University of Hertfordshire

From the same journal

By the same authors

Standard

UK National Survey of Practice Patterns of Fluid Volume Management in Haemodialysis Patients : A Need for Evidence. / Dasgupta, Indranil; Farrington, Ken; Davies, Simon J; Davenport, Andrew; Mitra, Sandip.

In: Blood Purification, Vol. 41, No. 4, 01.04.2016, p. 324-31.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Dasgupta, Indranil ; Farrington, Ken ; Davies, Simon J ; Davenport, Andrew ; Mitra, Sandip. / UK National Survey of Practice Patterns of Fluid Volume Management in Haemodialysis Patients : A Need for Evidence. In: Blood Purification. 2016 ; Vol. 41, No. 4. pp. 324-31.

Bibtex

@article{5163f83990db4315a1402e77a5c93f53,
title = "UK National Survey of Practice Patterns of Fluid Volume Management in Haemodialysis Patients: A Need for Evidence",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Fluid management in haemodialysis (HD) affects patient experience, morbidity and mortality. Standards for best practice are lacking. A national survey of the United Kingdom was undertaken to define prevalent practice.METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed to all UK renal centres.RESULTS: Forty-five of 74 centres (173 dialysis units), serving 62% (n = 14,697) of UK HD population responded. Seventy-eight per cent had no agreed policy for managing fluid balance in patients on HD; 44% did not assess fluid status routinely. Clinical assessment was the norm; 27% used bio-impedance-based device. To achieve a target-weight, 53% reduced weight as far as tolerated. Twenty-two per cent measured residual renal function (RRF). Ninety-one per cent had no policy for fluid overload. Sixty-four per cent restricted salt and water. Ninety-three per cent used diuretics in patients with RRF. Thirty-eight per cent felt management was adequate; 77% felt there was a need for better evidence. Ninety-one per cent would participate in a study addressing this.CONCLUSION: There is an urgent need for establishing an evidence base on the optimal approaches to fluid management.",
keywords = "Diet, Disease Management, Diuretics, Electric Impedance, Fluid Therapy, Health Surveys, Humans, Kidney Failure, Chronic, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Renal Dialysis, Surveys and Questionnaires, Survival Analysis, United Kingdom, Water-Electrolyte Balance, Journal Article",
author = "Indranil Dasgupta and Ken Farrington and Davies, {Simon J} and Andrew Davenport and Sandip Mitra",
note = "{\textcopyright} 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel.",
year = "2016",
month = apr,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1159/000444246",
language = "English",
volume = "41",
pages = "324--31",
journal = "Blood Purification",
issn = "0253-5068",
publisher = "S. Karger AG",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - UK National Survey of Practice Patterns of Fluid Volume Management in Haemodialysis Patients

T2 - A Need for Evidence

AU - Dasgupta, Indranil

AU - Farrington, Ken

AU - Davies, Simon J

AU - Davenport, Andrew

AU - Mitra, Sandip

N1 - © 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel.

PY - 2016/4/1

Y1 - 2016/4/1

N2 - BACKGROUND: Fluid management in haemodialysis (HD) affects patient experience, morbidity and mortality. Standards for best practice are lacking. A national survey of the United Kingdom was undertaken to define prevalent practice.METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed to all UK renal centres.RESULTS: Forty-five of 74 centres (173 dialysis units), serving 62% (n = 14,697) of UK HD population responded. Seventy-eight per cent had no agreed policy for managing fluid balance in patients on HD; 44% did not assess fluid status routinely. Clinical assessment was the norm; 27% used bio-impedance-based device. To achieve a target-weight, 53% reduced weight as far as tolerated. Twenty-two per cent measured residual renal function (RRF). Ninety-one per cent had no policy for fluid overload. Sixty-four per cent restricted salt and water. Ninety-three per cent used diuretics in patients with RRF. Thirty-eight per cent felt management was adequate; 77% felt there was a need for better evidence. Ninety-one per cent would participate in a study addressing this.CONCLUSION: There is an urgent need for establishing an evidence base on the optimal approaches to fluid management.

AB - BACKGROUND: Fluid management in haemodialysis (HD) affects patient experience, morbidity and mortality. Standards for best practice are lacking. A national survey of the United Kingdom was undertaken to define prevalent practice.METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed to all UK renal centres.RESULTS: Forty-five of 74 centres (173 dialysis units), serving 62% (n = 14,697) of UK HD population responded. Seventy-eight per cent had no agreed policy for managing fluid balance in patients on HD; 44% did not assess fluid status routinely. Clinical assessment was the norm; 27% used bio-impedance-based device. To achieve a target-weight, 53% reduced weight as far as tolerated. Twenty-two per cent measured residual renal function (RRF). Ninety-one per cent had no policy for fluid overload. Sixty-four per cent restricted salt and water. Ninety-three per cent used diuretics in patients with RRF. Thirty-eight per cent felt management was adequate; 77% felt there was a need for better evidence. Ninety-one per cent would participate in a study addressing this.CONCLUSION: There is an urgent need for establishing an evidence base on the optimal approaches to fluid management.

KW - Diet

KW - Disease Management

KW - Diuretics

KW - Electric Impedance

KW - Fluid Therapy

KW - Health Surveys

KW - Humans

KW - Kidney Failure, Chronic

KW - Practice Patterns, Physicians'

KW - Renal Dialysis

KW - Surveys and Questionnaires

KW - Survival Analysis

KW - United Kingdom

KW - Water-Electrolyte Balance

KW - Journal Article

U2 - 10.1159/000444246

DO - 10.1159/000444246

M3 - Article

C2 - 26863433

VL - 41

SP - 324

EP - 331

JO - Blood Purification

JF - Blood Purification

SN - 0253-5068

IS - 4

ER -