Haemodialysis machine designation for patients with chronic Hepatitis B virus: A practice and attitudes survey of Australian renal healthcare workers

Résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: To reduce the risk of viral transmission, guidelines recommend the use of designated haemodialysis machines and patient isolation for patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV). These practices are without a strong evidence base, and may no longer be necessary in the setting of heat disinfection programs and standard precautions. METHODS: An online cross-sectional survey was developed for renal clinicians across Australia and New Zealand to explore infection prevention policy concerning patients with chronic HBV in haemodialysis units. We sought to determine whether psychosocial and cultural impacts might result from the mandatory use of machine designation and patient isolation practices, as perceived by multidisciplinary healthcare workers with experience working with this patient population. RESULTS: Sixty-seven responses from 27 health districts across all states of Australia and one New Zealand district were received. Most respondents were from urban areas (65%), and were nurses (87%). 50% of health districts reported using designated machines, while 32% isolate patients. Lack of necessary resources limited the use of designated machines (57%), and patient isolation (78%). Respondents not routinely using these precautions were more likely to express concerns regarding patient psychosocial wellbeing and cultural appropriateness. Overall, 30% of respondents expressed concerns regarding the cultural appropriateness of these recommendations. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate wide variation in haemodialysis infection prevention and control policy and practice with regards to managing patients with chronic HBV. While use of standard precautions and machine disinfection are consistently applied, resource availability and concerns for patient psychosocial wellbeing limit adherence to international guidelines.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.