Department of Precision and Regenerative Medicine and Ionian Area (DiMePre-J) Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation Unit, University of Bari Aldo Moro, Bari, Italy.
Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Aug 31;8(8):CD013074. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013074.pub2.
Fatigue is a common and debilitating symptom in people receiving dialysis that is associated with an increased risk of death, cardiovascular disease and depression. Fatigue can also impair quality of life (QoL) and the ability to participate in daily activities. Fatigue has been established by patients, caregivers and health professionals as a core outcome for haemodialysis (HD).
We aimed to evaluate the effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions on fatigue in people with kidney failure receiving dialysis, including HD and peritoneal dialysis (PD), including any setting and frequency of the dialysis treatment.
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 18 October 2022 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Studies evaluating pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions affecting levels of fatigue or fatigue-related outcomes in people receiving dialysis were included. Studies were eligible if fatigue or fatigue-related outcomes were reported as a primary or secondary outcome. Any mode, frequency, prescription, and duration of therapy were considered.
Three authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Treatment estimates were summarised using random effects meta-analysis and expressed as a risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD), with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) or standardised MD (SMD) if different scales were used. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
Ninety-four studies involving 8191 randomised participants were eligible. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions were compared either to placebo or control, or to another pharmacological or non-pharmacological intervention. In the majority of domains, risks of bias in the included studies were unclear or high. In low certainty evidence, when compared to control, exercise may improve fatigue (4 studies, 217 participants (Iowa Fatigue Scale, Modified Fatigue Impact Scale, Piper Fatigue Scale (PFS), or Haemodialysis-Related Fatigue scale score): SMD -1.18, 95% CI -2.04 to -0.31; I = 87%) in HD. In low certainty evidence, when compared to placebo or standard care, aromatherapy may improve fatigue (7 studies, 542 participants (Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), Rhoten Fatigue Scale (RFS), PFS or Brief Fatigue Inventory score): SMD -1.23, 95% CI -1.96 to -0.50; I = 93%) in HD. In low certainty evidence, when compared to no intervention, massage may improve fatigue (7 studies, 657 participants (FSS, RFS, PFS or Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score): SMD -1.06, 95% CI -1.47, -0.65; I = 81%) and increase energy (2 studies, 152 participants (VAS score): MD 4.87, 95% CI 1.69 to 8.06, I = 59%) in HD. In low certainty evidence, when compared to placebo or control, acupressure may reduce fatigue (6 studies, 459 participants (PFS score, revised PFS, or Fatigue Index): SMD -0.64, 95% CI -1.03 to -0.25; I = 75%) in HD. A wide range of heterogenous interventions and fatigue-related outcomes were reported for exercise, aromatherapy, massage and acupressure, preventing our capability to pool and analyse the data. Due to the paucity of studies, the effects of pharmacological and other non-pharmacological interventions on fatigue or fatigue-related outcomes, including non-physiological neutral amino acid, relaxation with or without music therapy, meditation, exercise with nandrolone, nutritional supplementation, cognitive-behavioural therapy, ESAs, frequent HD sections, home blood pressure monitoring, blood flow rate reduction, serotonin reuptake inhibitor, beta-blockers, anabolic steroids, glucose-enriched dialysate, or light therapy, were very uncertain. The effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments on death, cardiovascular diseases, vascular access, QoL, depression, anxiety, hypertension or diabetes were sparse. No studies assessed tiredness, exhaustion or asthenia. Adverse events were rarely and inconsistently reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Exercise, aromatherapy, massage and acupressure may improve fatigue compared to placebo, standard care or no intervention. Pharmacological and other non-pharmacological interventions had uncertain effects on fatigue or fatigue-related outcomes in people receiving dialysis. Future adequately powered, high-quality studies are likely to change the estimated effects of interventions for fatigue and fatigue-related outcomes in people receiving dialysis.
疲劳是接受透析的人群中常见且使人虚弱的症状,与死亡风险增加、心血管疾病和抑郁有关。疲劳还会降低生活质量(QoL)并影响参与日常活动的能力。患者、护理人员和卫生专业人员已将疲劳确立为血液透析(HD)的核心结局。
我们旨在评估药物和非药物干预措施对接受透析治疗的肾衰竭患者(包括 HD 和腹膜透析(PD))疲劳的影响,包括透析治疗的任何设置和频率。
我们通过与信息专家联系,使用与本综述相关的搜索词,对 Cochrane 肾脏和移植登记册中的研究进行了截至 2022 年 10 月 18 日的搜索。登记册中的研究通过对 CENTRAL、MEDLINE 和 EMBASE、会议论文集、国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP)搜索门户和 ClinicalTrials.gov 的搜索确定。
评估影响疲劳或与疲劳相关结局的药物和非药物干预措施的研究包括在内。如果疲劳或与疲劳相关的结局被报告为主要或次要结局,则研究合格。考虑了任何模式、频率、处方和治疗持续时间。
三位作者独立提取数据并评估了偏倚风险。使用随机效应荟萃分析汇总治疗估计值,并以风险比(RR)或平均差异(MD)表示,置信区间(CI)或标准化 MD(SMD)如果使用不同的量表。使用 Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation(GRADE)方法评估证据的可信度。
94 项研究涉及 8191 名随机参与者符合条件。药物和非药物干预措施与安慰剂或对照相比,或与另一种药物或非药物干预措施相比。在大多数领域,纳入研究的偏倚风险不明确或较高。在低确定性证据中,与对照相比,运动可能会改善疲劳(4 项研究,217 名参与者(爱荷华疲劳量表、改良疲劳影响量表、哌珀疲劳量表(PFS)或血液透析相关疲劳量表评分):SMD -1.18,95%CI-2.04 至-0.31;I=87%)在 HD 中。在低确定性证据中,与安慰剂或标准护理相比,芳香疗法可能会改善疲劳(7 项研究,542 名参与者(疲劳严重程度量表(FSS)、罗滕疲劳量表(RFS)、PFS 或简短疲劳量表评分):SMD -1.23,95%CI-1.96 至-0.50;I=93%)在 HD 中。在低确定性证据中,与无干预相比,按摩可能会改善疲劳(7 项研究,657 名参与者(FSS、RFS、PFS 或视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分):SMD -1.06,95%CI-1.47,-0.65;I=81%)并增加能量(2 项研究,152 名参与者(VAS 评分):MD 4.87,95%CI 1.69 至 8.06,I=59%)在 HD 中。在低确定性证据中,与安慰剂或对照相比,穴位按压可能会降低疲劳(6 项研究,459 名参与者(PFS 评分、修订后的 PFS 或疲劳指数):SMD -0.64,95%CI-1.03 至-0.25;I=75%)在 HD 中。运动、芳香疗法、按摩和穴位按压报告了各种不同的干预措施和与疲劳相关的结局,这使得我们无法对数据进行汇总和分析。由于研究数量有限,药物和其他非药物干预措施对疲劳或与疲劳相关结局的影响(包括非生理性中性氨基酸、放松加或不加音乐疗法、冥想、含 nandrolone 的运动、营养补充剂、认知行为疗法、ESAs、频繁的 HD 部分、家庭血压监测、血流速度降低、选择性 5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂、β-受体阻滞剂、合成代谢类固醇、富含葡萄糖的透析液或光疗)非常不确定。药物和非药物治疗对死亡、心血管疾病、血管通路、QoL、抑郁、焦虑、高血压或糖尿病的影响很少。没有研究评估疲倦、疲惫或虚弱。不良事件很少且不一致地报告。
与安慰剂、标准护理或无干预相比,运动、芳香疗法、按摩和穴位按压可能会改善疲劳。药物和其他非药物干预措施对接受透析治疗的患者的疲劳或与疲劳相关的结局的影响不确定。未来足够强大、高质量的研究可能会改变对接受透析治疗的人群中疲劳和与疲劳相关结局的干预措施的估计效果。