Catheter Insertion and Perioperative Practices within the ISPD North American Research Consortium
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
UNLABELLED: ♦ BACKGROUND: In general, efforts to standardize care based on group consensus practice guidelines have resulted in lower morbidity and mortality. Although there are published guidelines regarding insertion and perioperative management of peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheters, variation in practice patterns between centers may exist. The objective of this study is to understand variation in PD catheter insertion practices in preparation for conducting future studies. ♦ METHODS: An electronic survey was developed by the research committee of the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis - North American Research Consortium (ISPD-NARC) to be completed by physicians and nurses involved in PD programs across North America. It consisted of 45 questions related to 1) organizational characteristics; 2) PD catheter insertion practices; 3) current quality-improvement initiatives; and 4) interest in participation in PD studies. Invitation to participate in the survey was given to nephrologists and nurses in centers across Canada and the United States (US) identified by participation in the inaugural meeting of the ISPD-NARC. Descriptive statistics were applied to analyze the data. ♦ RESULTS: Fifty-one ISPD-NARC sites were identified (45% in Canada and 55% in the US) of which 42 responded (82%). Center size varied significantly, with prevalent PD population ranging from 6 - 300 (median: 60) and incident PD patients in the year prior to survey administration ranging from 3 - 180 (median: 20). The majority of centers placed fewer than 19 PD catheters/year, with a range of 0 - 50. Availability of insertion techniques varied significantly, with 83% of centers employing more than 1 insertion technique. Seventy-one percent performed laparoscopic insertion with advanced techniques (omentectomy, omentopexy, and lysis of adhesions), 62% of sites performed open surgical dissection, 10% performed blind insertion via trocar, and 29% performed blind placement with the Seldinger technique. Use of double-cuff catheters was nearly universal, with a near even distribution of catheters with pre-formed bend versus straight inter-cuff segments. There was also variation in the choice of perioperative antibiotics and perioperative flushing practices. Although 86% of centers had quality-improvement initiatives, there was little consensus as to appropriate targets. ♦ CONCLUSIONS: There is marked variability in PD catheter insertion techniques and perioperative management. Large multicenter studies are needed to determine associations between these practices and catheter and patient outcomes. This research could inform future trials and guidelines and improve practice. The ISPD-NARC is a network of PD units that has been formed to conduct multicenter studies in PD.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».