Next Article in Journal
A Machine Learning Approach to Analyze Home Advantage during COVID-19 Pandemic Period with Regards to Margin of Victory and to Different Tournaments in Professional Rugby Union Competitions
Next Article in Special Issue
Effect of Dietary Intervention Designed with Behavior Change Wheel on Compliance with Dietary Control in Women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Previous Article in Journal
Why Re-Invent the Wheel? Social Network Approaches Can Be Used to Mitigate SARS-CoV-2 Related Disparities in Latinx Seasonal Farmworkers
Previous Article in Special Issue
Comparison of Whey Versus Almond Protein Powder on Nitrogen Balance in Female College Students; The California Almond Protein Powder Project (CAlmond-P3)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 18
Issue 23
10.3390/ijerph182312710
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Assessment of Dietary Folate Intake and Pill Burden among Saudi Patients on Maintenance Hemodialysis

by
Ibrahim Sales
1,*,
Ghada Bawazeer
1,
Ahmad R. Tarakji
2,
Feriel K. Ben Salha
3,
Nourah H. Al-Deaiji
4,
Marwah Saeed
5,
Rawan S. Idris
6,
Mohammad H. Aljawadi
1,
Majidah A. Aljohani
7,
Mansour Adam Mahmoud
8 and
Wajid Syed
1
1
Department of Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
2
Consultant Nephrologist, St. George Medical Centre, Kitchener, ON N2R 0H3, Canada
3
Primary Point of Contact, Roche Tunisia & Libya, Roche Tunisie SA, Les Arcades, Lac Loch Ness Street, Berges du Lac, Tunis 1053, Tunisia
4
Pharmaceutical Care Division, National Care Hospital, Riyadh 11461, Saudi Arabia
5
Pharmaceutical Care Division, King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre, Riyadh 11564, Saudi Arabia
6
Pharmaceutical Care Division, Green Crescent Hospital, Riyadh 12711, Saudi Arabia
7
Pharmaceutical Care Division, King Saud Medical City, Riyadh 12746, Saudi Arabia
8
Department of Clinical and Hospital Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, Taibah University, Al-Madinah Al-Munawarah 42353, Saudi Arabia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(23), 12710; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182312710
Submission received: 13 October 2021 / Revised: 18 November 2021 / Accepted: 23 November 2021 / Published: 2 December 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Diet Quality and Diet-Environment Interactions on Human Health and Disease)
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The aim of this study was to assess the adequacy of dietary folate intake and perceptions of pill burden among Saudi patients on maintenance hemodialysis (MHD). This was a cross-sectional study of adults (>18 years) on MHD (>3 months) attending the dialysis unit at King Saud University Medical City. Patient demographics, dietary folic acid intake, and perceptions of pill burden were collected. Fifty-four patients met the eligibility criteria, with a mean age of 57 ± 15.5 years. The majority were females (63%), and the most prevalent comorbidities were diabetes (43%) and hypertension (76%). The average number of medications/patients was 11 ± 2.9, and most patients were receiving folate supplementation (68.5%). The average dietary folate intake was 823 ± 530 mcg/day. Pill burden was bothersome, primarily due to taking too many medications (57%) while taking medications at the workplace was the least bothersome burden (17%). The reported high pill burden and adequate dietary folate intake by Saudi patients on MHD indicates that the omission of folate supplementation may be advantageous for this special population.

1. Introduction

Anemia is one of the most common complications of chronic kidney disease (CKD), with iron-deficiency anemia being the most common manifestation besides a decrease in erythropoietin activity [1]. When indicated, the use of human recombinant erythropoietin (rHuEPO) and iron supplementation is usually sufficient to correct anemia and is considered the standard of care [2,3]. Anemia due to folic acid and B12 deficiency is uncommon in CKD patients. Although these water-soluble vitamins are highly removed during dialysis, regular supplementation is controversial [4,5,6,7]. Maintaining a normal, folate-balanced diet is reasonably sufficient to replace folate loss in the dialysate [8]. Nonetheless, observational data suggest that malnutrition is also common among CKD patients [9]. Folate supplementation has been associated with an enhanced effect of erythropoietin treatment in patients with folic acid deficiency [10,11,12]; however, KIDIGO guidelines do not advocate the use of adjuvants (such as folic acid) except in instances of deficiency or inefficacy [3]. Most dialysis patients receive adequate folate supplementation from folate-fortified foods in countries that require mandatory fortification [6]; however, due to the fact that folic acid has relatively low toxicity, routine supplementation with folic acid in CKD patients on dialysis is still a routine practice in most dialysis units as a preventative measure [2,13,14]. In the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), food fortification is encouraged but not mandatory [15]. According to data compiled by the Food Fortification Initiative, wheat fortification in KSA is voluntary, and no legislation has been passed regarding maize and rice (the main staple of a typical diet in the country).
Another aspect that can affect patient adherence and quality of life is the daily pill burden in patients who are on maintenance hemodialysis (MHD). CKD has been associated with the highest pill burden compared to any other chronic disease state [13,16,17]. The complexity of the medication regimens of MHD patients contributes to an increase in the rate of non-adherence and negatively affects their quality of life. Studies have estimated that the mean daily pill burden in chronic hemodialysis (HD) patients is around 10–12 medications per day [14]. Phosphate binders have been implicated as the most common drug associated with non-adherence in MHD patients [18]. The aim of this study was to assess the adequacy of dietary folate intake and the perceptions of pill burden among Saudi patients on MHD.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design and Setting

A cross-sectional study was conducted in the dialysis unit at King Saud University Medical City (KSUMC) in Riyadh. KSUMC is a tertiary teaching hospital that serves the employees of King Saud University, their dependents, and Saudi nationals not affiliated with the university. The majority of patients are native Arabic speakers. The study period ran from October–November 2015 and was concluded in January 2016.

2.2. Participants and Enrollment

All adult patients (≥18 years) from both genders attending the KSUMC HD unit who had been on chronic HD for at least three months prior to the study and were able to communicate through the questionnaire administration were included. Patients were excluded if they were on peritoneal dialysis, were pregnant, had psychiatric illnesses, or were under palliative care.

2.3. Folic Acid and Pill Burden Assessment Tools

Two surveys were adopted and administered to the patients. The folate-rich food survey [19,20] was used to measure daily dietary intake of folic acid. This survey was adopted and modified based upon the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates of foods common to the Saudi diet and the Saudi Healthy Food Palm [21,22]. The perceived burden of the oral therapy survey [23] assessed the complexity of oral therapy.

2.4. Data Collection

The administration of the two questionnaires to consenting patients was conducted by four authors (F.B., N.S., M.S., and R.I.). Prior to the data-collecting period, pilot questionnaires were administered to five patients and then modified, as required, to ensure optimum understanding by the patients. During this phase, the researchers observed each other to standardize the questionnaire administration practice and minimize variations in data collection and interpretation of patients’ responses. All subsequent questionnaire administration was performed independently. Eligible patients were approached to obtain their consent at the beginning of their scheduled MHD session. Both questionnaires were administered during a single MHD session, and the researchers spent approximately 20–30 min with each participant. Researchers began with the food frequency questionnaire and all diet-related questions first, and then the pill burden questionnaire was completed by the same researcher. The researchers asked the participants each survey question and recorded their responses on the data collection forms.

2.5. Data Analysis

The content of dietary folic acid intake was adjusted and calculated for each patient and presented as the amount of folic acid intake per day (amount in mcg/day). The perceived burden of therapy (PBOT) survey consisted of 6 items that measured how much patients were bothered by the number of medications prescribed, the medication size, adverse effects, the number of times treatment should be administered during the day, the need to take medications at work or in social contexts, and the need to drink to take their medications. These items are answered using a 5-point Likert Scale (1—Not bothered at all to 5—Extremely bothered). The total score of PBOT was 30 (a maximum score of 5 for each question); therefore, a cutoff score of 15 was used. Patients who scored 15 and above were considered to have a high level of PBOT, and patients who scored less than 15 were considered to have a low level of PBOT.

2.6. Ethical Considerations

This study was approved by the KSUMC Institutional Review Board Project No. E-19-3858.

2.7. Statistical Analysis

Continuous variables were presented as means and standard deviations. Categorical variables were presented as numbers and percentages. Mann–Whitney tests were used to test for differences between the continuous variables because the data was not normally distributed. Chi-square tests or Fisher’s exact tests were used to test for differences among the categorical variables. A p value < 0.05 was considered significant. The Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) Version 22 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) was used for all statistical analyses.

3. Results

Over a 3-month period, a total of 63 patients on MHD were screened, and 54 patients met the eligibility criteria. A total of nine patients were excluded (Figure 1). Most of the patients attended three sessions per week (92.6%), while a minority attended four sessions per week (7.4%). The mean patient age was 57.2 ± 15.5 years, the majority were female (63%), and 74% were married. The mean dialysis vintage was 6 ± 5.5 years. The baseline patient demographics and clinical characteristics are summarized in Table 1.
Fifty-three (98.1%) patients had at least one active disease. The patients were suffering from comorbidities, including hypertension (75.9%), anemia (48.1%), diabetes mellitus (42.6%), ischemic heart disease (IHD) (13%), hypothyroidism (11.1%), heart failure (HF) (7.4%), atrial fibrillation (AF) (5.6%), myocardial infarction (MI) (3.7%), and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (3.7%). A failed renal transplant was reported in 13% of the patients.
The average number of medications was 11 ± 29. The most common medication classes prescribed were phosphate binders (90.7%), vitamin D analogues (83.3%), multivitamins (75.9%), erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) (72.2%), iron supplements (68.5%), folic acid (68.5%), statins (64.8%), proton pump inhibitors (61.1%), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS) (51.9%), calcium channel blockers (33.3%), beta blockers (29.6%), insulin (25.9%), cholecalciferol (22.2%), anticoagulants (20%), antibiotics (18.5%), and oral antihyperglycemic medications (7.4%). In addition, the average number of pills per day was 16 ± 3.6.

3.1. Folic Acid Intake

Data from the folate-rich food questionnaire indicated that the average amount of dietary folic acid intake was 822.9 ± 530.7 mcg/day. Moreover, 37 patients (68.5%) were receiving additional folate supplementation. Those on folic acid supplementation were most commonly females (67.6%), non-smokers (78.4%), married (73%), and had a formal education (64.9%).

3.2. Perceived Burden of Therapy

The PBOT survey showed good reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.77). The average number of medications per patient was 11.0 ± 3, with an average of 15.21 ± 5.55 pills/patient/day. Table 2 summarizes the patients’ perceptions of PBOT. Patients with low levels of PBOT had a higher mean age compared to patients with high levels of PBOT (p = 0.02) (Table 3).

4. Discussion

This was a single-center study designed to assess dietary folic acid consumption and the perceived pill burden in patients undergoing MHD. The results of our study indicated that the majority of participants consumed adequate levels of folic acid from their normal diets. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to assess the amount of dietary folic acid intake among patients on MHD. It has been suggested that Saudi Arabia has a high prevalence of folate deficiency; however, to our knowledge, no local studies have been performed to assess the dietary consumption of folic acid.
In accordance with the U.S. Public Health Service, Center for Disease and Control (CDC), and Health Canada recommendations, the recommended daily intake of folic acid for healthy adults is 400 mcg/day [24,25,26,27]. However, in CKD patients, the available guidelines do not mention folic acid as part of the management and recommend against routine supplementation when the signs and symptoms of anemia are absent [3]. Palabiyik et al. compared the folate levels of participants on MHD with subjects without renal insufficiency [28]. The healthy volunteers’ folate levels were significantly higher in the MHD group, and this was attributed to the majority of MHD patients taking folic acid-containing multivitamins. Malyszko et al. reported that 68% of hemodialysis patients being treated for anemia were concomitantly receiving folic acid therapy [29]. Lee et al. measured serum folate, vitamin B12, and red cell folate concentrations by radioimmunoassay in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis patients not taking folate supplementation [6]. Folate deficiency occurred in 10% of the hemodialysis patients, and no macrocytic anemia was reported in any of the patients.
Well-nourished patients on MHD are less likely to develop folic acid deficiency as hemodialysis per se is not an indication for folic acid supplementation unless the patient is suffering from hyperhomocysteinemia, hyporesponsiveness to erythropoietin therapy, or malnutrition [3,5,30]. Many factors could contribute to malnutrition in hemodialysis patients such as dialysis duration, low frequency of taking three daily meals, inadequate nutrient intake, and changes in taste. Additionally, the disease itself could cause additional burden and psychological problems that could affect their dietary behaviors [31]. Nevertheless, folic acid concentrations are not considered to be reliable measures of actual folate tissue concentrations. They more accurately reflect recent dietary intake [32].
Pill burden is a major concern for both healthcare providers and patients. Complex medication regimens and a high number of medications and/or pills per day could significantly affect medication adherence and may become burdensome for many patients. Compared with other chronic diseases, CKD patients and patients on hemodialysis are typically prescribed an excessive number of medications due to multiple comorbidities and dialysis-related complications [14,33,34]. In the present study, we measured the PBOT from the patients’ perspective. We found that approximately 60% of patients were bothered by taking too many medications. An average of 11.0 ± 3 medications/patient and an average of 16 ± 3.6 pills/patient/day were reported by our patients. This is in agreement with previous findings in the literature indicating that CKD patients take an average of 10–12 medications daily [13,14,35].
As found in previous studies, phosphate binders, followed by vitamin D analogues, were the most commonly prescribed medications in our cohort and were the primary reasons for increased levels of dissatisfaction with medication regimens and pill burden. Additionally, phosphate binders have been associated with high levels of medication non-adherence [18,35,36,37], which we did not measure for our population.
On the pill burden survey, approximately 60% of patients were bothered by taking too many medications. Although taking medications at the workplace was the least bothersome aspect, the average age of the participants was close to 60; therefore, many of the participants may have been retired. Over half of the participants were bothered by medication side effects. Adverse effects of medications have also been associated with non-adherence [38,39,40,41,42,43,44]. Ghimire et al. reported that some patients independently decide to “experiment” with their medications by temporarily or permanently discontinuing therapy to determine whether the adverse reaction is due to the medication [39]. The large pill sizes, which are typically associated with phosphate binders, concerned approximately 43% of the patients. Many similar surveys have confirmed this finding. Pill sizes further pose a challenge for this population due to fluid restrictions and difficulty swallowing [39,45,46,47,48,49,50]. One-third of our patients complained about taking some of their medicine(s) multiple times daily. Frequency has likewise been highly associated with deficiencies in medication adherence [46,48,51,52].
Promising strategies and interventions to decrease pill burden include an increased involvement of clinical pharmacists, incorporating structured medication reconciliation (SMR), and deprescribing. Mateti et al. investigated the impact of a pharmacist-led enhanced pharmaceutical care program upon the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and clinical outcomes in MHD patients over a 12-month period [53,54]. Patients randomized to the pharmaceutical care group had significant reductions in interdialytic weight gain and blood pressure as well as significant increases in hemoglobin levels, medication adherence, and six HRQoL domains. Structured medication reconciliation (SMR) requires inter-professional collaboration. The clinical pharmacist plays a critical role in coordinating the process of medication reconciliation. Such services can reduce polypharmacy, medication-related problems, and healthcare-related costs, especially for MHD patients [55]. A quality improvement project aimed at improving patient treatment adherence in patients on MHD in an outpatient hemodialysis unit included multiple initiatives [56]. The project included a comprehensive SMR on regular intervals and an assessment of treatment adherence via both objective measures (i.e., laboratory values, vital signs, and interdialytic weight gain) and the administration of a pre- and post-End-Stage Renal Disease Adherence Questionnaire (ESRD-AQ). The study demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the accuracy of medication profiles and improvements in objective measures and the use of pharmacy services. Furthermore, McIntyre et al. developed a deprescribing tool for MHD patients for certain types of medication classes [57]. They hypothesized that if deprescribing reduces polypharmacy, it can lead to a decrease in medication burden and possibly increase adherence. After a 6-month period, 57% of study participants had a reduction in pill burden.
Our study had several limitations. The patients were recruited from a single HD center in KSA; therefore, the sample size was small and may affect the results and generalizability of the study. Further, different populations in the same and different countries might have different dietary folic acid intakes. Another limitation is the lack of realization of portion size in most of our Saudi patients and the fact that the majority have no fixed meal schedules. This could possibly make the data collection for the food frequency questionnaire less accurate and more vulnerable to either over- or under-estimation of the actual folic acid intake. Additionally, the folic acid amounts were estimated based on the folate-rich food survey, and some of the amounts were retrieved from the WHO. Furthermore, this study did not take into consideration patient-reported medication adherence. Finally, possible variations in the researchers’ skills and data collection may have existed, although the initial observation period sought to minimize these potential discrepancies.

5. Conclusions

Folate supplementation in centers providing services to Saudi patients on MHD may not be necessary. The dietary folate intake in Saudi patients on MHD appears to be more than adequate. The reported high pill burden by Saudi patients on MHD indicates that the omission of folate supplementation may be advantageous for this special population, already plagued with a high prevalence of polypharmacy and suboptimal medication adherence. These findings need to be confirmed in future, larger, multi-center studies to provide general guidance for the national and international communities.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.R.T., G.B., I.S. and M.H.A.; methodology, A.R.T., M.H.A. and W.S.; data collection, F.K.B.S., N.H.A.-D., M.S., R.S.I. and W.S.; formal analysis, M.H.A. and M.A.M.; writing—original draft preparation, F.K.B.S., N.H.A.-D., M.S. and R.S.I.; writing—review and editing, I.S., G.B., M.A.M., M.A.A. and W.S.; supervision, G.B. and M.H.A.; project administration, G.B.; funding acquisition, I.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors extend their appreciation to the Deanship of Scientific Research at King Saud University for funding this work through research group number (RG-1441-367).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the King Saud University Medical City Institutional Review Board Project No. E-19-3858.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to participant confidentiality but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

We would like to show our gratitude and thanks to KSUMC dialysis unit, nursing and staff, and the managers of the unit.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Eschbach, J.W.; Cook, J.D.; Scribner, B.H.; Finch, C.A. Iron Balance in Hemodialysis Patients. Ann. Intern. Med. 1977, 87, 710–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Anemia Work Group. KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline for Anemia in Chronic Kidney Disease. Kidney Inter. Suppl. 2012, 2, 279–335. [Google Scholar]
  3. Ikizler, T.A.; Burrowes, J.D.; Byham-Gray, L.D.; Campbell, K.L.; Carrero, J.J.; Chan, W.; Fouque, D.; Friedman, A.N.; Ghaddar, S.; Goldstein-Fuchs, D.J.; et al. KDOQI Clinical Practice Guideline for Nutrition in CKD: 2020 Update. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 2020, 76, S1–S107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Capelli, I.; Cianciolo, G.; Gasperoni, L.; Zappulo, F.; Tondolo, F.; Cappuccilli, M.; la Manna, G. Folic Acid and Vitamin B12 Administration in CKD, why not? Nutrients 2019, 11, 383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Handelman, G.J.; Levin, N.W. Guidelines for Vitamin Supplements in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients: What is the Evidence? J. Ren. Nutr. 2011, 21, 117–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Lee, E.Y.; Kim, J.S.; Lee, H.J.; Yoon, D.S.; Han, B.G.; Shim, Y.H.; Choi, S.O. Do Dialysis Patients Need Extra Folate Supplementation? Adv. Perit. Dial. Conf. Perit. Dial. 1999, 15, 247–250. [Google Scholar]
  7. Schaefer, R.M.; Teschner, M.; Kosch, M. Folate Metabolism in Renal Failure. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 2002, 17, 24–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Schiffl, H.; Lang, S.M. Folic Acid Deficiency Modifies the Haematopoietic Response to Recombinant Human Erythropoietin in Maintenance Dialysis Patients. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 2006, 21, 133–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Garg, A.X.; Blake, P.G.; Clark, W.F.; Clase, C.M.; Haynes, R.B.; Moist, L.M. Association between Renal Insufficiency and Malnutrition in Older Adults: Results from the NHANES III. Kidney Int. 2001, 60, 1867–1874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Suliman, M.; Divino Filho, J.; Bàràny, P.; Anderstam, B.; Lindholm, B.; Bergström, J. Effects of High-Dose Folic Acid and Pyridoxine on Plasma and Erythrocyte Sulfur Amino Acids in Hemodialysis Patients. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. JASN 1999, 10, 1287–1296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bamgbola, O. Pattern of Resistance to Erythropoietin-Stimulating Agents in Chronic Kidney Disease. Kidney Int. 2011, 80, 464–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Duclos, J.; Sieberth, H.; Mann, H. Is It Necessary to Supplement with Folic Acid Patients in Chronic Dialysis Treated with Erythropoietin? Rev. Med. Chile 1993, 121, 30–35. [Google Scholar]
  13. Chiu, Y.-W.; Teitelbaum, I.; Misra, M.; de Leon, E.M.; Adzize, T.; Mehrotra, R. Pill Burden, Adherence, Hyperphosphatemia, and Quality of Life in Maintenance Dialysis Patients. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2009, 4, 1089–1096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Manley, H.J.; Garvin, C.G.; Drayer, D.K.; Reid, G.M.; Bender, W.L.; Neufeld, T.K.; Hebbar, S.; Muther, R.S. Medication Prescribing Patterns in Ambulatory Haemodialysis Patients: Comparisons of USRDS to a Large Not-for-Profit Dialysis Provider. Nephrol Dial Transpl. 2004, 19, 1842–1848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Country Profile—Saudi Arabia. Available online: http://www.ffinetwork.org/country_profiles/country.php?record=194 (accessed on 21 June 2020).
  16. Parker, K.; Nikam, M.; Jayanti, A.; Mitra, S. Medication Burden in CKD-5D: Impact of Dialysis Modality and Setting. Clin. Res. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Tesfaye, W.; McKercher, C.; Peterson, G.; Castelino, R.; Jose, M.; Zaidi, S.; Wimmer, B. Medication Adherence, Burden and Health-Related Quality of Life in Adults with Predialysis Chronic Kidney Disease: A Prospective Cohort Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Fissell, R.B.; Karaboyas, A.; Bieber, B.A.; Sen, A.; Li, Y.; Lopes, A.A.; Akiba, T.; Bommer, J.; Ethier, J.; Jadoul, M.; et al. Phosphate Binder Pill Burden, Patient-Reported Non-Adherence, and Mineral Bone Disorder Markers: Findings from the DOPPS. Hemodial. Int. 2016, 20, 38–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. National Cancer Institute NHANES Food Questionnaire. Available online: https://epi.grants.cancer.gov/diet/usualintakes/FFQ.English.June0304.pdf (accessed on 5 November 2021).
  20. Mulligan, A.; Luben, R.; Bhaniani, A.; Parry-Smith, D.; O’Connor, L.; Khawaja, A.; Forouhi, N.; Khaw, K. A New Tool for Converting Food Frequency Questionnaire Data into Nutrient and Food Group Values: FETA Research Methods and Availability. BMJ Open 2014, 4, e004503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Al-Dkheel, M. Dietary Guidelines for Saudis; Ministry of Health: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  22. World Health Organization. Promoting a Healthy Diet for the WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region: User-Friendly Guide; World Health Organization: Gevena, Switzerland, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  23. Neri, L.; Martini, A.; Andreucci, V.; Gallieni, M.; Rey, L.; Brancaccio, D. Regimen Complexity and Prescription Adherence in Dialysis Patients. Am. J. Nephrol. 2011, 34, 71–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Health Canada Dietary Reference Intakes Tables; Government of Canada: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 2010.
  25. Centers for Disease Control. Recommendations for the Use of Folic Acid to Reduce the Number of Cases of Spina Bifida and Other Neural Tube Defects; CDC: Atlanta, GA, USA, 1992.
  26. Centers for Disease Control. Recommendations: Women & Folic Acid. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/folicacid/recommendations.html (accessed on 6 November 2021).
  27. Tucker, B.M.; Safadi, S.; Friedman, A.N. Is Routine Multivitamin Supplementation Necessary in US Chronic Adult Hemodialysis Patients? A Systematic Review. J. Ren. Nutr. 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Palabiyik, S.S.; Baydar, T.; Cetinkaya, R.; Dolgun, A.B.; Sahin, G. Erythrocyte Folate Status and Serum Iron Levels in Patients Undergoing Hemodialysis. Hemodial. Int. 2014, 18, 32–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Malyszko, J.; Drozdz, M.; Zolkiewicz, A.; Rutkowski, B. Renal Anaemia Treatment in Haemodialysis Patients in the Central and Eastern European Countries in Everyday Clinical Practice Follow-Up. Int. Urol. Nephrol. 2014, 46, 71–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Schwotzer, N.; Kanemitsu, M.; Kissling, S.; Darioli, R.; Benghezal, M.; Rezzi, S.; Burnier, M.; Pruijm, M. Water-Soluble Vitamin Levels and Supplementation in Chronic Online Hemodiafiltration Patients. Kidney Int. Rep. 2020, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Lim, H.-S.; Kim, H.-S.; Kim, J.K.; Park, M.; Choi, S.J. Nutritional Status and Dietary Management According to Hemodialysis Duration. Clin. Nutr. Res. 2019, 8, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Galloway, M.; Rushworth, L. Red Cell or Serum Folate? Results from the National Pathology Alliance Benchmarking Review. J. Clin. Pathol. 2003, 56, 924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Ghimire, S.; Peterson, G.M.; Castelino, R.L.; Jose, M.D.; Zaidi, S.T.R. Medication Regimen Complexity and Adherence in Haemodialysis Patients: An Exploratory Study. Am. J. Nephrol. 2016, 43, 318–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Tozawa, M.; Iseki, K.; Iseki, C.; Oshiro, S.; Higashiuesato, Y.; Yamazato, M.; Tomiyama, N.; Tana, T.; Takishita, S. Analysis of Drug Prescription in Chronic Haemodialysis Patients. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 2002, 17, 1819–1824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Iwashita, Y.; Ohya, M.; Kunimoto, S.; Iwashita, Y.; Mima, T.; Negi, S.; Shigematsu, T. A Survey of Drug Burden in Patients Undergoing Maintenance Hemodialysis in Japan. Intern. Med. 2018, 57, 2937–2944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Wang, S.; Alfieri, T.; Ramakrishnan, K.; Braunhofer, P.; Newsome, B.A. Serum Phosphorus Levels and Pill Burden Are Inversely Associated with Adherence in Patients on Hemodialysis. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 2014, 29, 2092–2099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  37. Gray, K.; Ficociello, L.; Hunt, A.; Mullon, C.; Brunelli, S.M. Phosphate Binder Pill Burden, Adherence, and Serum Phosphorus Control among Hemodialysis Patients Converting to Sucroferric Oxyhydroxide. Int. J. Nephrol. Renov. Dis. 2019, 12, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  38. Schmid, H.; Hartmann, B.; Schiffl, H. Adherence to Prescribed Oral Medication in Adult Patients Undergoing Chronic Hemodialysis: A Critical Review of the Literature. Eur. J. Med. Res. 2009, 14, 185–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  39. Ghimire, S.; Castelino, R.L.; Jose, M.D.; Zaidi, S.T.R. Medication Adherence Perspectives in Haemodialysis Patients: A Qualitative Study. BMC Nephrol. 2017, 18, 167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  40. Cummings, K.M.; Becker, M.H.; Kirscht, J.P.; Levin, N.W. Psychosocial Factors Affecting Adherence to Medical Regimens in a Group of Hemodialysis Patients. Med. Care 1982, 20, 567–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Wileman, V.; Farrington, K.; Wellsted, D.; Almond, M.; Davenport, A.; Chilcot, J. Medication Beliefs Are Associated with Phosphate Binder Non-Adherence in Hyperphosphatemic Haemodialysis Patients. Br. J. Health Psychol. 2015, 20, 563–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Chater, A.M.; Parham, R.; Riley, S.; Hutchison, A.J.; Horne, R. Profiling Patient Attitudes to Phosphate Binding Medication: A Route to Personalising Treatment and Adherence Support. Psychol. Health 2014, 29, 1407–1420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Wileman, V.; Chilcot, J.; Norton, S.; Hughes, L.; Wellsted, D.; Farrington, K. Choosing Not to Take Phosphate Binders: The Role of Dialysis Patients’ Medication Beliefs. Nephron Clin. Pract. 2011, 119, 205–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Horne, R.; Sumner, S.; Jubraj, B.; Weinman, J.; Frost, S. Haemodialysis Patients’ Beliefs about Treatment: Implications for Adherence to Medication and Fluid-Diet Restrictions. Int. J. Pharm. Pract. 2001, 9, 169–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ghimire, S.; Banks, C.; Jose, M.D.; Castelino, R.L.; Zaidi, S.T.R. Medication Adherence Assessment Practices in Dialysis Settings: A Survey of Renal Nurses’ Perceptions. J. Clin. Nurs. 2019, 28, 528–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Lindberg, M.; Lindberg, P. Overcoming Obstacles for Adherence to Phosphate Binding Medication in Dialysis Patients: A Qualitative Study. Pharm. World Sci. 2008, 30, 571–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Kaplan, M.R.; Stashenko, C.L.; Bledsoe, A.L.; McGowan, J. A Preference Study: Calcium Acetate Tablets versus Gelcaps in Hemodialysis Patients. Nephrol. Nurs. J. J. Am. Nephrol. Nurses’ Assoc. 2002, 29, 363–365. [Google Scholar]
  48. Ghimire, S.; Castelino, R.L.; Lioufas, N.M.; Peterson, G.M.; Zaidi, S.T.R. Nonadherence to Medication Therapy in Haemodialysis Patients: A Systematic Review. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0144119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Seng, J.J.B.; Tan, J.Y.; Yeam, C.T.; Htay, H.; Foo, W.Y.M. Factors Affecting Medication Adherence among Pre-Dialysis Chronic Kidney Disease Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Literature. Int. Urol. Nephrol. 2020, 52, 903–916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Karamanidou, C.; Clatworthy, J.; Weinman, J.; Horne, R. A Systematic Review of the Prevalence and Determinants of Nonadherence to Phosphate Binding Medication in Patients with End-Stage Renal Disease. BMC Nephrol. 2008, 9, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Tangkiatkumjai, M.; Walker, D.-M.; Praditpornsilpa, K.; Boardman, H. Association between Medication Adherence and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease: A Prospective Cohort Study. Clin. Exp. Nephrol. 2017, 21, 504–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. McKillop, G.; Joy, J. Patients’ Experience and Perceptions of Polypharmacy in Chronic Kidney Disease and Its Impact on Adherent Behaviour. J. Ren. Care 2013, 39, 200–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Mateti, U.V.; Nagappa, A.N.; Attur, R.P.; Nagarapu, S.P.; Rangaswamy, D. Impact of Pharmaceutical Care on the Health-Related Quality of Life among Hemodialysis Patients—A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Study. Saudi J. Kidney Dis. Transplant. Off. Publ. Saudi Cent. Organ Transplant. Saudi Arab. 2017, 28, 1293–1306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Mateti, U.V.; Nagappa, A.N.; Attur, R.P.; Nagaraju, S.P.; Rangaswamy, D. Impact of Pharmaceutical Care on Clinical Outcomes among Hemodialysis Patients: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Study. Saudi J. Kidney Dis. Transplant. Off. Publ. Saudi Cent. Organ Transplant. Saudi Arab. 2018, 29, 801–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Pai, A.B.; Cardone, K.E.; Manley, H.J.; St. Peter, W.L.; Shaffer, R.; Somers, M.; Mehrotra, R. Medication Reconciliation and Therapy Management in Dialysis-Dependent Patients: Need for a Systematic Approach. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2013, 8, 1988–1999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Saunders, J.; Ahmadzadeh, S.; Bush, M.; Wright, R.; Granger, B. Improving Patient Experience and Treatment Adherence in the Adult, Outpatient Hemodialysis Population. J. Nurs. Care Qual. 2019, 34, 330–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. McIntyre, C.; McQuillan, R.; Bell, C.; Battistella, M. Targeted Deprescribing in an Outpatient Hemodialysis Unit: A Quality Improvement Study to Decrease Polypharmacy. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 2017, 70, 611–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijerph 18 12710 g001 550
Figure 1. Flowchart of patient recruitment.
Figure 1. Flowchart of patient recruitment.
Ijerph 18 12710 g001
Table
Table 1. Patient demographic characteristics.
Table 1. Patient demographic characteristics.
Characteristics (n = 54)N (%)
Age (years) *57.2 ± 15.5
Gender
Male20 (37)
Female34 (63)
Smoking status
Non-smoker45 (83.3)
Smoker9 (16.7)
Marital status
Married40 (74.1)
Single14 (25.9)
Level of education
Illiterate22 (40.74)
School education17 (31.5)
University15 (27.8)
Hemoglobin level (g/L) *109.04 ± 21.3
Hct% *34.5 ± 13
MCV *87 ± 7.1
Number of medications *11 ± 2.9
Number of pills/patient/day *15.21 ± 5.55
Number of comorbidities *4.6 ± 2.3
Dialyzer type
Fx6023 (42.6)
Fx8031 (57.4)
Number of sessions per week
Three sessions50 (92.6)
Four sessions4 (7.4)
Duration of the session
Three hours5 (9.3)
Three and a half hours20 (37.0)
Four hours29 (53.7)
Folic Acid supplementation
Yes37 (68.5)
No17 (31.5)
Folic Acid dose
1 mg18 (33.3)
5 mg36 (66.7)
* mean ± SD. Hematocrit (Hct), Mean Corpuscular Volume (MCV).
Table
Table 2. Participant responses to the Perceived Burden of Therapy (PBOT) Survey.
Table 2. Participant responses to the Perceived Burden of Therapy (PBOT) Survey.
VariableNot Bothered
at All
N (%)		Somewhat
Bothered
N (%)		Moderately
Bothered
N (%)		Very
Bothered
N (%)		Extremely
Bothered
N (%)		Mean Perception Score *
Taking too many medications19 (35.8)3 (5.7)14 (26.4)7 (13.2)10 (18.9)1.7
Side effects of medicines16 (30.2)9 (17)9 (17)4 (7.4)15 (28.3)2
Pill size (too big)20 (37.7)10 (18.9)6 (11.3)7 (13.2)10 (18.9)2.2
Taking medicines many times per day22 (41.5)13 (24.5)8 (15.1)2 (3.8)8 (15.1)1.5
Taking medicine at the workplace41 (77.4)3 (5.7)1 (1.9)5 (9.4)3 (5.7)1
The need to drink to take medicines37 (69.8)3 (5.7)4 (7.5)6 (11.3)3 (5.7)1.6
* The mean score was based upon the 5-point Likert Scale (1—Not bothered at all to 5—Extremely bothered).
Table
Table 3. Association between the level of Perceived Burden of Therapy (PBOT) and patient demographics.
Table 3. Association between the level of Perceived Burden of Therapy (PBOT) and patient demographics.
CharacteristicsLow Level of PBOT
N (%)
(n = 45)		High Level of PBOT
N (%)
(n = 8)		p Value
Age (years) *59.1 ± 15.044.5 ± 13.50.02
Gender 0.34
 Male16 (35.6)4 (50)
 Female29 (64.4)4 (50)
Phosphate binder ¥ 0.57
 Yes41 (91.1)7 (87.5)
 No4 (8.9)1 (12.5)
Folic acid intake ¥ 0.25
 Yes13 (28.9)4 (50)
 No32 (71.1)4 (50)
MCV *86.8 ± 7.188.6 ± 7.00.46
Number of medications *11.0 ± 3.111.0 ± 1.510.90
Number of pills *(16 ± 3.6)(14.4 ± 5.8)0.28
Number of comorbidities *4.7 ± 2.34.1 ± 1.70.44
* (mean ± SD; Mann—Whitney test); ¥ (Chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test). Perceived Burden of Therapy (PBOT), Mean Corpuscular Volume (MCV).
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sales, I.; Bawazeer, G.; Tarakji, A.R.; Ben Salha, F.K.; Al-Deaiji, N.H.; Saeed, M.; Idris, R.S.; Aljawadi, M.H.; Aljohani, M.A.; Mahmoud, M.A.; et al. Assessment of Dietary Folate Intake and Pill Burden among Saudi Patients on Maintenance Hemodialysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 12710. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182312710

AMA Style

Sales I, Bawazeer G, Tarakji AR, Ben Salha FK, Al-Deaiji NH, Saeed M, Idris RS, Aljawadi MH, Aljohani MA, Mahmoud MA, et al. Assessment of Dietary Folate Intake and Pill Burden among Saudi Patients on Maintenance Hemodialysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(23):12710. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182312710

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sales, Ibrahim, Ghada Bawazeer, Ahmad R. Tarakji, Feriel K. Ben Salha, Nourah H. Al-Deaiji, Marwah Saeed, Rawan S. Idris, Mohammad H. Aljawadi, Majidah A. Aljohani, Mansour Adam Mahmoud, and et al. 2021. "Assessment of Dietary Folate Intake and Pill Burden among Saudi Patients on Maintenance Hemodialysis" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 23: 12710. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182312710

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop