Assisted Peritoneal Dialysis Implementation: A Pilot Program From a Large Dialysis Unit in Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background:Kidney failure prevalence is increasing in older patients for whom dialysis initiation can be challenging. Assisted peritoneal dialysis (PD), where PD is performed with the help of a healthcare worker, can facilitate PD for frailer patients who may not be candidate otherwise.Objectives:This study aimed to assess the feasibility of implementing the first pilot assisted PD program in Quebec (Canada) and to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of the PD cohort before and after assisted PD availability.Design:Observational retrospective cohort study.Setting and Population:All adult patients initiating PD between 2015 and 2020 in a single-center dialysis unit were included.Measurements:Incidence, characteristics, and outcomes of patients with PD were compared between (1) the “pre” (2015-2017) and the “post” assisted PD era (2018-2020) and (2) patients with assisted PD and independent PD in the more recent period.Methods:The primary outcome was peritonitis rate over the first year. Secondary outcomes included hospitalization, transfers to in-center hemodialysis (HD) and mortality.Results:Overall, 124 patients initiated PD with an annual incidence of 17 ± 3 patients during the “pre” and 24 ± 8 patients during the “post” assisted PD era (<i>P</i> = .18). First-year peritonitis rate was similar over the 2 eras. Years of PD initiation and use of assisted PD were not associated with risk peritonitis (over total follow-up) after adjustment. Adjusted hazard of transfer to HD or death was higher during the “post” era (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.42-5.58). Seventeen patients received assisted PD including 13 (18%) of the 72 patients initiated between 2018 and 2020. Patients with assisted PD were older than those with independent PD (72 [64-84] vs. 59 [47-67], <i>P</i> = .006) and received assistance for 0.8 (0.4-1.5) years. When comparing assisted and independent cohorts, there were no differences in crude rates of peritonitis or hospitalization.Limitations:Single-center study with small sample size.Conclusion:This study shows the feasibility of implementing an assisted PD program, with favorable overall outcomes including similar rates of peritonitis during the first year after PD initiation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.635 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".