UK Renal Registry 16th Annual Report: Chapter 14 2012 Multisite Dialysis Access Audit in England, Northern Ireland and Wales and 2011 PD One Year Follow-up: National and Centre-specific Analyses

Publisher： Karger

E-ISSN： 1660-2110|125|1-4|275-294

ISSN： 1660-2110

Source： Nephron Clin Pract, Vol.125, Iss.1-4, 2014-02, pp. : 275-294

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Previous Menu Next

Abstract

Introduction: Dialysis access should be timely, minimise complications and maintain functionality. Good functional access is required for renal replacement therapy (RRT) to be successful. The aim of the combined vascular and peritoneal dialysis access audit was to examine practice patterns with respect to dialysis access and highlight variations in practice between renal centres. Methods: The UK Renal Registry collected centre-specific information on vascular and peritoneal access outcome measures including patient demographics, dialysis access type (at start of dialysis and three months after start of dialysis), surgical assessment and access functionality. The combined access audit covered incident haemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients in 2012 from England, Northern Ireland and Wales. Centres who had reported data on incident PD patients for the previous audit in 2011 were additionally asked to provide one year follow up data for this group. Results: Fifty-one centres in England, Wales and Northern Ireland (representing 82% of all centres) returned data on first access from 3,720 incident HD patients and 1,018 incident PD patients. A strong relationship was seen between surgical assessment and the likelihood of starting HD with an arteriovenous fistula (AVF). Type of first access was related to the length of time known to renal services with higher numbers of AVFs and PD catheters used in patients known to renal services for at least one year. Three month and one year outcomes of HD and PD access were poorly reported. Conclusions: This audit provides information on important patient related outcome measures with the potential to lead to an improvement in access provision. This represents an important advance, however data collection remains suboptimal. There is wide practice variation across the England, Wales and Northern Ireland in provision of both HD and PD access which requires further exploration.