MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2048065302 · doi:10.1097/00002480-200109000-00014

Thoughts on the ASAIO Conference and Text of the Presentation

2001· article· en· W2048065302 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joyce Cagle

Notice bibliographique

RevueASAIO Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHemodialysisDialysisMedicineFeelingReimbursementPresentation (obstetrics)Home hemodialysisHealth careGerontologyPsychologySurgerySocial psychologyPolitical scienceLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Recently I attended the American Society of Artificial Internal Organs (ASAIO) conference in New York to present the patient’s view of nightly home hemodialysis (NHHD). Before my presentation, I listened to several other presentations from medical professionals; each one spoke most favorably for daily dialysis, in either the long nightly form or the short daily form. Currently, Heath Care Financing Administration (HCFA) pays for three dialysis treatments a week, and Susan Robers’ (MPA) presentation entitled “Cost of Daily Hemodialysis,” showed that overall, daily hemodialysis would not increase the amount of reimbursement for dialysis patients, considering the reduction in hospital days and Epogen (Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA) usage. The HCFA representative, Dr. Kang, was very receptive, but indicated the need to have congressional support. Dr. Robert Lindsay talked about the Canadian government and hemodialysis. The Canadian plan seems to work very well for the dialysis patients in that country. Dr. Robert Lockridge presented slides and reported on the nightly program in Lynchburg, Virginia. His report supported the findings of fewer hospitalizations, less Epogen taken, reduced blood pressure, no binders, and overall improvement in health. The patient speaking for short daily hemodialysis spoke of feeling much better, returning to full time work, regaining confidence, and in general, leading a better life. The following are some of my remarks about long nightly hemodialysis: “As the patient representative of the Nightly Home Hemodialysis Group in Lynchburg, Virginia, I want to share with you some of the many benefits of this dialysis modality. Mere words cannot describe to you the difference this has made in my life. Basically, this is hemodialysis done 6 nights a week, for 7 to 9 hours each night while sleeping, using slower dialysate, ultrafiltration, and blood flow rates. My introduction to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) began abruptly 11 years ago. Continuous cyclical peritoneal dialysis (CCPD), continuous abdominoperitoneal dialysis (CAPD), transplant, rejection, in-center hemodialysis, and nightly home hemodialysis—I have experienced all the options. After years of almost continuous illness, in just 1 week of nightly treatments it was all behind me. Gone were the years of no energy, high blood pressure, monster headaches, and the ever present nausea. I felt normal! Normal, what a great feeling. What’s so great about feeling normal you say? Well, I began to do the things I had wanted to do for a long time—took on extra responsibilities at work, began to plan for the future, and even added to my retirement account, all the things normal people do when they expect to have a future. The physical changes were even more dramatic than the psychologic changes—blood pressure normalized to 110 over 70 after the very first night; I had previously been on a combination of five blood pressure medications. Color returned to my previously ashen skin, I had energy again, lab results were, well, normal, and continue to be normal. I’ve felt even better than when I had the transplant. As you know, Medicare insurance currently does not reimburse dialysis units for the cost of more than three treatments per week, but it is these extra treatments that make the difference of merely existing on dialysis and living a full and productive life on dialysis. In my almost 3 years on NHHD, I have been hospitalized 1 day, and it was not ESRD related. Before NHHD, the average was 6 times a year, with stays ranging from 3 days to 3 weeks, usually on holidays. Frequently, I am asked questions by other patients considering NHHD, the questions most often asked include: Does this really make a difference in the way you feel? Yes it does. What kind of machine do you use? It is a Fresenius machine. Can you sleep? Yes. The first few days are a bit difficult; you don’t trust the machine yet, but after a few sleepless nights you will relax and sleep. Is it safe? Yes, there is a self-test of all systems before each use, and alarms to warn you of any dangers. How long does it take to learn to use the machine? Approximately 5 weeks. How long does it take to set up the machine? Approximately 1 hour. How many catheter infections have you had? None. Are there any diet and liquid restrictions? None, except for days off, on those days I am careful with potassium and liquids. Isn’t it tiresome to do this 6 nights a week? It is just routine, like taking a shower. As I said earlier, I have difficulty finding the words to convey to you the difference NHHD has made in my life. Just realize, I have my life back. This is the miracle people who are stricken with ESRD pray for. They just don’t know it yet. I thank Dr. Pierratos for helping to develop this in Canada, and Dr. Lockridge for bringing it to Lynchburg and giving me the opportunity to benefit from it. Thank you.” Everything said at the conference was favorable for the end-stage renal disease patient.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,668
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,211

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,030
Tête enseignante GPT0,285
Écart entre enseignants0,254 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2001
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueASAIO JournalMême sujetDialysis and Renal Disease ManagementTravaux en français237 207