By the increase of the rate of existence of the hemodialyzing patients, they were required the long run treatment. Regardless of medical insurance expansion, hemodialyzing cost much expenses so that hospital has been considering the reuse of hemodialyzer and flowing eugipments along with the diverse study and progress of the ways of hemodialyzing and medical instruments.
This sl;udy was aimed to provide the basic materials regarding the reuse of hemodialyzer which is used for the patients of chronic renal disease.
The reusing program in the artificial kidney center of K hospital has been used for this study from 50 patients aften one year result from Sep. 1995 through Aug. 1996.
Automatic equipment of DRS-4 made by Seratronic Co., was used as the equipment and it was retreated with the function test simultaneously. Compliaction and confirmation of the infection were by the records of the hemodialysis of the patients.
SPSS was used for the analysis of the materials by computerization. The character of the patients and the rate of removal was by mistake and percentage, function test and rate of complication by Ftest(ANOVA) and the rate of complication per items by ~ and Ftest. As the post test the Duncan"s test was used for the statistically significant different variables in the standard of p(.05 after Ftest.
The followings are the summary of the result
1) In the function test of the new hemodialyzer and the reused one, and in all of CA110 and CF1 5.11, the dialyzer ultrafiltration coeffient(KiJfl was appeared to have been higher in the reusing groups than the first use ones.
This has been the normal limit showing no troubles with them.
2) In the function test of the new and reused hemodialyzer, in all of CA110 and CF15.11, the total blood volume was appeared to have been the less value in the reuse groups than the new ones.
This was the price within 80% of the first price that both showed possible for use.
3) The result of reuse hemodialyzer of CA110 was x´.9.48 7.83 in average in the test of leak test while 17.3 7.96 in reuse of CF15.11. The normal limit of C60 was the leak test result, So both of the hemodialyzer was normal for reuse.
4) T11e rate of removal of Blood Urea Nitrogen(B UN) w~~s 72.25% in CA110 hemodialyzer by reusing 16 -20 tunes as the highest rate showing the better result in the reuse hemodialyzer, while in CF15.1 1 hemodialyzer showed 71.16% by highest rate in the fir;~t use by the highest rate with no difference from the reuse.
5) T:he rate of removal of serum creatinine of CA110 was 64.08% by highest rate in reuse of 1-5 times ley showing better result in reuse hemodialy zer. While in CF15.11 66.47% the highest by re-use of 16-20 times showing no difference from each other.
6) No patients were admitted or precribed by antibiotics in relation with reuse dialyzer and no reports were shown about hepatitis B C, AIDS in fection.
7) Ol the total 248 episods of complication due to the hemodialyzing. 86 by first use. 73 by 1-5 times, 35 by 6-10 t1mES, 35 by 11-15 times and 19 by 16-~?0 times have been shown which have had no significant difference between the groups.
8) In the comparison of the expense for the hem odialyzer, there was the effect of saving 11.597.6 Won between the first and reuse hemodialyzer. And by decreasing the extracted materials, they did the great role of disposing the waste matters.
|