| Literature DB >> 35991134 |
Liya Ma1, Jianli Guo1, Hongwei Sun1, Nan Li1, MeiXuan Lv1, Bing Shang1.
Abstract
This work is aimed at exploring the nursing strategies and effects of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) with refractory hypotension under the background of smart health. 40 ESRD patients with refractory hypotension who received CRRT treatment were enrolled as the research objects and were randomly rolled into the intervention group and the control group, with 20 cases in each group. Patients in the control group received routine nursing, and those in the intervention group received individualized nursing. The incidence of hypotension, dry body weight, serous cavity effusion, renal function indicators (blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and creatinine (Cre)), and patient satisfaction were compared between the two groups. The results showed that the probability of hypotension in the intervention group was 9.38%, which was lower than that in the control group (34.38%). The probability of early termination of dialysis in the intervention group was 0%, which was lower than that in the control group (18.75%), and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The decreases of BUN and Cre in the intervention group were significantly greater than those in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). The proportion of water growth less than 10% during dialysis in the intervention group was 98.44%, which was greater than that in the control group (93.45%), and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The ultrafiltration volume after dialysis in the intervention group was 2850 ± 400 mL, which was greater than that in the control group 2350 ± 350 mL. After intervention, the proportion of patients with pleural effusion in the intervention group was 10% less than that in the control group (20%), and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The satisfaction rate of the intervention group was 97.66%, which was higher than that of the control group (65.63%). In conclusion, individualized nursing was more helpful to the recovery of ESRD patients with refractory hypotension treated with CRRT than routine nursing.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35991134 PMCID: PMC9385371 DOI: 10.1155/2022/2382458
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.809
Figure 1Technical route.
Figure 2Flowchart of CRRT.
Specific contents of individualized nursing.
| Measures | Specific contents |
|---|---|
| Condition nursing | Nursing staff should pay close attention to the changes in the patient's condition. For dialysis patients, it was necessary to regularly observe the changes of vital signs, ask more about the patient's feeling, and detect abnormal changes in the patient's condition in time. It should monitor vital signs once per hour for general patients, and once every 15-30 minutes for critically ill patients to detect the aura symptoms and typical symptoms of hypotension in time, such as yawning, palpitation, nausea, vomiting, and cold sweats. In addition, it should timely inform the dialysis doctor of various changes in the dialysis process and give corresponding treatment. |
| Dietary guidance | Dialysis patients should strengthen nutrition, improve anemia, and eat high-quality high-protein, low-sodium, and vitamin-rich foods to prevent hypoproteinemia. It should inform the patients and their families to strictly limit the intake of sodium salt and water during dialysis, increase body weight by no more than 3%-5% of body weight, and avoid rapid ultrafiltration, and ultrafiltration of water per hour does not exceed 1% of the body weight. It was not advisable to eat during dialysis. If the condition requires, it should inform the patient that eating during hemodialysis was best within 1-2 hours of the start of dialysis. At this time, the solute and water removed by dialysis only account for 20%-40% of the expected target, which had little effect on peripheral effective circulating blood volume and would not cause blood pressure to drop. |
| Exercise program | Firstly, postural adaptation exercise should be taken: it should keep the patient in a concave lying position, raise the upper body by 30°, place a soft pillow under the feet, raise it by 15°, and train twice a day, and each training time is 20-30 minutes. Secondly, it should turn over regularly: an alarm clock was placed on the bedside of the hemodialysis treatment, and the alarm clock would ring once every 2 hours. After hearing the alarm, the patient used the healthy limb to grasp the bed rail and perform the ipsilateral turning movement. Nursing staff need to monitor during exercise to ensure that the turning movement does not affect the patency of the pipeline and monitor it effectively. Thirdly, according to the actual situation of the patient, acupuncture was mainly based on aerobic exercise, such as walking and playing Taijiquan. The specific exercise time and amount depended on the patient's tolerance. In addition, it should avoid large movements during exercise. |
| Psychological nursing | Compared with other treatments, hemodialysis is more likely to cause anxiety, fear, and other adverse emotions in patients, which not only increases the psychological burden but also is not conducive to the treatment of the disease, increasing the probability of hypotension. It can provide targeted psychological care according to the actual situation of the patient, explain the knowledge of the disease to the patient, eliminate the patient's fear of the disease, assist the patient to vent their negative emotions, and maintain a good psychological state. Nursing staff increased the number and time of visits, communicated with patients as much as possible, encouraged, and comforted patients more, and kept patients in the best condition. |
Comparison on basic data of patients.
| Item | Intervention group | Control group |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 57.13 ± 3.78 | 56.98 ± 2.67 | 0.056 | 0.735 |
| Gender | 0.018 | 0.987 | ||
| Males | 11 | 12 | ||
| Females | 9 | 8 | ||
| Course of disease | 9.31 ± 2.96 | 9.28 ± 4.13 | 0.127 | 0.396 |
| Number of weekly dialysis | 2.79 ± 0.56 | 2.81 ± 0.13 | 0.421 | 0.213 |
Comparison on incidence of hypotension and early termination of dialysis.
| Group | Times pf hypotension | Incidence of hypotension | Times of early termination of dialysis | Incidence of early termination of dialysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention group | 60 | 9.38% | 0 | 0 |
| Control group | 220 | 34.38% | 120 | 18.75% |
|
| 59.673 | 27.164 | ||
|
| 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
Comparison of renal function in intervention group before and after intervention.
| Indicators | Intervention group |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before intervention | After intervention | |||
| BUN (mmol/L) | 28.46 ± 7.31 | 15.14 ± 7.56 | 4.128 | 0.048 |
| Cre (umoL/L) | 360.67 ± 141.84 | 149.12 ± 140.32 | 4.063 | 0.030 |
Comparison of renal function before and after intervention in the control group.
| Indicator | Control group |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before intervention | After intervention | |||
| BUN (mmol/L) | 27.72 ± 7.65 | 18.32 ± 6.23 | 4.241 | 0.007 |
| Cre (umoL/L) | 361.68 ± 132.86 | 169.52 ± 110.67 | 5.013 | 0.041 |
Comparison of results of weight gain as a percentage of body weight.
| Time | Intervention group | Control group |
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| <10% | >10% | <10% | >10% | |||
| Before intervention | 600 | 40 | 587 | 53 | 2.376 | 0.312 |
| After intervention | 630 | 10 | 598 | 42 | 27.869 | 0.000 |
Comparison on targeted ultrafiltration volume before dialysis and ultrafiltration volume after dialysis.
| Ultrafiltration volume | Intervention group | Control group |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Targeted ultrafiltration volume before dialysis | 3100 ± 500 | 3000 ± 400 | 1.545 | 0.128 |
| Ultrafiltration volume after dialysis | 2850 ± 400 | 2350 ± 350 | 18.517 | 0.000 |
Comparison on serous effusion before and after the intervention.
| Pleural effusion | Intervention group | Control group |
|---|---|---|
| Before intervention | 7 (35%) | 6 (30%) |
| After intervention | 2 (10%) | 4 (20%) |
|
| 10.564 | 9.708 |
|
| 0.006 | 0.007 |
Comparison on nursing satisfaction.
| Group | Satisfied | General | Unsatisfied | Satisfaction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention group | 568 | 57 | 15 | 97.66%∗ |
| Control group | 212 | 208 | 220 | 65.63% |
Note: compared with the control group, the difference was statistically notable (P < 0.05).