ArticleBMC nephrology2025
Determinants of dialysis adequacy in maintenance hemodialysis patients: a cross-sectional study on modifiable risk factors and clinical interventions.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of exercise on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing haemodialysis for chronic kidney disease: an umbrella review.Journal of global health · 2026Pooled it
- Depression, Anxiety, Stress Symptoms and Health-Related Quality of Life in Hemodialysis Patients: Cross-Sectional Findings from a Romanian Cohort.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- The correlation between depression and haemodialysis adequacy in chronic kidney disease patients in South Africa.Health SA = SA Gesondheid · 2026Article
- Comparison of the Dialysis Adequacy Across Four Types of Dialysis Machines in Hemodialysis Patients.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDialysis adequacy is crucial for maintaining the health and quality of life of patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis (MHD). Assessing its current status and identifying influencing factors is essential for optimizing treatment outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the status of dialysis adequacy in MHD patients and analyze the factors that affect it.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted at a hemodialysis center from June to October 2024. A total of 232 MHD patients were included in the study. Data on demographics, hemodialysis parameters, and laboratory indicators were collected. Dialysis adequacy was assessed using the single pool Kt/V (spKt/V) method. Patients were categorized into adequate (spKt/V ≥ 1.2) and inadequate (spKt/V < 1.2) dialysis groups.
resultsOf the 232 patients, 147 (63.36%) had adequate dialysis. Factors significantly associated with dialysis adequacy included sex, age, dialysis duration, dry weight, vascular access type, ultrafiltration volume, β2-microglobulin levels, and oxygen supplementation (P < 0.05). Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that dialysis duration was an independent protective factor, whereas dry weight was an independent risk factor. These variables accounted for 79.30% of the variance in dialysis adequacy.
conclusionsDialysis adequacy in MHD patients requires further enhancement. Healthcare professionals can improve dialysis adequacy, ensure treatment efficacy, and enhance patients' quality of life by adjusting dry weight, administering continuous low-flow oxygen inhalation during dialysis, and managing interdialytic weight gain.
trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN13609931, registered on 27 February 2025.
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.