Open access

Identification of Hemodialysis Patients’ Physical and Psychosocial Problems Using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)

Written By

Hideyo Tsutsui, Teruhiko Koike and Yoshiharu Oshida

Submitted: 24 November 2010 Published: 14 November 2011

DOI: 10.5772/23160

From the Edited Volume

Hemodialysis - Different Aspects

Edited by Maria Goretti Penido

Chapter metrics overview

2,368 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

1. Introduction

We aimed to identify hemodialysis (HD) patients’physical and psychosocial problems using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)-based checklist we developed. The ICF belongs to the WHO’s family of international classifications, and it is the instrument for comprehensive understanding of patients. HD patients have diverse physical and psychosocial problems, and ICF-based approach may be useful to improve management and quality of life (QOL) of patients on HD. In this article, we introduced the new data associated with physical and psychosocial problems of 222 patients in HD, which extends our previous report (Tsutsui et al. 2009).

In Japan, the number of patients on HD was 36,397 in 1980 and increased to 290,675 in 2009 (Patient Registration Committee, Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy, 2010). In addition to the physical limitations in functioning caused by renal failure and its comorbidities, HD patients have various restrictions resulting from HD therapyrequiring radical lifestyle changes. Therefore, HD patients tend to have both physical and psychosocial problems. Thus, evaluation of QOL is especially important, and the Kidney Disease Quality of Life (KDQOLTM) (Hays et al, 1994) and the Kidney Disease Quality of Life-Short Form (KDQOL-SFTM) (Hays et al, 1994) have been widely used. The KDQOL-SFTM includes multi-item scales targeted at the particular health-related concerns of individuals who have kidney disease and are on dialysis. In the present study, we aimed to investigate the use of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) (WHO 2001), whichis the instrumentfor comprehensive understanding of patients. In addition to evaluate physical and psychosocial problems of patients, ICF can be used as a tool for team medical treatment to make plans for treatment and care of patients. We have reported the checklist for HD patients based on ICF (Tsutsui et al. 2009). The data in this article include those of patients on HD with diabetic nephropathy, which was excluded in the previous report.

Advertisement

2. International classification of functioning, disability and health

The ICF was published by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2001 to standardize descriptions of health and disability. The ICF and International Classification of Disease-10thRevision (ICD-10) constitute the core classification in the WHO’s family of international classifications, which provides a valuable tool to describe and compare the health of populations in an international context. The information on mortality (provided by ICD-10) and on health outcomes (provided by ICF) may be combined in summary measures of population health.

The overall aim of the ICF classification is to provide a unified and standard language and framework for the description of health and health-related states. It defines components of health and some health-related components of well-being (such as education and labor). An ICF-based approach can also be useful to collect information on a broad set of impairments, activity limitations and environmental factors that contribute to improve or worsen patients’ functioning and disability status. Such information could provide a common framework for research, clinical work and social policy and help in improving the identification of needs related to health and social services, and related interventions.

The ICF provides a description of situations about human functioning and its restrictions and serves as a framework to organize this information. The ICF is based on the biopsychosocial model, an integration of medical and social models. The patient’s functioning is conceived as a dynamic interaction between the underlying health condition and specific personal and environmental factors. The following diagram is one representation of model of disability that is the basis for ICF (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Interactions between the components of ICF (WHO, 2001).

The ICF organizes information in the two main subdivisions: Part 1 covers functioning and disability and Part 2 covers contextual factors. Each of these two parts is divided into components. Components of functioning and disability consist of "Body functions and structures" and "Activities and participation". Components of contextual factors consists of "Environmental factors" and "Personal factors". "Body functions" relate to the physiological and psychological functions of the body. "Body structures" are anatomic parts of the body such as organs, limbs and their components classified according to body systems. "Activities" is the execution of a task or action by an individual. It represents the individual perspective of functioning. "Participation" is a person’s involvement in a life situation. It represents the societal perspective of functioning. "Environmental factors" refer to all aspects of the external or extrinsic world that from the context of an individual’s life such as social attitudes and values, social systems and services, policies, rules and laws. "Personal factors" are those related to the individual such as age, gender, social status, and life experiences, which are not currently classified in ICF, although users may incorporate in their applications of the classification (WHO 2001).

Every component of the ICF has a hierarchical structure. The categories of ICF are classified by the code in which the letters (b, s, d, and e) is combined with the number. The letters b, s, d and e refer to the components “Body functions” (b), “Body structures” (s), “Activities and participation” (d), and “Environmental factors” (e). The letters are followed by a numeric code that defines the chapter number (first digit) and the category levels up to the fourth level (suffix of two, three, or four digits).

2.1. ICF checklist

The ICF in its current version consists of 1424 codes. Therefore, it is necessary to select a subset of the codes as needed for any given purpose. One of such activities is the development of the ICF checklist (WHO, 2003). The ICF checklist consists of a selection of 128 first- and second-level categories from the whole ICF classification system. It provides a relatively simple-to-use questionnaire, and is a generic template for a structured interview. The ICF checklist makes it possible to generate a profile of the individual patient on the functioning and disability in clinical practice. Of the 128 categories, 32 belong to “Body functions”, 16 to “Body structures”, 48 belong to “Activities and participation”, and 32 to “Environmental factors”. The ICF checklist utilizes a “qualifier” to evaluate each component, which is considered to be positive when patients have any level of impairments (i.e. mild, moderate, severe, or complete) in “Body functions” and “Body structures”; any level of activity limitations or participation restrictions in “Activities and participation”; and any level of barrier in “Environmental factors” (WHO 2003, Ewert et al. 2004).

2.2. ICF core sets

The ICF core sets are developed for medical conditions that have high impact on a patient’s functioning and disability (Stucki et al. 2002). They have been developed in a formal decision making and consensus-based process integrating evidence gathered from studies for chronic conditions (Weigl et al. 2004, Brockow et al. 2004, Ewert et al. 2004). The ICF core sets for patients with a determined health condition represent a selection of ICF categories out of the whole classification that can serve as minimal standards for reporting of functioning and health for clinical studied and clinical encounter or as standards for multiprofessional. The ICF core sets contain categories not only on anatomic and pathophysiologic changes but also on functioning in every-day activities and relevant environmental factors.

These ICF core sets are to be developed in two levels: A brief and comprehensive ICF core sets. The brief ICF core sets includes only the most important ICF-categories and is intended to be rated in all patients of a clinical study. However, the comprehensive ICF core sets include all categories that are typically limited in the selected health condition, and are created to guide multidisciplinary assessment (Stucki et al. 2002).

The ICF core sets have been developed for many health conditions including diabetes mellitus (Ruof et al. 2004), obesity (Stucki et al. 2004), and stroke (Geyh et al. 2004).

Advertisement

3. Identification of HD patients’ physical and psychosocial problems

The process of developing the checklist for the HD treatment is briefly described.

Initially, we interviewed 32 HD patients using ICF checklist.They were interviewed for each category of the ICFchecklist whether they had problems since starting HD treatment.For example, in the category of b134Sleep, patients were interviewed “Have you ever experienced insomnia, nocturnal awakening, or hypersomnia since starting HD treatment?” The interviewer questioned about the details of their problems when patients answered “yes”.The interview was done by the first author who was the medical social worker.All categories that at least 1patient reported a problem were selected as problem categories. As a result, 57 categories of the ICF checklist were selected for the checklist for the HD treatment. Thirty-five categories in the ICF that were not included in the ICF checklist were chosen based on the consensus of the conference that included physician, nurses, and medical social worker. These 92 categories consisted of 39 categories from the “Body functions” component, 13 from the “Body structures” component, 20 categories from the “Activities and participation” component, and 20 categories from the “Environmental factors” component. Finally, we added 8 categories that are not included in the ICF categories considering the specificities of HD.These categories are following; Functions of vascular access in “Body functions” component, Vascular access in “Body structures” component, Going to hospital, Managing weight, Angiostasis by oneself after drawing out needle, and Preparing a dialysis diet in “Activities and participation” component, Dialysis professionals in “Environmental factors” component. Taken together, the checklist for the HD comprises 100 categories.

Table 1.

Component of checklist.

3.1. Physical and psychosocial problems of maintenance HD patients

We interviewed 222 maintenance HD patients using the checklist for HD patients. The characteristics of them are shown in Table2.

3.1.1. Body functions

The percentage of patients on maintenance HD who reported problems in each category of “Body functions” component is described in Table 3.

Total
n=222
Sex (men/women) 152/70
Age (years) 61±11
Age of HD introduction (years) 52±13
Duration of HD (years) 9.1±8.0
Underlying disease
Diabetic nephropathy 86
Chronic glomerulonephritis 46
Nephrosclerosis 44
Polycystic kidney 9
Gouty kidney 6
Interstitinal nephritis 2
Obstructive urinary disorder 2
Reflux nephropathy 1
Cystinuria 1
Pregnancy-induced kidney disease 1
Pyelonephritis 1
Systemic lupus erythematosus 1
Unidentified 22

Table 2.

Maintenance HD patients’ characteristics.

Body Functions %
b110 Consciousness functions 25.7
b1300 Energy level 39.2
b1302 Appetite 26.6
b134 Sleep functions 46.4
b140 Attention functions 32.9
b152 Emotional functions 26.6
b210 Seeing functions 50.9
b240 Sensations associated with hearing and vestibular function 37.8
b250 Taste function 20.7
b260 Proprioceptive function 36.9
b265 Touch function 16.7
b270 Sensory functions related to temperature and other stimuli 12.2
b280 Sensation of pain 45.9
b410 Heart functions 45.9
b415 Blood vessel functions
§ Functions of vascular access
22.5
27.2
b420 Blood pressure functions 75.7
b430 Haematological system functions 14.0
b440 Respiration functions 26.6
b4550 General physical endurance 50.5
b4551 Aerobic capacity 45.9
b4552 Fatigability 57.2
b515 Digestive functions 24.8
b525 Defecation functions 51.4
b530 Weight maintenance functions 22.5
b535 Sensations associated with the digestive system 33.8
b545 Water, mineral and electrolyte balance functions 26.6
b555 Endocrine gland functions 14.0
b610 Urinary excretory functions 61.3
b620 Urination functions 47.7
b64 Sexual functions 18.0
b670 Sensations associated with genital and reproductive functions 12.6
b710 Mobility of joint functions 43.2
b730 Muscle power functions 12.6
b735 Muscle tone functions 40.5
b780 Sensations related to muscles and movement functions 64.4
b810 Protective functions of the skin 59.9
b820 Repair function of the skin 36.9
b840 Sensation related to the skin 74.8
b850 Functions of hair 29.7

Table 3.

Percentage of maintenance HD patients who reported impairment in each category of “Body functions” component.

§; Categories specific for HD (Not ICF categories)

In the “Body functions” component, problems of patients on maintenance HD are associated with sleep, fatigue, defecation, blood pressure, urination, muscle, skin, and those related to the symptoms or complication of kidney disease. Itching of the skin (Danquah et al. 2010, Caplin et al. 2011), sleep (Čengić et al. 2010, Danquah et al. 2010), blood pressure (Van Buren et al. 2011, Caplin et al. 2011), muscle cramps (Danquah et al. 2010, Weisbord et al. 2008), and constipation (Wu et al. 2004, Yasuda et al. 2002) have been reported as significant problems in patients with maintenance HD. According to the interview, these patients tend to have problemssuchas itching, muscle cramp, or low blood pressure not only in everyday life but also during HD treatment, which seem worry them substantially.

3.1.2. Body structures

The percentage of maintenance HD patients who reported problems in each category of component of “Body structures” component is described in Table 4.

In the “Body structures” component, a high percentage of patients on maintenance HD reported problems related to nail, disorder of urinary system, and eye disease. Disorder of nail structure such as half-and-half nail and tinea unguium (Saray et al. 2004, Dyachenko et al. 2007), disorder of urinary system such as pyuria and loss of urination (Vij et al. 2009, Fasolo et al. 2006), and eye disease such as diabetic retinopathy andglaucoma(Chiu et al. 2008, Varbec et al. 2005) have been reported.

Body structures %
s220 Structure of eyeball 41.0
s410 Structure of cardiovascular system 30.2
s4100 Heart
§ Vascular access
9.5
33.8
s550 Structure of pancreas 0.9
s5801 Thyroid gland 12.1
s5802 Parathyroid gland 14.7
s610 Structure of urinary system 61.3
s6100 Kidneys 100.0
s630 Structure of reproductive system 6.8
s730 Structure of upper extremity 28.4
s750 Structure of lower extremity 13.5
s770 Additional musculoskeletal structures related to
movement
5.0
s830 Structure of nails 56.3

Table 4.

Percentage of maintenance HD patients who reported impairment in each category of “Body structures” component.

§; Categories specific for HD (Not ICF categories)

3.1.3. Activities and participation

The percentage of maintenance HD patients who reported restrictions in each category of “Activities and participation” component is described in Table 5.

In the “Activities and participation” component, a high percentage of patientsreported restrictions related to actions that use upper limbs, job, and hobby. Consistently, actions that use upper limbs (Tander et al. 2007, Namazi et al. 2007), job (Panagopoulou et al. 2009, Kutner et al. 2010), and hobby (Al Eissa et al. 2010) have been reported to be highly restricted. The time restriction due to the regular dialysis and the need to protect vascular access seem to be major factors to affect patients’ restriction in activities and participation.

3.1.4. Environmental factors

The percentage of maintenance HD patients who reportedbarriers in each category of “Activities and participation” component is described in Table 6.

In the “Environmental factors” component, a high percentage of paients reported as barriers in categories related to transportation service, social security, and labor. Transportation (Diamant et al. 2010, Gorden et al. 2003), social security such as medical fee (Holley et al. 2006, Gracia-Gracia et al. 2005) and labor (Neri et al. 2009, Muehrer et al. 2011) have been reported as barriers. Maintaining employment is one of the most serious problems. We reported that 41% of the patients in the previous study (Tsutsui et al, 2009) were terminated, transferred to a different position, demoted, or changed their employment agreement (from

Activities and Participation %
d220 Undertaking multiple tasks 14.0
b240 Handling stress and other psychological demands 17.1
d430 Lifting and carrying objects 35.1
d440 Fine hand use 23.0
d450 Walking 13.1
d465 Moving around using equipment 9.9
d470 Using transportation 15.8
d475 Driving
§ Going to hospital
19.4
5.4
d510 Washing oneself 9.9
d520 Caring for body parts 9.5
d550 Eating 7.2
d570 Looking after one's health
§ Managing weight
§ Confirmation of vascular access
§ Angiostasis by oneself after drawing out needle
15.8
14.0
0.5
9.9
d630 Preparing meals
§ Preparing a dialysis diet
7.2
17.1
d640 Doing housework 9.5
d660 Assisting others 2.7
d845 Acquiring, keeping and terminating a job 24.8
d850 Remunerative employment 21.6
d9201 Sports 18.5
d9204 Hobbies 32.0
d9205 Socializing 24.8

Table 5.

Percentage of maintenance HD patients who reported restrictions in each category of “Activities and participation” component.

§; Categories specific for HD (Not ICF categories)

full-time to part-time employment). According to Japanese statistics, 37.7% of men HD patients and 43% of women HD patients were terminated or retired in the past 5 years (Japan Association of Kidney Disease Patients, Japanese Association of Dialysis Physician. 2007). The problem related to the payment of medical fees is another serious concern for patients. Patients on HD had received a total exemption of medical fees until the coming into force of the "Law for Independence of Persons With Disabilities“ in 2006. According to a report (Japan Association of Kidney Disease Patients, Japanese Association of Dialysis Physician. 2007), 75.2% of Japanese HD patients greatly hope for “continuation of medical security of HD treatment“.

Environmental Factors %
e110 Products or substances for personal consumption 27.5
e310 Immediate family 8.1
e320 Friends 7.7
e325 Acquaintances, peers, colleagues, neighbors and community members 5.0
e330 People in positions of authority
e350 Domesticated animals
5.9
14.4
e355 Health professionals
§Dialysis professionals
16.7
5.4
e410 Individual attitudes of immediate family members 4.1
e420 Individual attitudes of friends 4.1
e425 Individual attitudes of acquaintances, peers, colleagues, neighbors
and community members
6.3
e430 Individual attitudes of people in positions of authority 3.6
e440 Individual attitudes of personal care providers and personal assistants 2.3
e450 Individual attitudes of health professionals 18.5
e465 Social norms, practices and ideologies 17.1
e540 Transportation services, systems and policies 10.4
e555 Associations and organizational services, systems and policies 14.9
e560 Media services, systems and policies 23.4
e570 Social security services, systems and policies 23.8
e580 Health services, systems and policies 32.4
e590 Labour and employment services, systems and policies 35.1

Table 6.

Percentage of the maintenance HD patients who reported barriers in each category of “Environmental factors” component.

§; Categories specific for HD (Not ICF categories)

Advertisement

4. Conclusion

We developed the ICF-based checklist for the HD treatment, and identified the physical and psychosocial problems that the HD patients had. We showed the features of HD patients with problems associated with disease or impairments as well as daily life activities. The checklist based on ICF, which is an integrated model of the medical and the social models, enables us to understand HD patients comprehensively. We will continue efforts to identifymore relevant ICF categories to complete the final version of the checklist.

Advertisement

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank: Dr. F Kato, nephrologist, Dr. A Ito, hospital director, and H Sato, director of nursing department, at the Masuko Memorial Hospital; Dr. C Yamazaki, hospital director, and M Imai, chief nurse at the Masko Clinic Subaru; and Dr. H Tawada, hospital director, and S Sekine, medical social worker, at the Tawada Hospital; and Dr. H Tawada, hospital director, K Moriya, medical social worker, and A Nakanishi, manager; and Dr. Y Hatanaka, hospital director, and H Kozakai, medical social worker, at the Sakashita Clinic, for their support with respect to the interviews.

References

  1. 1. Al Eissa M. Al Sulaiman M. Jondeby M. et al. 2010 Factors affecting hemodialysis patients’ satisfaction with their dialysis therapy. Int J Nephrol. 2010 342901 342901 , 2090-2158
  2. 2. Brockow T. Cieza A. Kuhlow H. et al. 2004 Identifying the concepts contained in outcome measures of clinical trials on musculoskeletal disorders and chronic widespread pain using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health as a reference. J Rehabil Med. 44 No. Suppl., 30 36 , 1650-1969
  3. 3. Caplin B. Kumar S. Davenport A. 2011 Patients’ perspective of haemodialysis-associated symptoms. Nephrol Dial Transplant. Epub ahead of print, 1460-2385
  4. 4. Čengić B. Resić H. Spasovski G. et al. 2010 Quality of sleep in patients undergoing hemodialysis. IntUrolNephrol. Epub ahead of print, 1573-2584
  5. 5. Chiu E. Markowitz S. N. Cook W. L. et al. 2008 Visual impairment in elderly patients receiving long-term hemodialysis.Am J Kidney Dis. 52 6 1131 1138 , 1523-6838
  6. 6. Cieza A. Bickenbach J. Chatterji S. 2008 The ICF as a conceptual platform to specify and discuss health and health-related concepts. Gesundheitswesen. 70 10 e47 e56 , 1439-4421
  7. 7. Danquah F. V. N. Zimmerman L. Diamond P. M. et al. 2010 Frequency, severity, and distress of dialysis-related symptoms reported by patients on hemodialysis. NephrolNurs J. 37 6 627 638 , 1526-744X.
  8. 8. MJ Diamant Harwood. L. Movva S. et al. 2010 A comparison of quality of life and travel-related factors between in-center and satellite-based hemodialysis patients.Clin J Am SocNephrol. 5 2 268 274 , 0155-5905X.
  9. 9. Dyachenko P. Monselise A. Shustak A. et al. 2007 Nail disorders in patients with chronic renal failure and undergoing haemodialysis treatment: a case-control study. J EurAcadDermatolVenereol. 21 3 340 344 , 1468-3083
  10. 10. Ewert T. Fuessl M. Cieza A. et al. 2004 Identification of the most common patient problems in patients with chronic conditions using the ICF checklist. J Rehabil Med. 44 No. Suppl, 22 29 , ISNN 1650-1969.
  11. 11. Fasolo L. R. Rocha L. M. Campbell S. et al. 2006 Diagnostic relevance of pyuria in dialysis patients. Kidney Int. 70 11 2035 2038 , 1523-1755
  12. 12. Garcia-Garcia G. Monteon-Ramos J. F. Gracia-Bejarano H. et al. 2005 Renal replacement therapy among disadvantaged populations in Mexico: A report from the Jalisco dialysis and transplant registry (REDTAL). Kidney Int. 68 97 s58 s61 , 0098-6577
  13. 13. Geyh S. Cieza A. Schouten J. et al. 2004 ICF core sets for stroke. J Rehabil Med. 44 No. suppl., 135 141 , 1650-1969
  14. 14. Gorden E. J. Leon J. B. Sehgal A. R. et al. 2003 Why are hemodialysis treatments shortened and skipped? Development of a taxonomy and relationship to patient subgroups.NephrolNurs J. 30 2 209 217 , 1526-744X.
  15. 15. Hays R. D. Kallich J. D. Mapes D. L. et al. 1994 Development of the Kidney Disease Quality of Life (KDQOLTM) instrument. Qual Life Res. 5 3 329 338 , 1573-2649
  16. 16. Hays R. D. Kallich J. D. Mapes D. L. et al. 1997 Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form (KDQOL-SFTM) version 1.3: A for use and scoring. 7994, Santa Monica, CA, Rand
  17. 17. Holley J. L. De Vote C. C. 2006 Why all prescribed medications are not taken: Results from a survey of chronic dialysis patients. AdvPerit Dial. 22 162 166 , 1197-8554
  18. 18. Japan Association of Kidney Disease Patients, Japanese Association of Dialysis Physician 2007 Report of research on patients with dialysis treatment in 2006., Tokyo (Japanese)
  19. 19. Koskinen S. Hokkinen E. M. Sarajuuri J. et al. 2007 Applicability of the ICF checklist to traumatically brain-injured patients in post-acute rehabilitation settings. J Rehab Med. 39 6 467 472 , 1651-2081
  20. 20. Kutner N. G. Zhang R. Huang Y. et al. 2010 Depressed mood, usual activity level, and continued employment after starting dialysis. Clin J Am SocNephrol. 5 11 2040 2045 , 0155-5905X.
  21. 21. Muehrer R. J. Schatell D. Witten B. et al. 2011 Factors affecting employment at initiation of dialysis. Clin J Am SocNephrol. Epub ahead of print, 0155-5905 1555 905 X.
  22. 22. Namazi H. Majd Z. 2007 Carpal tunnel syndrome in patients who are receiving long-term renal hemodialysis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 127 8 725 728 , 1434-3916
  23. 23. Neri L. Rocca Rey. L. A. Gallieni M. et al. 2009 Occupational stress is associated with impaired work ability and reduced quality of life in patients with chronic kidney failure. Int J Artif Organs. 32 5 291 298 , 1724-6040
  24. 24. Panagopoulou A. Hardalias A. Berati S. et al. 2009 Psychosocial issues and quality of life in patients on renal replacement therapy. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl. 20 2 213 218 , 1319-2442
  25. 25. Patient Registration Committee, Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy 2010 An overview of regular dialysis treatment in Japan, As of 31 December 2009. Available from http://docs.jsdt.or.jp/overview/index.html
  26. 26. Ruof J. Cieza A. Wolff B. et al. 2004 ICF core sets for diabetes mellitus. J Rehabil Med. 44 No.Suppl, 100 106 , 1650-1969
  27. 27. Saray Y. Seçkin D. Güleç A. T. et al. 2004 Nail disorders in hemodialysis patients and renal transplant recipients: a case-control study. J Am AcadDermatol. 50 2 197 202 , 1097-6787
  28. 28. Stucki A. Daansen P. Fuessl M. et al. 2004 ICF core sets for obesity. J Rehabil Med. 44 No.Suppl, 107 113 , 1650-1969
  29. 29. Stucki G. Ewert T. Cieza A. 2002 Value and application of the ICF in rehabilitation medicine. DisablRehabil. 24 17 932 938 , 1464-5165
  30. 30. Tander B. Akpolat T. Durmus D. et al. 2007 Evaluation of hand functions in hemodialysis patients. Ren Fail. 29 4 477 480 , 1525-6049
  31. 31. Tenorio-Martinez R. Del Carmen Lara-Munoz M. Mrdina-Mora M. E. 2009 Measurement of problems in activities and participation in patients with anxiety, depression and schizophrenia using the ICF checklist. Soc Psychiatry PsychaoatrEpidemiol. 44 5 377 384 , 1433-9285
  32. 32. Tsutsui H. Koike T. Yamazaki C. et al. 2009 Identification of hemodialysis patients’ common problems using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. TherApher Dial. 13 3 186 192 , 1744-9987
  33. 33. Van Buren P. N. Inrig J. K. 2011 Hypertension and hemodialysis: pathophysiology and outcomes in adult and pediatric populations. PediatrNephrol. 6 3 489 496 , 1432-198X.
  34. 34. Vij R. Nataraj S. Peixoto A. J. 2009 Diagnostic utility of urinalysis in detecting urinary tract infection in hemodialysis patients. Nephron ClinPract. 113 4 c281 c285 , 1660-2110
  35. 35. Vrabec R. Vatavyk Z. Pavlović D. et al. 2005 Ocular findings in patients with chronic renal failure undergoing haemodialysis. CollAntropol. 29 No.Suppl. 1, 95 98 , 0350-6134
  36. 36. Weigl M. Cieza A. Andersen C. et al. 2004 Identification of relevant ICF categories in patients with chronic health conditions: A Delphi exercise. J Rehabil Med. 44 No. Suppl, 12 21 , 1650-1969
  37. 37. Weisbord S. D. Bossola M. Fried L. F. et al. 2008 Cultural comparison of symptoms in patients on maintenance. Hemodial Int. 12 4 434 440 , 1542-4758
  38. 38. World Health Organization 2001 International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF. 9-24154-741-3, Geneva: WHO
  39. 39. World Health Organization 2003 ICF checklist version 2.1α, Clinician form for International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Available fromhttp://www.who.int/classifications/icf/training/icfchecklist.pdf
  40. 40. Wu M. J. Change C. S. Cheng C. H. et al. 2004 Colonic transit in long-term dialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis. 44 2 322 327 , 1523-6838
  41. 41. Yasuda G. Shibata K. Takizawa T. et al. 2002 Prevalence of constipation in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis patients and comparison with hemodialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis. 39 6 1292 1299 , 1523-6838

Written By

Hideyo Tsutsui, Teruhiko Koike and Yoshiharu Oshida

Submitted: 24 November 2010 Published: 14 November 2011