美国和加拿大腹膜透析患者远程监护服务提供者的实践差异。

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Peritoneal Dialysis International Pub Date : 2024-08-06 DOI:10.1177/08968608241270294
O El Shamy, R Fadel, E D Weinhandl, G Abra, M Salani, J I Shen, J Perl, T S Malavade, D Chatoth, M V Naljayan, K B Meyer, S Q Lew, M J Oliver, T A Golper, J Uribarri, R R Quinn
{"title":"美国和加拿大腹膜透析患者远程监护服务提供者的实践差异。","authors":"O El Shamy, R Fadel, E D Weinhandl, G Abra, M Salani, J I Shen, J Perl, T S Malavade, D Chatoth, M V Naljayan, K B Meyer, S Q Lew, M J Oliver, T A Golper, J Uribarri, R R Quinn","doi":"10.1177/08968608241270294","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Automation has allowed clinicians to program PD treatment parameters, all while obtaining extensive individual treatment data. This data populates in a centralized online platform shortly after PD treatment completion. Individual treatment data available to providers includes patients' vital signs, alarms, bypasses, prescribed PD treatment, actual treatment length, individual cycle fill volumes, ultrafiltration volumes, as well as fill, dwell, and drain times. However, there is no guidance about how often or if this data should be assessed by the clinical team members. We set out to determine current practice patterns by surveying members of the home dialysis team managing PD patients across the United States and Canada. A total of 127 providers completed the survey. While 91% of respondents reported having access to a remote monitoring platform, only 31% reported having a standardized protocol for data monitoring. Rating their perceived importance of having a standard protocol for remote data monitoring, on a scale of 0 (not important at all) to 10 (extremely important), the average response was 8 (physicians 7; nurses 9). Most nurses reported reviewing the data multiple times per week, whereas most physicians reported viewing the data only during regular/monthly visits. Although most of the providers who responded have access to remote monitoring data and feel that regular review is important, the degree of its utilization is variable, and the way in which the information is used is not commonly protocolized. Working to standardize data interpretation, testing algorithms, and educating providers to help process and present the data are important next steps.</p>","PeriodicalId":19969,"journal":{"name":"Peritoneal Dialysis International","volume":" ","pages":"8968608241270294"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Variations in provider practices in remote patient monitoring on peritoneal dialysis in the USA and Canada.\",\"authors\":\"O El Shamy, R Fadel, E D Weinhandl, G Abra, M Salani, J I Shen, J Perl, T S Malavade, D Chatoth, M V Naljayan, K B Meyer, S Q Lew, M J Oliver, T A Golper, J Uribarri, R R Quinn\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/08968608241270294\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Automation has allowed clinicians to program PD treatment parameters, all while obtaining extensive individual treatment data. This data populates in a centralized online platform shortly after PD treatment completion. Individual treatment data available to providers includes patients' vital signs, alarms, bypasses, prescribed PD treatment, actual treatment length, individual cycle fill volumes, ultrafiltration volumes, as well as fill, dwell, and drain times. However, there is no guidance about how often or if this data should be assessed by the clinical team members. We set out to determine current practice patterns by surveying members of the home dialysis team managing PD patients across the United States and Canada. A total of 127 providers completed the survey. While 91% of respondents reported having access to a remote monitoring platform, only 31% reported having a standardized protocol for data monitoring. Rating their perceived importance of having a standard protocol for remote data monitoring, on a scale of 0 (not important at all) to 10 (extremely important), the average response was 8 (physicians 7; nurses 9). Most nurses reported reviewing the data multiple times per week, whereas most physicians reported viewing the data only during regular/monthly visits. Although most of the providers who responded have access to remote monitoring data and feel that regular review is important, the degree of its utilization is variable, and the way in which the information is used is not commonly protocolized. Working to standardize data interpretation, testing algorithms, and educating providers to help process and present the data are important next steps.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19969,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Peritoneal Dialysis International\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"8968608241270294\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Peritoneal Dialysis International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/08968608241270294\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Peritoneal Dialysis International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08968608241270294","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自动化使临床医生能够在获取大量个人治疗数据的同时,对腹膜透析治疗参数进行编程。这些数据会在腹膜透析治疗完成后不久输入一个集中的在线平台。医疗服务提供者可获得的单个治疗数据包括患者的生命体征、警报、旁路、规定的腹腔透析治疗、实际治疗长度、单个循环灌注量、超滤量以及灌注、停留和排液时间。但是,对于临床团队成员应该多长时间或是否应该对这些数据进行评估,却没有任何指导。为了确定当前的实践模式,我们对美国和加拿大负责管理腹膜透析患者的家庭透析团队成员进行了调查。共有 127 名医疗服务提供者完成了调查。虽然 91% 的受访者表示可以使用远程监控平台,但只有 31% 的受访者表示拥有数据监控的标准化协议。在 0 分(完全不重要)到 10 分(极其重要)的评分中,受访者对远程数据监控标准协议重要性的平均评价为 8 分(医生为 7 分,护士为 9 分)。大多数护士表示每周查看数据多次,而大多数医生则表示仅在定期/每月出诊时查看数据。虽然大多数做出回应的医疗服务提供者都能访问远程监控数据,并认为定期查看数据很重要,但其使用程度却不尽相同,而且使用信息的方式也没有普遍的规范。努力实现数据解释标准化、测试算法以及教育医疗服务提供者帮助处理和展示数据,是接下来的重要步骤。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Variations in provider practices in remote patient monitoring on peritoneal dialysis in the USA and Canada.

Automation has allowed clinicians to program PD treatment parameters, all while obtaining extensive individual treatment data. This data populates in a centralized online platform shortly after PD treatment completion. Individual treatment data available to providers includes patients' vital signs, alarms, bypasses, prescribed PD treatment, actual treatment length, individual cycle fill volumes, ultrafiltration volumes, as well as fill, dwell, and drain times. However, there is no guidance about how often or if this data should be assessed by the clinical team members. We set out to determine current practice patterns by surveying members of the home dialysis team managing PD patients across the United States and Canada. A total of 127 providers completed the survey. While 91% of respondents reported having access to a remote monitoring platform, only 31% reported having a standardized protocol for data monitoring. Rating their perceived importance of having a standard protocol for remote data monitoring, on a scale of 0 (not important at all) to 10 (extremely important), the average response was 8 (physicians 7; nurses 9). Most nurses reported reviewing the data multiple times per week, whereas most physicians reported viewing the data only during regular/monthly visits. Although most of the providers who responded have access to remote monitoring data and feel that regular review is important, the degree of its utilization is variable, and the way in which the information is used is not commonly protocolized. Working to standardize data interpretation, testing algorithms, and educating providers to help process and present the data are important next steps.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Peritoneal Dialysis International
Peritoneal Dialysis International 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
17.90%
发文量
69
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Peritoneal Dialysis International (PDI) is an international publication dedicated to peritoneal dialysis. PDI welcomes original contributions dealing with all aspects of peritoneal dialysis from scientists working in the peritoneal dialysis field around the world. Peritoneal Dialysis International is included in Index Medicus and indexed in Current Contents/Clinical Practice, the Science Citation Index, and Excerpta Medica (Nephrology/Urology Core Journal). It is also abstracted and indexed in Chemical Abstracts (CA), as well as being indexed in Embase as a priority journal.
期刊最新文献
Iodine starch test in a peritoneal dialysis-related hydrothorax. Pulsed peritoneal dialysis in an experimental rat model: A first experience. Severe uterovaginal prolapse and start of peritoneal dialysis: Role of colpocleisis surgery. Report of two cases. Colostomy formation in a peritoneal dialysis patient. Establishing a peritoneal dialysis technique survival core outcome measure: A standardised outcomes in nephrology-peritoneal dialysis consensus workshop report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1