Indian Journal of Nephrology About us |  Subscription |  e-Alerts  | Feedback | Login   
  Print this page Email this page   Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
 Home | Current Issue | Archives| Ahead of print | Search |Instructions |  Editorial Board  

Users Online:798

Official publication of the Indian Society of Nephrology
 ~   Next article
 ~   Previous article
 ~   Table of Contents

 ~   Similar in PUBMED
 ~  Search Pubmed for
 ~  Search in Google Scholar for
 ~Related articles
 ~   Citation Manager
 ~   Access Statistics
 ~   Reader Comments
 ~   Email Alert *
 ~   Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded200    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 2    

Recommend this journal


Year : 2021  |  Volume : 31  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 460-466

A study of Factors Affecting Dialysis Recovery Time in Haemodialysis Patients in India

Department of Nephrology, Saveetha Medical College and Hospital, Thandalam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. B Karthikeyan
Department of Nephrology, Saveetha Medical College Hospital, Thandalam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/ijn.IJN_241_20

Rights and Permissions

Background: Patients on maintenance haemodialysis (MHD) often complain of fatigue and tiredness following haemodialysis sessions leading to poor compliance with the dialysis schedule. There is limited Indian data on dialysis recovery time (DRT). The present study was designed to assess the factors affecting DRT in our haemodialysis population. Methods: We recorded self-reported patient recovery times of 120 patients who satisfied the inclusion criteria, over three consecutive dialysis sessions by asking the question, 'How long does it take to recover from a dialysis session'? Data recorded included patient factors like age, sex, co-morbidities, Charlson comorbidity index score (CCI), dialysis vintage, duration of kidney disease, interdialytic weight gain (IDWG), treatment factors like ultrafiltration rate (UFR), SpKt/V, blood pump speed, dialysate sodium, session length, pre and post HD blood pressure and laboratory parameters. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed with the KDQOL-SF v. 1.3 questionnaire. Results from the SF-36 score were summarised into the physical composite score (PCS), mental composite score (MCS) and kidney disease composite score (KDCS). Results: The mean age of the study population was 50.6 ± 12.6 years. Among the 120 patients, 77 (64.2%) were males. Thirty-nine patients (32.5%) were diabetic and 95 (79.1%) patients were hypertensive. The mean dialysis vintage of the study population was 26.1 ± 18.6 months, 41 (34.2%) patients reported DRT <2 h; 48 (40%) reported DRT between 2–6 h and 31 (25.8%) reported DRT >6 h. On multivariate regression analysis, higher IDWG, CCI score and UFR were associated with prolonged DRT. Reported DRT also inversely correlated with PCS (r = - 0.66), MCS (r = - 0.65) and KDCS (r = - 0.59) scores which was statistically significant. Conclusion: The present study showed that higher CCI scores, IDWG and UFR were associated with prolonged DRT in Indian haemodialysis patients and patients with longer recovery time had poor HRQoL. Interventions to reduce DRT need to be assessed in further trials in Indian MHD patients.


Print this article     Email this article

Indian Journal of Nephrology
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 20th Sept '07