MO700: Outcomes of Remote Patient Monitoring among Peritoneal Dialysis Population in the Covid-19 ERA
Abstract BACKGROUND AND AIMS Automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) is a growing PD modality but as with other home dialysis methods, the lack of monitoring of patients' adherence to prescriptions is a limitation with potential negative impact on clinical outcome parameters. Remote patient monitor...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation dialysis, transplantation, 2022-05, Vol.37 (Supplement_3) |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | |
|---|---|
| container_issue | Supplement_3 |
| container_start_page | |
| container_title | Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation |
| container_volume | 37 |
| creator | Kaies Ibrahim Elsayed Ali, Hatem Mohamed, Mahmoud Hamer, Rizwan |
| description | Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) is a growing PD modality but as with other home dialysis methods, the lack of monitoring of patients' adherence to prescriptions is a limitation with potential negative impact on clinical outcome parameters. Remote patient monitoring (RPM-PD) allowing the clinical team to have access to dialysis data and adjust the treatment may overcome this limitation. As a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the importance of RPM programs has raised to allow the physicians ensure optimal care of PD patients. In addition, to avoid the increased risk of complications or technique failure, the present study sought to determine clinical outcomes associated with RPM use in patients on APD therapy.
METHOD
We performed a systematic review in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases to select studies that met the inclusion criteria. The search terms used were: peritoneal dialysis, remote monitoring, sharesource, outcomes, peritonitis, hospitalization, technique failure and adherence. These search terms were individually used and then combined in different databases. References within the chosen studies were reviewed. We followed the recommendations of Cochrane collaboration and the Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses guidelines. STATA package-15 was used. We combined all study-specific estimates using inverse-variant weighted averages of logarithmic relative risk in random effects model. Confidence interval including the value of 1 was used evident for statistically significant estimate. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Higgins I² statistic. Heterogeneity was estimated when the level of P-value was |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1093/ndt/gfac078.037 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>oup_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_ndt_gfac078_037</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/ndt/gfac078.037</oup_id><sourcerecordid>10.1093/ndt/gfac078.037</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c757-3fd24b1d94107347d618f7e8a66cc00e6106aa025e714af9bd4536974717bbeb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkEFLwzAYhoMoOKdnrzkL3b40adJ4G3NTYWNj7F7SNpmRNhlNJuzfG9nuXr4XPt7nPTwIPROYEJB06to4PRjVgCgnQMUNGhHGIctpWdyiUWqQDAqQ9-ghhG8AkLkQI6TXGwHwijen2PheB-wN3uneR423KlrtIl57Z6MfrDtg1ft0t3pID6dVh9-s6s7BBrz1x1OXAO-wdTh-aTz3P7bNiMSL3ewR3RnVBf10zTHaLxf7-Ue22rx_zmerrBGFyKhpc1aTVjICgjLRclIaoUvFedMAaE6AKwV5oQVhysi6ZQXlUjBBRF3rmo7R9DLbDD6EQZvqONheDeeKQPUnqUqSqqukKklKxMuF8Kfjv-VfedJpKw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>MO700: Outcomes of Remote Patient Monitoring among Peritoneal Dialysis Population in the Covid-19 ERA</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Kaies Ibrahim Elsayed Ali, Hatem ; Mohamed, Mahmoud ; Hamer, Rizwan</creator><creatorcontrib>Kaies Ibrahim Elsayed Ali, Hatem ; Mohamed, Mahmoud ; Hamer, Rizwan</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) is a growing PD modality but as with other home dialysis methods, the lack of monitoring of patients' adherence to prescriptions is a limitation with potential negative impact on clinical outcome parameters. Remote patient monitoring (RPM-PD) allowing the clinical team to have access to dialysis data and adjust the treatment may overcome this limitation. As a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the importance of RPM programs has raised to allow the physicians ensure optimal care of PD patients. In addition, to avoid the increased risk of complications or technique failure, the present study sought to determine clinical outcomes associated with RPM use in patients on APD therapy.
METHOD
We performed a systematic review in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases to select studies that met the inclusion criteria. The search terms used were: peritoneal dialysis, remote monitoring, sharesource, outcomes, peritonitis, hospitalization, technique failure and adherence. These search terms were individually used and then combined in different databases. References within the chosen studies were reviewed. We followed the recommendations of Cochrane collaboration and the Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses guidelines. STATA package-15 was used. We combined all study-specific estimates using inverse-variant weighted averages of logarithmic relative risk in random effects model. Confidence interval including the value of 1 was used evident for statistically significant estimate. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Higgins I² statistic. Heterogeneity was estimated when the level of P-value was < 0.1. Results of the random effects model were spread out on the forest plot graph.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies were included in our meta-analysis. In qualitative analysis: five studies showed that RPM in APD patients had lower hospitalization rates compared to traditional PD. Five studies showed better adherence in the RPM-PD group. Five studies showed better outcomes among RPM-APD patients in terms of symptom control, management of fluid balance, blood pressure control, dialysis prescription and electrolyte management. Five studies showed that RPM-APD had better outcomes in terms of patient independence, quality of life, patient and caregiver satisfaction. Five studies showed better cost-effectiveness in RPM-PD compared to traditional PD. Four studies showed better cost-effectiveness in RMP-PD. Three studies showed lower technique failure rates in RPM-PD compared to traditional PD. Three studies showed lower mortality rates in RPM-PD compared to traditional PD. Three studies showed better quality of life and patient satisfaction in RPM-PD. In quantitative analysis, RPM-PD patients had lower rates of technique failure (log relative risk = −0.32, 95% CI: −0.59 to −0.04), lower hospitalization rates (SMD = −0.84, 95% CI: −1.24 to −0.45), lower mortality rates (log RR = −0.26, 95% CI: −0.44 to −0.08) in comparison to traditional PD.
CONCLUSION
RPM-PD has better outcomes in terms of cost-effectiveness, patient adherence, hospital admissions, rate of peritonitis, technique failure, mortality rates, symptom control, quality of life, patient and caregiver satisfaction.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0931-0509</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1460-2385</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfac078.037</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><ispartof>Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation, 2022-05, Vol.37 (Supplement_3)</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the ERA. 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kaies Ibrahim Elsayed Ali, Hatem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mohamed, Mahmoud</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hamer, Rizwan</creatorcontrib><title>MO700: Outcomes of Remote Patient Monitoring among Peritoneal Dialysis Population in the Covid-19 ERA</title><title>Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation</title><description>Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) is a growing PD modality but as with other home dialysis methods, the lack of monitoring of patients' adherence to prescriptions is a limitation with potential negative impact on clinical outcome parameters. Remote patient monitoring (RPM-PD) allowing the clinical team to have access to dialysis data and adjust the treatment may overcome this limitation. As a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the importance of RPM programs has raised to allow the physicians ensure optimal care of PD patients. In addition, to avoid the increased risk of complications or technique failure, the present study sought to determine clinical outcomes associated with RPM use in patients on APD therapy.
METHOD
We performed a systematic review in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases to select studies that met the inclusion criteria. The search terms used were: peritoneal dialysis, remote monitoring, sharesource, outcomes, peritonitis, hospitalization, technique failure and adherence. These search terms were individually used and then combined in different databases. References within the chosen studies were reviewed. We followed the recommendations of Cochrane collaboration and the Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses guidelines. STATA package-15 was used. We combined all study-specific estimates using inverse-variant weighted averages of logarithmic relative risk in random effects model. Confidence interval including the value of 1 was used evident for statistically significant estimate. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Higgins I² statistic. Heterogeneity was estimated when the level of P-value was < 0.1. Results of the random effects model were spread out on the forest plot graph.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies were included in our meta-analysis. In qualitative analysis: five studies showed that RPM in APD patients had lower hospitalization rates compared to traditional PD. Five studies showed better adherence in the RPM-PD group. Five studies showed better outcomes among RPM-APD patients in terms of symptom control, management of fluid balance, blood pressure control, dialysis prescription and electrolyte management. Five studies showed that RPM-APD had better outcomes in terms of patient independence, quality of life, patient and caregiver satisfaction. Five studies showed better cost-effectiveness in RPM-PD compared to traditional PD. Four studies showed better cost-effectiveness in RMP-PD. Three studies showed lower technique failure rates in RPM-PD compared to traditional PD. Three studies showed lower mortality rates in RPM-PD compared to traditional PD. Three studies showed better quality of life and patient satisfaction in RPM-PD. In quantitative analysis, RPM-PD patients had lower rates of technique failure (log relative risk = −0.32, 95% CI: −0.59 to −0.04), lower hospitalization rates (SMD = −0.84, 95% CI: −1.24 to −0.45), lower mortality rates (log RR = −0.26, 95% CI: −0.44 to −0.08) in comparison to traditional PD.
CONCLUSION
RPM-PD has better outcomes in terms of cost-effectiveness, patient adherence, hospital admissions, rate of peritonitis, technique failure, mortality rates, symptom control, quality of life, patient and caregiver satisfaction.</description><issn>0931-0509</issn><issn>1460-2385</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkEFLwzAYhoMoOKdnrzkL3b40adJ4G3NTYWNj7F7SNpmRNhlNJuzfG9nuXr4XPt7nPTwIPROYEJB06to4PRjVgCgnQMUNGhHGIctpWdyiUWqQDAqQ9-ghhG8AkLkQI6TXGwHwijen2PheB-wN3uneR423KlrtIl57Z6MfrDtg1ft0t3pID6dVh9-s6s7BBrz1x1OXAO-wdTh-aTz3P7bNiMSL3ewR3RnVBf10zTHaLxf7-Ue22rx_zmerrBGFyKhpc1aTVjICgjLRclIaoUvFedMAaE6AKwV5oQVhysi6ZQXlUjBBRF3rmo7R9DLbDD6EQZvqONheDeeKQPUnqUqSqqukKklKxMuF8Kfjv-VfedJpKw</recordid><startdate>20220503</startdate><enddate>20220503</enddate><creator>Kaies Ibrahim Elsayed Ali, Hatem</creator><creator>Mohamed, Mahmoud</creator><creator>Hamer, Rizwan</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20220503</creationdate><title>MO700: Outcomes of Remote Patient Monitoring among Peritoneal Dialysis Population in the Covid-19 ERA</title><author>Kaies Ibrahim Elsayed Ali, Hatem ; Mohamed, Mahmoud ; Hamer, Rizwan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c757-3fd24b1d94107347d618f7e8a66cc00e6106aa025e714af9bd4536974717bbeb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kaies Ibrahim Elsayed Ali, Hatem</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mohamed, Mahmoud</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hamer, Rizwan</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kaies Ibrahim Elsayed Ali, Hatem</au><au>Mohamed, Mahmoud</au><au>Hamer, Rizwan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>MO700: Outcomes of Remote Patient Monitoring among Peritoneal Dialysis Population in the Covid-19 ERA</atitle><jtitle>Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation</jtitle><date>2022-05-03</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>Supplement_3</issue><issn>0931-0509</issn><eissn>1460-2385</eissn><abstract>Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) is a growing PD modality but as with other home dialysis methods, the lack of monitoring of patients' adherence to prescriptions is a limitation with potential negative impact on clinical outcome parameters. Remote patient monitoring (RPM-PD) allowing the clinical team to have access to dialysis data and adjust the treatment may overcome this limitation. As a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the importance of RPM programs has raised to allow the physicians ensure optimal care of PD patients. In addition, to avoid the increased risk of complications or technique failure, the present study sought to determine clinical outcomes associated with RPM use in patients on APD therapy.
METHOD
We performed a systematic review in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases to select studies that met the inclusion criteria. The search terms used were: peritoneal dialysis, remote monitoring, sharesource, outcomes, peritonitis, hospitalization, technique failure and adherence. These search terms were individually used and then combined in different databases. References within the chosen studies were reviewed. We followed the recommendations of Cochrane collaboration and the Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses guidelines. STATA package-15 was used. We combined all study-specific estimates using inverse-variant weighted averages of logarithmic relative risk in random effects model. Confidence interval including the value of 1 was used evident for statistically significant estimate. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Higgins I² statistic. Heterogeneity was estimated when the level of P-value was < 0.1. Results of the random effects model were spread out on the forest plot graph.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies were included in our meta-analysis. In qualitative analysis: five studies showed that RPM in APD patients had lower hospitalization rates compared to traditional PD. Five studies showed better adherence in the RPM-PD group. Five studies showed better outcomes among RPM-APD patients in terms of symptom control, management of fluid balance, blood pressure control, dialysis prescription and electrolyte management. Five studies showed that RPM-APD had better outcomes in terms of patient independence, quality of life, patient and caregiver satisfaction. Five studies showed better cost-effectiveness in RPM-PD compared to traditional PD. Four studies showed better cost-effectiveness in RMP-PD. Three studies showed lower technique failure rates in RPM-PD compared to traditional PD. Three studies showed lower mortality rates in RPM-PD compared to traditional PD. Three studies showed better quality of life and patient satisfaction in RPM-PD. In quantitative analysis, RPM-PD patients had lower rates of technique failure (log relative risk = −0.32, 95% CI: −0.59 to −0.04), lower hospitalization rates (SMD = −0.84, 95% CI: −1.24 to −0.45), lower mortality rates (log RR = −0.26, 95% CI: −0.44 to −0.08) in comparison to traditional PD.
CONCLUSION
RPM-PD has better outcomes in terms of cost-effectiveness, patient adherence, hospital admissions, rate of peritonitis, technique failure, mortality rates, symptom control, quality of life, patient and caregiver satisfaction.</abstract><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/ndt/gfac078.037</doi></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0931-0509 |
| ispartof | Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation, 2022-05, Vol.37 (Supplement_3) |
| issn | 0931-0509 1460-2385 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_ndt_gfac078_037 |
| source | Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| title | MO700: Outcomes of Remote Patient Monitoring among Peritoneal Dialysis Population in the Covid-19 ERA |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T18%3A58%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-oup_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=MO700:%20Outcomes%20of%20Remote%20Patient%20Monitoring%20among%20Peritoneal%20Dialysis%20Population%20in%20the%20Covid-19%20ERA&rft.jtitle=Nephrology,%20dialysis,%20transplantation&rft.au=Kaies%20Ibrahim%20Elsayed%20Ali,%20Hatem&rft.date=2022-05-03&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=Supplement_3&rft.issn=0931-0509&rft.eissn=1460-2385&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/ndt/gfac078.037&rft_dat=%3Coup_cross%3E10.1093/ndt/gfac078.037%3C/oup_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_oup_id=10.1093/ndt/gfac078.037&rfr_iscdi=true |