ArticleCureus2024
Dialysis Adequacy: A Cross-Sectional Study to Assess the Reliability of the Online Clearance Monitor to Measure Dialysis Dose.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Frequent assessment of the dialysis dose delivered to hemodialysis patients might help improve morbidity and mortality. Daugirdas' second-generation formula is the recommended method for calculating dialysis doses. However, urea reduction ratios (URRs) and online clearance monitors (OCMs) are frequently used to assess dialysis adequacy due to their more straightforward concept and ease of use. This study was conducted to determine the most reliable method for measuring dialysis adequacy by comparing the correlation of urea reduction ratio and online clearance monitor measurements with the dialysis dose measured using the recommended Daugirdas' second-generation formula. Methods This study was an observational, cross-sectional, single-center study. The dialysis dose was measured as a urea reduction ratio and by an online clearance monitor simultaneously for 50 patients. It was compared to the dialysis dose measurements obtained using Daugirdas' second-generation formula. Results There was a statistically significant strong positive correlation (r = 0.929; p ≤ 0.001) of the urea reduction ratio and a poor concordance (ρC = 0.401; p ≤ 0.001) of online clearance monitor measurements with the dialysis dose measured using Daugirdas' second generation formula. Conclusion Our findings illustrate that the urea reduction ratio may be a more straightforward and reliable means for assessing the adequacy of intermittent hemodialysis with minimal errors in patients compared to online clearance monitors. Online clearance monitors offer easy estimation and practicality with minimal effort but are prone to multiple errors and may not be accurate in some settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.