-
PDF
- Split View
-
Views
-
Cite
Cite
AGUSTIN CARRENO, Eliana Olazo, Ana Muñoz, Javier Lorente, Guadalupe Caparros, Santiago Josina De, JESUS MARTIN, David Padilla, Ana Yuste, Luis Guillermo Piccone Saponara, Carmen Vozmediano, SP516
GROWTH STRATEGIES IN A CONSOLIDATED PERITONEAL DIALYSIS PROGRAM, COINCIDENTAL WITH RESPONSIBLE MEDICAL AND NURSING PERSONNEL REPLACEMENT, Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, Volume 34, Issue Supplement_1, June 2019, gfz103.SP516, https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfz103.SP516 - Share Icon Share
INTRODUCTION: Although the evidence is scarce, it seems recommendable: -the absence of rotations in a peritoneal dialysis unit (DP) and therefore -the presence of the figures of a medical and nursing manager of reference to be able to implement clinical strategies and management during a period of time long enough to allow its proper development.
METHODS: In 2017, the organizational chart of renal replacement therapy (TRS) in our service has been modified:
-Creation of a special medical Advanced CKD consultation, exclusive for candidates for renal replacement therapy(RRT),(Ccr less than 20 ml / min, stages 4-5) and reduction in the number of patients attended (from 15 to 8 patients) with a longer time per patient than previously.
-Program of information and free choice of RRT, including the options of anticipated kidney transplantation in vivo, peritoneal dialysis (CAPD and APD by patient preference) in addition to home hemodialysis(HHD).
-Common communication with Surgery Service for assessment and inclusion of patients who choise PD, avoiding normal waiting lists until implantation.
-The management team has encouraged continuous training, providing support in this design that coincides with the change of the staff responsible for the DP in the last two decades, by personnel who have voluntarily chosen this department of the nephrology service. This multifactorial strategy has been implemented to counteract the negative effect that could be derived from the change of clinical and nursing managers, maintaining the previous care protocols; and to boost the growth of the program.
We review 2018 (year of implementation), compared with records of the last fifteen years (2004-2018).
RESULTS: Table(short view,2009-2018).
Table, short view(10yr)
. | 2009 . | 2010 . | 2011 . | 2012 . | 2013 . | 2014 . | 2015 . | 2016 . | 2017 . | 2018 . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
patients | 11 | 10 | 15 | 19 | 22 | 19 | 18 | 10 | 27 | 41 |
new patients | 6 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 12 | 10 | 10 | 4 | 18 | 16 |
transfer HD | 3 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
Exitus | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
perit catheter | 7 | 5 | 8 | 15 | 10 | 12 | 6 | 4 | 27 | 20 |
Transplant | 4 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 0 | 3 |
peritonitis | 2 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 6 |
. | 2009 . | 2010 . | 2011 . | 2012 . | 2013 . | 2014 . | 2015 . | 2016 . | 2017 . | 2018 . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
patients | 11 | 10 | 15 | 19 | 22 | 19 | 18 | 10 | 27 | 41 |
new patients | 6 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 12 | 10 | 10 | 4 | 18 | 16 |
transfer HD | 3 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
Exitus | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
perit catheter | 7 | 5 | 8 | 15 | 10 | 12 | 6 | 4 | 27 | 20 |
Transplant | 4 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 0 | 3 |
peritonitis | 2 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 6 |
Table, short view(10yr)
. | 2009 . | 2010 . | 2011 . | 2012 . | 2013 . | 2014 . | 2015 . | 2016 . | 2017 . | 2018 . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
patients | 11 | 10 | 15 | 19 | 22 | 19 | 18 | 10 | 27 | 41 |
new patients | 6 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 12 | 10 | 10 | 4 | 18 | 16 |
transfer HD | 3 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
Exitus | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
perit catheter | 7 | 5 | 8 | 15 | 10 | 12 | 6 | 4 | 27 | 20 |
Transplant | 4 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 0 | 3 |
peritonitis | 2 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 6 |
. | 2009 . | 2010 . | 2011 . | 2012 . | 2013 . | 2014 . | 2015 . | 2016 . | 2017 . | 2018 . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
patients | 11 | 10 | 15 | 19 | 22 | 19 | 18 | 10 | 27 | 41 |
new patients | 6 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 12 | 10 | 10 | 4 | 18 | 16 |
transfer HD | 3 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
Exitus | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
perit catheter | 7 | 5 | 8 | 15 | 10 | 12 | 6 | 4 | 27 | 20 |
Transplant | 4 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 0 | 3 |
peritonitis | 2 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 6 |
CONCLUSIONS: A multifactorial strategy, as well as the motivation of responsible staff, in a consolidated peritoneal dialysis program, can be the key to avoid the negative impact of a change in the team responsible for the peritoneal dialysis program. The longer time per patient has a positive impact on the freedom of choice of the RRT.
Comments