No abstract

Background Patients receiving peritoneal dialysis (PD) endure an ongoing regimen of daily fluid exchanges and are at risk of potentially life-threatening complications and debilitating symptoms that can limit their ability to participate in life activities. The aim of the study was to identify the characteristics, content and psychometric properties of measures for life participation used in research in PD. Methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsychInfo, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to May 2020 for all studies that reported life participation in patients on PD. The characteristics, dimensions of life participation and psychometric properties of these measures were extracted and analyzed. Results Of the 301 studies included, 17 (6%) were randomized studies and 284 (94%) were nonrandomized studies. Forty-two different measures were used to assess life participation. Of these, 23 (55%) were used in only one study. Fifteen (36%) measures were specifically designed to assess life participation, while 27 (64%) measures assessed broader constructs, such as quality of life, but included questions on life participation. The 36-Item Short Form Health Survey and Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form were the most frequently used measures [122 (41%) and 86 (29%) studies, respectively]. Eight (19%) measures had validation data to support their use in patients on PD. Conclusions The many measures currently used to assess life participation in patients receiving PD vary in their characteristics, content and validation. Further work to pilot and validate potential measures is required to establish a core patient-reported outcome measure to assess life participation in patients receiving PD.

For health scientists, knowledge translation refers to the process of facilitating uptake of knowledge into clinical practice or decision making. Since high-quality clinical research that is not applied cannot improve outcomes, knowledge translation is critical for realizing the value and potential for all types of health research. Knowledge translation is particularly relevant for areas within health care where gaps in care are known to exist, which is the case for some areas of management for people with chronic kidney disease (CKD), including assessment of proteinuria. Given that proteinuria is a key marker of cardiovascular and renal risk, forthcoming international practice guidelines will recommend including proteinuria within staging systems for CKD. While this revised staging system will facilitate identification of patients at higher risk for progression of CKD and mortality who benefit from intervention, strategies to ensure its appropriate uptake will be particularly important. This article describes key elements of effective knowledge translation strategies based on the knowledge-to-action cycle framework and describes options for effective knowledge translation interventions related to the new CKD guidelines, focusing on recommendations related to assessment for proteinuria specifically. The article also presents findings from a multidisciplinary meeting aimed at developing knowledge translation intervention strategies, with input from key stakeholders (researchers, knowledge users, decision makers and collaborators), to facilitate implementation of this guideline. These considerations are relevant for dissemination and implementation of guidelines on other topics and in other clinical settings.

Central nervous system toxicity due to an overdose of lidocaine was quickly reversed by intravenous lipid emulsion in our patient.

BackgroundDeficits in the transfer of information between inpatient and outpatient physicians are common and pose a patient safety risk. This is particularly the case for vulnerable populations such as patients with end-stage renal disease requiring dialysis. These patients have unique and complex health care needs that may not be effectively communicated on standard discharge summaries, which may result in potential medical errors and adverse events.ObjectiveTo evaluate Canadian dialysis center directors’ perceptions of deficiencies in the content and quality of hospital discharge summaries for dialysis patients.MethodsA web-based, cross-sectional survey of Canadian dialysis center directors was performed between September and November 2010. The survey consisted of three parts. The first part was designed to assess dialysis center directors’ attitudes on the quality of discharge summaries they receive. The second part was designed to elicit respondents’ preferences for discharge summary content, and the third part consisted of questions regarding demographic and practice information.ResultsOf 79 dialysis center directors, 21 (27%) completed the survey. Sixty-two percent felt that current discharge summaries inadequately communicate dialysis-specific information. Receipt of antibiotics for line sepsis or peritonitis, modifications to vascular access, and changes in target weight/dialysis prescription were rated as essential dialysis-specific information to include in discharge summaries by respondents.ConclusionOver three quarters of dialysis center directors find the current practice of transferring discharge information for hospitalized dialysis patients grossly inadequate. The inclusion of dialysis-specific information may improve the quality of discharge summaries for dialysis patients.