| Literature DB >> 31906987 |
Karsten Vanden Wyngaert1, Amaryllis H Van Craenenbroeck2,3, Sunny Eloot4, Patrick Calders5, Bert Celie1, Els Holvoet4, Wim Van Biesen4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Impaired physical function due to muscle weakness and exercise intolerance reduces the ability to perform activities of daily living in patients with end-stage kidney disease, and by consequence, Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL). Furthermore, the risk of falls is an aggregate of physical function and, therefore, could be associated with HRQoL as well. The present study examined the associations between objective and subjective measures of physical function, risk of falls and HRQoL in haemodialysis patients.Entities:
Keywords: End-stage kidney disease; Haemodialysis; Physical function; Quality of life; Risk of falls
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31906987 PMCID: PMC6945514 DOI: 10.1186/s12882-019-1671-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Nephrol ISSN: 1471-2369 Impact factor: 2.388
Dialysis risk of falls index
| Topic | Check | Score | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | ≥80 years old | |||
| ⎕ Yes | 1.5 | |||
| ⎕ No | 0 | |||
| Serum C-reactive Protein | ≥3.0 mg/dL | |||
| ⎕ Yes | 2.0 | |||
| ⎕ No | 0 | |||
| Risk for malnutrition | < 24 on 30 | |||
| ⎕ Yes | 0.5 | |||
| ⎕ No | 0 | |||
| Physical examinations | ||||
| - Side-by-side stand | ||||
| ⎕ 10 s | ⎕ 1 | |||
| ⎕ < 10 s | ⎕ 0 | |||
| - Semi-tandem stand | ||||
| ⎕ 10 s | ⎕ 1 | |||
| ⎕ < 10 s | ⎕ 0 | |||
| - Full-tandem stand | ||||
| ⎕ 10 s | ⎕ 2 | ⎕ < 8 points | 2.5 | |
| ⎕ 3–9.9 s | ⎕ 1 | |||
| ⎕ < 3 s | ⎕ 0 | ⎕ 9–10 points | 2.0 | |
| ⎕ > 350 m | ⎕ 4 | ⎕ 11–12 points | 0 | |
| ⎕ 300–350 m | ⎕ 2 | |||
| ⎕ < 300 m | ⎕ 0 | |||
| ⎕ < 11.19 s | ⎕ 4 | |||
| ⎕ 11.20–13.69 s | ⎕ 3 | |||
| ⎕ 13.70–16.69 s | ⎕ 2 | |||
| ⎕ 16.70–49.99 s | ⎕ 1 | |||
| ⎕ > 50 s or impossible | ⎕ 0 | |||
| Handgrip force | Male < 26 kg, female < 18 kg | |||
| ⎕ Yes | 1.5 | |||
| ⎕ No | 0 | |||
| Intra-dialytic hypotension | MAP decrease > 9.99 mmHg | |||
| ⎕ Yes | 1.5 | |||
| ⎕ No | 0 | |||
| Risk of falls assessment | Tinetti < 11 on 12 points | |||
| ⎕ Yes | 2.5 | |||
| ⎕ No | 0 | |||
| Total score | /12 | |||
Abbreviations: 6MWT six-minute walking test, MAP mean arterial pressure, STS sit-to-stand test
Patients’ characteristics and parameters of interest
| Variable | |
|---|---|
| Age (years) | 68 ± 16 |
| Male sex | 65 (57.5) |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 26.1 ± 5.4 |
| Dialysis vintage (months) | 22.5 [10.3; 49.8] |
| ΔMAP (mmHg) | 0.17 ± 15.5 |
| MAP pre-dialysis (mmHg) | 89.7 ± 15.3 |
| MAP post-dialysis (mmHg) | 89.3 ± 17.8 |
| Aetiology of CKD | |
| Glomerulonephritis | 19 (16.8) |
| Hematologic malignancies | 5 (4.4) |
| Interstitial nephritis | 13 (11.5) |
| Diabetic nephropathy | 30 (26.5) |
| Hypertension, angiosclerosis or unknown | 40 (35.4) |
| ADPKD | 6 (5.4) |
| Comorbidities | |
| Diabetes | 52 (46.0) |
| CVD | 84 (74.3) |
| Neuropathy | 32 (28.3) |
| Retinopathy | 36 (31.9) |
| Respiratory complications | 28 (24.8) |
| Musculoskeletal complications | 50 (44.2) |
| Hepatopathy | 20 (17.7) |
| Quadriceps force | |
| Absolute value (N) | 180 ± 75 |
| Relative value (% to predicted) | 53.8 ± 17.8 |
| Handgrip force | |
| Absolute value (kg) | 28.8 ± 11.1 |
| Relative value (% to predicted) | 91.7 ± 30.7 |
| DFRI (/12) | 5.9 ± 3.0 |
| Q1 | 0–3.5 |
| Q2 | 4–6.5 |
| Q3 | 7–8.5 |
| Q4 | 9–12 |
| Tinetti (/12) | 11.0 [5.5; 12.0] |
| Sit-to-Stand (s) | 23.0 [12.0; 50.0] |
| FICSIT (/28) | 15.0 [8.0; 21.0] |
| 6MWT | |
| Absolute value (m) | 236 [67; 397] |
| Relative value (% to predicted) | 44.1 [12.7; 60.3] |
| EQ-5D | |
| Utility score | 0.78 [0.41; 0.90] |
| Reference values based on age/sex | 0.89 ± 0.01 |
| VAS score (max 100) | 58.8 ± 18.9 |
| Reference values based on age/sex | 78.3 ± 23.5 |
| PROMIS (T-scores) | |
| Depression | 51.2 ± 9.4 |
| Anxiety | 49.0 ± 9.0 |
| Physical function | 39.7 ± 11.1 |
| Pain interference | 51.1 ± 9.8 |
| Fatigue | 50.6 ± 10.1 |
| Sleep disturbance | 48.1 ± 9.2 |
| Participation in social roles and activities | 48.2 ± 10.0 |
Data are reported as mean ± standard deviation, median [25%; 75%] or as number (percentage) as appropriate
Abbreviations: ADPKD autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease, BMI body mass index, CVD cardiovascular disease, DBP diastolic blood pressure, MAP mean arterial pressure, SBP systolic blood pressure, ΔMAP difference pre- to post-dialytic mean arterial pressure
Fig. 1Problems reported on each domain of the quality of life. Data are reported as a percentage of the population
Fig. 2Physical impairments. Data are reported as a percentage of the population
Association between the objective measures of physical function and EQ-5D
| EQ-VAS | EQ-5D score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F-value | F-value | |||
| Handgrip force (kg) | / | NS | 6.52 | 0.012 |
| Sit-to-Stand (s) | 5.11 | 0.015 | / | NS |
| 6MWT (m) | / | NS | 16.17 | < 0.001 |
| R square | 0.053 | 0.318 | ||
R square values are based on a general linear model; factors introduced to the model included absolute quadriceps and handgrip force, Sit-to-Stand test, 6MWT, Tinetti and the dialysis fall index. Abbreviations: 6MWT six-minute walking test
Association between the objective measures of physical function and PROMIS
| Physical measures | Depression | Physical function | Pain interference | Fatigue | participation in social roles and activities | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F-value | p | F-value | p | F-value | p | F-value | p | F-value | ||
| Quadriceps force ( | / | NS | 10.96 | < 0.001 | / | NS | 4.83 | 0.03 | / | NS |
| DFRI (/12) | 6.54 | 0.01 | / | NS | / | NS | / | NS | 7.98 | 0.01 |
| 6MWT (m) | / | NS | 42.21 | < 0.001 | 4.56 | 0.04 | / | NS | / | NS |
| R Square | 0.078 | 0.516 | 0.039 | 0.044 | 0.111 | |||||
R square values are based on a general linear model; factors introduced to the model included absolute quadriceps and handgrip force, Sit-to-Stand test, 6MWT, Tinetti and the dialysis fall index. Abbreviations: 6MWT six-minute walking test, DFRI dialysis fall risk index
Fig. 3Radar chart of the dimensions of EQ-5D and functional performance. Increasing scores correspond with increasing difficulty in domains of HRQoL. Patients were allocated to the good, moderate or severely impaired functional performance group based on having no, only one of two or both unfavourable scores on 6MWT and dialysis fall index