Logo-jrip
ePublished: 25 Jun 2017
EndNote EndNote

(Enw Format - Win & Mac)

BibTeX BibTeX

(Bib Format - Win & Mac)

Bookends Bookends

(Ris Format - Mac only)

EasyBib EasyBib

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Medlars Medlars

(Txt Format - Win & Mac)

Mendeley Web Mendeley Web
Mendeley Mendeley

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Papers Papers

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

ProCite ProCite

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Reference Manager Reference Manager

(Ris Format - Win only)

Refworks Refworks

(Refworks Format - Win & Mac)

Zotero Zotero

(Ris Format - Firefox Plugin)

J Renal Inj Prev. 2017;6(4): 247-252.
doi: 10.15171/jrip.2017.47

Scopus ID: 85040712909
  Abstract View: 1912
  PDF Download: 1228

Original Article

Comparison of two interventions of increased blood flow rate and high-flux filters on hemodialysis adequacy and complications; a quasi-experimental study

Hosien Shahdadi 1, Abbas Balouchi 2,3, Maryam Jahantigh Haghighi 3 *

1 Department of Nursing, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Zabol University of Medical Sciences, Zabol, Iran
2 Department of Nursing, Student Research Committee, Nursing and Midwifery School, Zabol University of Medical Sciences, Zabol, Iran
3 Student Research Committee, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
*Corresponding author: Maryam Jahantigh Haghighi, Ganjresearch@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Various parameters such as increased blood flow and high flux filter increase dialysis adequacy. Each parameter is associated with specific complications.

Objective: The aim of this study was comparison of two interventions of increased blood flow rate and high-flux filter on hemodialysis adequacy and complications.

Patients and Methods: This was a single-group quasi-experimental before-and-after intervention study. Twenty-two patients undergoing dialysis three times a week in the last 6 months consented to participate in the study. The participants were selected using random sampling method. They were reevaluated prior to dialysis and every 30 minutes until the end of each hemodialysis session using dialysis complication checklist. Dialysis adequacy was measured at the end of the fourth session for each patient.

Results: The paired t test results showed a significant increase in dialysis adequacy in dialysis with increased blood flow and dialysis with high flux filter (high-flux hemodialysis) compared to routine dialysis (P =0.01). A significant increase was found in incidence of muscular cramp in dialysis with increased blood flow compared to routine dialysis based on McNemar’s statistical test (P = 0.02).

Conclusion: Dialysis adequacy improved in both increased blood flow intervention and highflux hemodialysis compared to routine dialysis. On the other hand, increased blood flow intervention was associated with less complications than high-flux hemodialysis. In addition, increased blood flow intervention was more efficient and safer than high-flux hemodialysis.

Keywords: Blood flow rate, High-flux filter, Dialysis adequacy, Dialysis complications

Implication for health policy/practice/research/medical education:

Dialysis should be a safe procedure with less complications. It should improve physical state of the patients. High dialysis adequacy should also be taken into account in dialysis procedure. Thereby, the present study recommended dialysis with increased blood flow rate with higher adequacy and less complications compared to routine dialysis despite insignificant difference in dialysis adequacy and complications between increased blood flow intervention and high-flux hemodialysis. Nevertheless, increased blood flow intervention increased dialysis adequacy. For this purpose, this intervention was preferred over high-flux hemodialysis.

Please cite this paper as: Shahdadi H, Balouchi A, Jahantigh Haghighi M. Comparison of two interventions of increased blood flow rate and high-flux filters on hemodialysis adequacy and complications; a quasi-experimental study. J Renal Inj Prev. 2017;6(4):247-252. DOI: 10.15171/jrip.2017.47.

First Name
 
Last Name
 
Email Address
 
Comments
 
Security code


Abstract View: 1912

Your browser does not support the canvas element.


PDF Download: 1228

Your browser does not support the canvas element.