Wai Yin Leung RN, FNP-BC, DNurs, Marques S. N. Ng RN, PhD, Anthony K. C. Hau MBChD, MRCP, Winnie K. W. So RN, PhD, FAAN
{"title":"老年腹膜透析患者的再培训方案:一项随机对照试验。","authors":"Wai Yin Leung RN, FNP-BC, DNurs, Marques S. N. Ng RN, PhD, Anthony K. C. Hau MBChD, MRCP, Winnie K. W. So RN, PhD, FAAN","doi":"10.1111/jorc.12450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Peritonitis is a common cause of hospitalisation and death among patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis. Periodic retraining is recommended to prevent peritonitis, especially in older adults.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>We evaluated the effectiveness of a retraining programme for reducing peritonitis and exit site infection rates in older adults on peritoneal dialysis. The cost–benefit ratio was also calculated.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design</h3>\n \n <p>A two-arm prospective randomised controlled trial.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Participants</h3>\n \n <p>One hundred and thirty patients aged 55 years or older were recruited. Participants were randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. While both groups received usual care, the intervention group received a retraining programme (a knowledge and practical assessment and a one-on-one retraining session) 90 days after starting home-based continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis therapy.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Measurements</h3>\n \n <p>The outcomes included peritonitis rate, exit site infection rate and direct medical costs at 180, 270, and 360 days after starting home-based continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis therapy.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>No significant differences were found in the baseline characteristics between groups. The peritonitis rates were 0.11 episodes per patient-year in the intervention group versus 0.13 in the control group. The incidence of exit site infection was 20.0% in the intervention group and 12.3% in the control group. The cost–benefit ratio of retraining was 1:9.6. None of the results were statistically significant.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The absence of statistical significance may be partly explained by the premature termination of the study. Large-scale multi-centre trials are warranted to examine the effectiveness of retraining. The timing and long-term effects of retraining also need to be examined.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16947,"journal":{"name":"Journal of renal care","volume":"49 4","pages":"253-263"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Retraining programme for older patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis: A randomised controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"Wai Yin Leung RN, FNP-BC, DNurs, Marques S. N. Ng RN, PhD, Anthony K. C. Hau MBChD, MRCP, Winnie K. W. So RN, PhD, FAAN\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jorc.12450\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Peritonitis is a common cause of hospitalisation and death among patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis. Periodic retraining is recommended to prevent peritonitis, especially in older adults.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>We evaluated the effectiveness of a retraining programme for reducing peritonitis and exit site infection rates in older adults on peritoneal dialysis. The cost–benefit ratio was also calculated.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Design</h3>\\n \\n <p>A two-arm prospective randomised controlled trial.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Participants</h3>\\n \\n <p>One hundred and thirty patients aged 55 years or older were recruited. Participants were randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. While both groups received usual care, the intervention group received a retraining programme (a knowledge and practical assessment and a one-on-one retraining session) 90 days after starting home-based continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis therapy.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Measurements</h3>\\n \\n <p>The outcomes included peritonitis rate, exit site infection rate and direct medical costs at 180, 270, and 360 days after starting home-based continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis therapy.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>No significant differences were found in the baseline characteristics between groups. The peritonitis rates were 0.11 episodes per patient-year in the intervention group versus 0.13 in the control group. The incidence of exit site infection was 20.0% in the intervention group and 12.3% in the control group. The cost–benefit ratio of retraining was 1:9.6. None of the results were statistically significant.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The absence of statistical significance may be partly explained by the premature termination of the study. Large-scale multi-centre trials are warranted to examine the effectiveness of retraining. The timing and long-term effects of retraining also need to be examined.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16947,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of renal care\",\"volume\":\"49 4\",\"pages\":\"253-263\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of renal care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jorc.12450\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of renal care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jorc.12450","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Retraining programme for older patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis: A randomised controlled trial
Background
Peritonitis is a common cause of hospitalisation and death among patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis. Periodic retraining is recommended to prevent peritonitis, especially in older adults.
Objectives
We evaluated the effectiveness of a retraining programme for reducing peritonitis and exit site infection rates in older adults on peritoneal dialysis. The cost–benefit ratio was also calculated.
Design
A two-arm prospective randomised controlled trial.
Participants
One hundred and thirty patients aged 55 years or older were recruited. Participants were randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. While both groups received usual care, the intervention group received a retraining programme (a knowledge and practical assessment and a one-on-one retraining session) 90 days after starting home-based continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis therapy.
Measurements
The outcomes included peritonitis rate, exit site infection rate and direct medical costs at 180, 270, and 360 days after starting home-based continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis therapy.
Results
No significant differences were found in the baseline characteristics between groups. The peritonitis rates were 0.11 episodes per patient-year in the intervention group versus 0.13 in the control group. The incidence of exit site infection was 20.0% in the intervention group and 12.3% in the control group. The cost–benefit ratio of retraining was 1:9.6. None of the results were statistically significant.
Conclusions
The absence of statistical significance may be partly explained by the premature termination of the study. Large-scale multi-centre trials are warranted to examine the effectiveness of retraining. The timing and long-term effects of retraining also need to be examined.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Renal Care (JORC), formally EDTNA/ERCA Journal, is the official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Nursing Association/European Renal Care Association (EDTNA/ERCA).
The Journal of Renal Care is an international peer-reviewed journal for the multi-professional health care team caring for people with kidney disease and those who research this specialised area of health care. Kidney disease is a chronic illness with four basic treatments: haemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis conservative management and transplantation, which includes emptive transplantation, living donor & cadavaric transplantation. The continuous world-wide increase of people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) means that research and shared knowledge into the causes and treatment is vital to delay the progression of CKD and to improve treatments and the care given.
The Journal of Renal Care is an important journal for all health-care professionals working in this and associated conditions, such as diabetes and cardio-vascular disease amongst others. It covers the trajectory of the disease from the first diagnosis to palliative care and includes acute renal injury. The Journal of Renal Care accepts that kidney disease affects not only the patients but also their families and significant others and provides a forum for both the psycho-social and physiological aspects of the disease.