PDI
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Perit Dial Int 29(3): 355-357
2009
© 2009 International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wilkie, M.
Right arrow Articles by Wild, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wilkie, M.
Right arrow Articles by Wild, J.

SHORT REPORTS

Peritoneal Dialysis Access — Results from a UK Survey

Martin Wilkie1,* and Janet Wild2

Sheffield Kidney Institute1 Northern General Hospital, Sheffield Baxter Healthcare2 Compton, United Kingdom

a The Renal Association Working Party on Peritoneal Access comprised Jonathan Barratt, Robert Diament, Stephen Holt, Helen Hurst, Badri Shrestha, and Christopher Winearls.

* e-mail: martin.wilkie{at}sth.nhs.uk

{diamondsuit} Objective: To obtain information about peritoneal dialysis (PD) access practices in the United Kingdom.

{diamondsuit} Methods: During July of 2007, a PD access survey was circulated to 80 clinical directors of renal units in the UK.

{diamondsuit} Results: Returns were received from 43 units; annual catheter insertion numbers ranging from 5 to 100 (median 34, mean 38) were reported. The majority of responding centers (30/43) reported a waiting time for catheter insertion of 1 week to 1 month; primary patency rates were reported as >90% in 26 and 60%–90% in 16 centers. Day case catheter insertion was reported by 19 of the 43 respondents. Most centers (40) reported that catheters could be removed in 2 days or sooner when required. The majority of surgical problems (hernia, leaks, or catheter malfunction) were reported as being managed in 1 – 4 weeks. A variety of catheter insertion techniques were reported: 22 centers used surgical insertion alone; 13 used a combination of surgical and medical percutaneous techniques; 4 reported using a combination of surgical and peritoneoscopic insertion; 2 centers reported using combinations of all 3 techniques; 1 center used only a radiographic technique and another used only the peritoneoscopic technique. Catheters were most often inserted by consultant surgeons (71.7%), followed by consultant nephrologists (19.3%), trainee nephrologists (2.9%), trainee surgeons (2.4%), associate specialists (2.4%), or a nurse specialist (1.2%). Two thirds of respondents indicated that they would be interested in attending a medical catheter-insertion training program.

{diamondsuit} Conclusion: In the UK, reducing waiting times for PD catheter insertion may have an important role in increasing patient access to the technique.

KEY WORDS: Peritoneal dialysis access; catheter insertion techniques; survey.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
P. K.-t. Li and K. M. Chow
Importance of peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion by nephrologists: practice makes perfect
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., November 1, 2009; 24(11): 3274 - 3276.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Multimed Inc. logo
Copyright © 2009 by Multimed Inc.