Determinants of Dialysis Patients' Interest in Selecting Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis (CAPD) Therapy at Murni Teguh Hospital Medan in 2025
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Page: 2982-2990
Abstract
Background: Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) is a home-based option for kidney replacement therapy, but interest in this modality may depend on patients’ understanding, perceived risks, confidence, family resources, and the education they receive. Objective: To examine the associations of knowledge, perceived infection risk, family support, self-efficacy, and healthcare-provider education with interest in CAPD among patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis. Methods: This quantitative, cross-sectional correlational study was conducted at Murni Teguh Hospital, Medan, from November 2025 to February 2026. A purposive sample of 149 adults was selected from a reference population of 254 hemodialysis patients. Structured questionnaires assessed the five explanatory domains and interest in CAPD. Analyses included descriptive statistics, Pearson chi-square tests, crude prevalence ratios (PRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and exploratory simultaneous-entry binary logistic regression. Results: High interest in CAPD was reported by 59 participants (39.6%). The proportions with high interest were 90.0%, 43.8%, and 7.3% in the good-, fair-, and poor-knowledge groups, respectively. All five domains were associated with interest in unadjusted analyses (all p < 0.001). Good versus poor knowledge yielded a crude PR of 12.38 (95% CI, 4.78–32.04). No participant in the low-perception category reported high interest. The exploratory multivariable model did not converge, limiting interpretation of adjusted associations.Conclusion: Knowledge, perceived infection risk, family support, self-efficacy, and healthcare-provider education were associated with CAPD interest. These findings support individualized, family-inclusive counseling and prospective evaluation of balanced education and shared decision-making.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) CKD Work Group. KDIGO 2024 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of Chronic Kidney Disease. Kidney Int 2024;105(4 Suppl):S117–S314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kint.2023.10.018.
Johnson RJ, Floege J, Tonelli M, editors. Comprehensive Clinical Nephrology. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2024. ISBN: 9780323825924.
Li PKT, Chow KM, Van de Luijtgaarden MWM, Johnson DW, Jager KJ, Mehrotra R, et al. Changes in the worldwide epidemiology of peritoneal dialysis. Nat Rev Nephrol 2017;13(2):90–103. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneph.2016.181.
Li PKT, Chow KM, Cho Y, Fan S, Figueiredo AE, Harris T, et al. ISPD peritonitis guideline recommendations: 2022 update on prevention and treatment. Perit Dial Int 2022;42(2):110–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/08968608221080586.
Chow KM, Li PKT, Cho Y, Abu-Alfa A, Bavanandan S, Brown EA, et al. ISPD Catheter-related Infection Recommendations: 2023 Update. Perit Dial Int 2023;43(3):201–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/08968608231172740.
Putri S, Nugraha RR, Pujiyanti E, Thabrany H, Hasnur H, Istanti ND, et al. Supporting dialysis policy for end stage renal disease (ESRD) in Indonesia: an updated cost-effectiveness model. BMC Res Notes 2022;15:359. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-022-06252-4.
Afiatin, Khoe LC, Kristin E, Masytoh LS, Herlinawaty E, Werayingyong P, et al. Economic evaluation of policy options for dialysis in end-stage renal disease patients under the universal health coverage in Indonesia. PLoS One 2017;12(5):e0177436. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177436.
Chou CY, Hsieh YL, Lai JW. Who decides on peritoneal dialysis treatment? A decision analysis for patients with kidney failure. J Health Psychol 2025;30(5):1059–1068. https://doi.org/10.1177/13591053241264984.
Ho YF, Hsu PT, Yang KL. Peritoneal dialysis after shared decision-making: the disparity between reality and patient expectations. BMC Nurs 2022;21:268. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-022-01043-5.
Newcombe RG. Two-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: comparison of seven methods. Stat Med 1998;17(8):857–872. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19980430)17:8<857::AID-SIM777>3.0.CO;2-E.
Bursac Z, Gauss CH, Williams DK, Hosmer DW. Purposeful selection of variables in logistic regression. Source Code Biol Med 2008;3:17. https://doi.org/10.1186/1751-0473-3-17.
Heinze G, Schemper M. A solution to the problem of separation in logistic regression. Stat Med 2002;21(16):2409–2419. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1047.
Ribitsch W, Haditsch B, Otto R, Schilcher G, Quehenberger F, Roob JM, et al. Effects of a pre-dialysis patient education program on the relative frequencies of dialysis modalities. Perit Dial Int 2013;33(4):367–371. https://doi.org/10.3747/pdi.2011.00255.
Cao F, Hong F, Ruan Y, Lin M. Factors Influencing the Choice of Automated Peritoneal Dialysis Treatment by Patients Receiving Home Peritoneal Dialysis. Patient Prefer Adherence 2023;17:2797–2804. https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S423443.
Green LW, Kreuter MW. Health Program Planning: An Educational and Ecological Approach. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2005.
Rosenstock IM. Historical Origins of the Health Belief Model. Health Educ Monogr 1974;2(4):328–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/109019817400200403.
Oliver MJ, Abra G, Béchade C, Brown EA, Sanchez-Escuredo A, Johnson DW, et al. Assisted peritoneal dialysis: Position paper for the ISPD. Perit Dial Int 2024;44(3):160–170. https://doi.org/10.1177/08968608241246447.
Chow JSF, Brunier G, Figueiredo AE, Hurst H, Perez Moran D, Neumann JL, et al. Teaching peritoneal dialysis: A position paper for the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis. Perit Dial Int 2025;45(6):327–343. https://doi.org/10.1177/08968608251375512.