Evaluating the clinical experience of a regional in‐center nocturnal hemodialysis program: The patient and staff perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: End-stage kidney disease causes significant morbidity, mortality, and reduced quality of life. Despite improvements in conventional hemodialysis, these problems persist. In-center nocturnal hemodialysis (INHD) has been shown to be beneficial in observational studies. This report outlines a 4-year renal network experience of INHD from the patient and frontline staff perspective. METHODS: Staff and patients' experiences of INHD were evaluated through two work streams. Work stream one: 12 patients who chose to stop INHD and 24 patients who chose to continue with INHD completed an anonymous survey. Work stream two: one-to-one interviews with 20 patients receiving INHD and seven staff working INHD shifts were conducted. Clinical incident reporting for conventional hemodialysis and INHD from April 2014 to December 2018 was reviewed. FINDINGS: Work stream one: Five themes were identified; facilities, time, health and well-being, sleep, and transport. A patient "starter pack" was developed and improvements to the dialysis unit were completed. Work stream two: Patient interviews demonstrated starter packs to aid sleep were well received; sleep itself was not a single reason to discontinue INHD. Staff indicated that their greatest concern was staffing levels; although staff-to-patient ratio remains unchanged, total numbers on INHD shifts were fewer, causing concern around less colleague availability for support during an emergency. SAFETY: 363 clinical incidents were reported across all dialysis shifts; for conventional hemodialysis, a larger proportion were due to medical interventions, infection control, and transport; for INHD, most incidents centered around communication with patients and relatives, delays in patient transfer, and issues with medical equipment or facilities. DISCUSSION: Patients continue with INHD due to increased social time and perceived health benefits. Patient starter packs and adjustments to the dialysis unit may enhance sleep. This experience has optimized the design of the NightLife study; a randomized controlled trial evaluated the effect of INHD on quality of life.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".