OBJECTIVES: This study’s objectives were to determine which anticoagulation methods are commonly used in patients who are undergoing haemodialysis (HD) in Spain, on what criteria do they depend, and the consequences arising from their use. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Ours was a cross-sectional study based on two types of surveys: a "HD Centre Survey" and a "Patient Survey". The first survey was answered by 87 adult HD units serving a total of 6093 patients, as well as 2 paediatric units. Among these units, 48.3% were part of the public health system and the remaining 51.7% units were part of the private health system. The patient survey analysed 758 patients who were chosen at random from among the aforementioned 78 HD units. RESULTS: A) HD Centre Survey: The majority of adult HD units (n=61, 70.2%) used both kinds of heparin, 19 of them (21.8%) only used LMWH and 7 of them (8%) only used UFH. The most frequently applied criteria for the use of LMWH were medical indications (83.3% of HD units) and ease of administration (29.5%). The most frequently used methods for adjusting the dosage were clotting of the circuit (88.2% of units), bleeding of the vascular access after disconnection (75.3%), and patient weight (57.6%). B) Patient Survey: The distribution of the types of heparin used was: UFH: 44.1%, LMWH: 51.5%, and dialysis without heparin in 4.4% of patients. LMWH was more frequently used in public medical centres (64.2% of patients) than in private medical centres (46.1%) (P<.001). LMWH was more frequently used in on-line haemodiafiltration (HF) than in high-flux HD (P<.001). Antiplatelet agents were given to 45.5% of patients, oral anticoagulants to 18.4% of patients, and both to 5% of patients. Additionally, 4.4% of patients had suffered bleeding complications during the previous week, and 1.9% of patients suffered thrombotic complications. Bleeding complications were more frequent in patients with oral anticoagulants (P=.001), although there was no association between the type of heparin and the occurrence of bleeding or thrombotic complications. CONCLUSIONS: We are able to conclude that there is a great amount of disparity in the criteria used for the medical prescription of anticoagulation in HD. It is advisable that each HD unit revise their own results as well as those from other centres, and possibly to create an Anticoagulation Guide in Haemodialysis.
OBJECTIVES: This study’s objectives were to determine which anticoagulation methods are commonly used in patients who are undergoing haemodialysis (HD) in Spain, on what criteria do they depend, and the consequences arising from their use. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Ours was a cross-sectional study based on two types of surveys: a "HD Centre Survey" and a "Patient Survey". The first survey was answered by 87 adult HD units serving a total of 6093 patients, as well as 2 paediatric units. Among these units, 48.3% were part of the public health system and the remaining 51.7% units were part of the private health system. The patient survey analysed 758 patients who were chosen at random from among the aforementioned 78 HD units. RESULTS: A) HD Centre Survey: The majority of adult HD units (n=61, 70.2%) used both kinds of heparin, 19 of them (21.8%) only used LMWH and 7 of them (8%) only used UFH. The most frequently applied criteria for the use of LMWH were medical indications (83.3% of HD units) and ease of administration (29.5%). The most frequently used methods for adjusting the dosage were clotting of the circuit (88.2% of units), bleeding of the vascular access after disconnection (75.3%), and patient weight (57.6%). B) Patient Survey: The distribution of the types of heparin used was: UFH: 44.1%, LMWH: 51.5%, and dialysis without heparin in 4.4% of patients. LMWH was more frequently used in public medical centres (64.2% of patients) than in private medical centres (46.1%) (P<.001). LMWH was more frequently used in on-line haemodiafiltration (HF) than in high-flux HD (P<.001). Antiplatelet agents were given to 45.5% of patients, oral anticoagulants to 18.4% of patients, and both to 5% of patients. Additionally, 4.4% of patients had suffered bleeding complications during the previous week, and 1.9% of patients suffered thrombotic complications. Bleeding complications were more frequent in patients with oral anticoagulants (P=.001), although there was no association between the type of heparin and the occurrence of bleeding or thrombotic complications. CONCLUSIONS: We are able to conclude that there is a great amount of disparity in the criteria used for the medical prescription of anticoagulation in HD. It is advisable that each HD unit revise their own results as well as those from other centres, and possibly to create an Anticoagulation Guide in Haemodialysis.
Authors: João Fazendeiro Matos; Bruno Pinto; Carla Felix; Helena Carvalho; Pedro Ponce; Ricardo Peralta Journal: Hemodial Int Date: 2019-10-21 Impact factor: 1.812