Centre-level fluid management practices in the BISTRO trial and their lack of association with participant fluid status and blood pressure in non-anuric haemodialysis patients.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Neena Johal, Radha Sharma, John Belcher, David Coyle, Elizabeth J Lindley, David Keane, Fergus J Caskey, Indranil Dasgupta, Andrew Davenport, Ken Farrington, Sandip Mitra, Paula Ormandy, Martin Wilkie, Jamie Macdonald, Ivonne Solis-Trapala, Julius Sim, Simon J Davies
{"title":"Centre-level fluid management practices in the BISTRO trial and their lack of association with participant fluid status and blood pressure in non-anuric haemodialysis patients.","authors":"Neena Johal, Radha Sharma, John Belcher, David Coyle, Elizabeth J Lindley, David Keane, Fergus J Caskey, Indranil Dasgupta, Andrew Davenport, Ken Farrington, Sandip Mitra, Paula Ormandy, Martin Wilkie, Jamie Macdonald, Ivonne Solis-Trapala, Julius Sim, Simon J Davies","doi":"10.1186/s12882-024-03837-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Fluid assessment and management is a key aspect of good dialysis care and is affected by patient-level characteristics and potentially centre-level practices. In this secondary analysis of the BISTRO trial we wished to establish whether centre-level practices with the potential to affect fluid status were stable over the course of the trial and explore if they had any residual associations with participant's fluid status.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two surveys (S) of fluid management practices were conducted in 32 participating centres during the trial, (S1: 2017-18 and S2: 2021-22). Domains interrogated included: dialysate sodium concentration, (D-[Na<sup>+</sup>]), fluid and salt intake, residual kidney function, use of diuretics, incremental start, approaches to fluid assessment, management and dialysate temperature, (D-<sup>o</sup>C). Associations of these practices with the closeness of the participant's post-dialysis target weight to their normally hydrated weight, pre- and post-dialysis systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure, (DBP), were analysed using intra-class correlations and multilevel modelling with adjustment for visit, age, sex and comorbidity burden.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Variations in centre practices were reported but did not change during the trial, apart from some relaxation in salt and fluid restriction in S2. For our measures of fluid status, measured 2501 times in 439 non-anuric incident haemodialysis patients, centre-level intraclass correlations were extremely low, whereas patient-level correlations ranged between 0.12 and 0.47, strongest for pre- and post-dialysis-SBP, less so for post-dialysis-DBP. Multi-level analysis found no associations between D-[Na<sup>+</sup>], or assessment methods of fluid status. In S2, one centre, routinely using a D-C<sup>o</sup> of 35°C had more divergence between the target and normally hydrated weight, but this was not observed in S1, and no other associations were found.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Centre-level fluid management practices were stable over the course of the BISTRO trial, and in contrast to patient-level factors, no centre-level associations were detected with fluid status or blood pressure. This may be because the trial imposed a standardised approach to fluid assessment in all trial participants who at least initially had residual kidney function, potentially over-riding the effects of other centre practices. Survey responses revealed substantial scope for developing and evaluating standardised protocols to optimise fluid management.</p>","PeriodicalId":9089,"journal":{"name":"BMC Nephrology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11542461/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12882-024-03837-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Fluid assessment and management is a key aspect of good dialysis care and is affected by patient-level characteristics and potentially centre-level practices. In this secondary analysis of the BISTRO trial we wished to establish whether centre-level practices with the potential to affect fluid status were stable over the course of the trial and explore if they had any residual associations with participant's fluid status.

Methods: Two surveys (S) of fluid management practices were conducted in 32 participating centres during the trial, (S1: 2017-18 and S2: 2021-22). Domains interrogated included: dialysate sodium concentration, (D-[Na+]), fluid and salt intake, residual kidney function, use of diuretics, incremental start, approaches to fluid assessment, management and dialysate temperature, (D-oC). Associations of these practices with the closeness of the participant's post-dialysis target weight to their normally hydrated weight, pre- and post-dialysis systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure, (DBP), were analysed using intra-class correlations and multilevel modelling with adjustment for visit, age, sex and comorbidity burden.

Results: Variations in centre practices were reported but did not change during the trial, apart from some relaxation in salt and fluid restriction in S2. For our measures of fluid status, measured 2501 times in 439 non-anuric incident haemodialysis patients, centre-level intraclass correlations were extremely low, whereas patient-level correlations ranged between 0.12 and 0.47, strongest for pre- and post-dialysis-SBP, less so for post-dialysis-DBP. Multi-level analysis found no associations between D-[Na+], or assessment methods of fluid status. In S2, one centre, routinely using a D-Co of 35°C had more divergence between the target and normally hydrated weight, but this was not observed in S1, and no other associations were found.

Conclusions: Centre-level fluid management practices were stable over the course of the BISTRO trial, and in contrast to patient-level factors, no centre-level associations were detected with fluid status or blood pressure. This may be because the trial imposed a standardised approach to fluid assessment in all trial participants who at least initially had residual kidney function, potentially over-riding the effects of other centre practices. Survey responses revealed substantial scope for developing and evaluating standardised protocols to optimise fluid management.

BISTRO 试验中中心一级的液体管理方法及其与非无尿血液透析患者的液体状态和血压之间的联系。
导言:体液评估和管理是良好透析护理的一个关键方面,它受到患者特征和潜在中心实践的影响。在对 BISTRO 试验的二次分析中,我们希望确定有可能影响体液状况的中心级实践在试验过程中是否稳定,并探讨它们是否与参与者的体液状况有任何残余关联:在试验期间,对 32 个参与中心的输液管理实践进行了两次调查(S1:2017-18 年和 S2:2021-22 年)。调查的领域包括:透析液钠浓度(D-[Na+])、液体和盐的摄入量、残余肾功能、利尿剂的使用、递增启动、液体评估方法、管理和透析液温度(D-oC)。使用类内相关性和多层次模型分析了这些方法与参与者透析后目标体重与其正常水合体重的接近程度、透析前后收缩压(SBP)和舒张压(DBP)之间的关系,并对就诊次数、年龄、性别和合并症负担进行了调整:据报告,除了 S2 放宽了对盐和液体的限制外,试验期间各中心的做法并无变化。我们对 439 名非尿毒症血液透析患者的液体状态进行了 2501 次测量,结果发现,中心层面的类内相关性极低,而患者层面的相关性在 0.12 到 0.47 之间,透析前和透析后的 SBP 相关性最高,而透析后的 DBP 相关性较低。多层次分析发现,D-[Na+]与体液状态评估方法之间没有关联。在 S2 中,一个中心常规使用 35°C 的 D-Co,其目标体重与正常水合体重之间的差异较大,但在 S1 中没有观察到这种情况,也没有发现其他关联:在 BISTRO 试验过程中,中心层面的液体管理方法保持稳定,与患者层面的因素不同,没有发现中心层面的因素与液体状态或血压有关。这可能是因为试验对所有至少在最初阶段有残余肾功能的试验参与者实施了标准化的液体评估方法,从而有可能抵消其他中心做法的影响。调查反馈显示,在制定和评估标准化方案以优化液体管理方面还有很大的空间。
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
BMC Nephrology
BMC Nephrology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
375
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Nephrology is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of kidney and associated disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
×
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