.2岁。AVF为当前血管通路的占60.4%,其余为CVC。12.1%的患者进行了家庭HD, 76%的患者通过CVC开始。对于同时患有AVF和CVC的患者,58%的人更喜欢AVF,而目前CVC携带者中只有26.5%的人会接受新的AVF,主要是由于害怕疼痛(52%)。大多数人(72.5%)表示获得了足够的信息,两种途径之间没有差异。SF12结果显示AVF和CVC患者之间没有差异。在VAQ方面,AVF患者对社交方面(p = 0.036)和并发症(p = 0.006)的满意度更高。结论:AVF患者在并发症和社会方面优于CVC患者。这些差异不能归因于CVC患者整体生活质量状况的恶化。大多数cvc患者因为害怕穿刺疼痛而拒绝接受新的AVF。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信