Elke Weisshaar1, Uwe Matterne, Thomas Mettang. 1. Department of Clinical Social Medicine, Occupational and Environmental Dermatology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Thibautstrasse 3, 69115 Heidelberg, Germany. elke.Weisshaar@med.uni-heidelberg.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite advances in dialysis treatment of end-stage renal disease, pruritus remains a widespread and distressing concomitant of chronic renal failure. The prevalence of uraemic pruritus (UP) across countries ranges from 10 to 77%. Data from the DOPPS study showed that moderate to severe UP occurs in >40% of patients on haemodialysis. We aimed to provide data on how common and how serious a problem pruritus is as perceived by nephrologists in daily haemodialysis practice. Method. A national cross-sectional survey in 1420 nephrologists assessed information on the number of dialysed patients, gender distribution, perceived prevalence of UP, time-related aspects of UP, characteristics of UP and its association with dialysis and therapy of UP. RESULTS: Most respondents reported UP to be prevalent in 1-30% of their patients, and 30% reported an association between UP and dialysis. Seventy-five percent reported an undulating pattern. Nearly half the sample suggested a relationship between quality of dialysis and UP. No substantial differences in recognition and management of UP as a function of organizational affiliation were detected. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of UP may be underestimated by nephrologists. Large variation in the reported prevalence of UP and the undulating pattern of UP after dialysis may impede the recognition of UP.
BACKGROUND: Despite advances in dialysis treatment of end-stage renal disease, pruritus remains a widespread and distressing concomitant of chronic renal failure. The prevalence of uraemic pruritus (UP) across countries ranges from 10 to 77%. Data from the DOPPS study showed that moderate to severe UP occurs in >40% of patients on haemodialysis. We aimed to provide data on how common and how serious a problem pruritus is as perceived by nephrologists in daily haemodialysis practice. Method. A national cross-sectional survey in 1420 nephrologists assessed information on the number of dialysed patients, gender distribution, perceived prevalence of UP, time-related aspects of UP, characteristics of UP and its association with dialysis and therapy of UP. RESULTS: Most respondents reported UP to be prevalent in 1-30% of their patients, and 30% reported an association between UP and dialysis. Seventy-five percent reported an undulating pattern. Nearly half the sample suggested a relationship between quality of dialysis and UP. No substantial differences in recognition and management of UP as a function of organizational affiliation were detected. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of UP may be underestimated by nephrologists. Large variation in the reported prevalence of UP and the undulating pattern of UP after dialysis may impede the recognition of UP.
Authors: Nidhi Sukul; Elodie Speyer; Charlotte Tu; Brian A Bieber; Yun Li; Antonio A Lopes; Koichi Asahi; Laura Mariani; Maurice Laville; Hugh C Rayner; Bénédicte Stengel; Bruce M Robinson; Ronald L Pisoni Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2019-04-11 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Mirosław Snit; Radosław Gawlik; Beata Łącka-Gaździk; Roman Kuźniewicz; Marek Dwornicki; Aleksander Owczarek; Małgorzata Walaszczyk; Piotr Grabiec; Władysław Grzeszczak Journal: Med Sci Monit Date: 2013-09-02
Authors: Hugh C Rayner; Maria Larkina; Mia Wang; Matthew Graham-Brown; Sabine N van der Veer; Tevfik Ecder; Takeshi Hasegawa; Werner Kleophas; Brian A Bieber; Francesca Tentori; Bruce M Robinson; Ronald L Pisoni Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2017-09-18 Impact factor: 8.237