Outcomes of Remote Patient Monitoring for Automated Peritoneal Dialysis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Hee Yeon Jung, Yena Jeon, Yon Su Kim, Dong Ki Kim, Jung Pyo Lee, Chul Woo Yang, Eun Jeong Ko, Dong Ryeol Ryu, Shin Wook Kang, Jung Tak Park, Jeong Hoon Lim, Ji Young Choi, Jang Hee Cho, Chan Duck Kim, Yong Lim Kim, Sun Hee Park

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)


Introduction: We hypothesize that remote patient monitoring (RPM) for automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) and feedback could enhance patient self-management and improve outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of RPM-APD compared to traditional APD (T-APD) without RPM. Methods: In this multicenter, randomized controlled trial, patients on APD were randomized to T-APD (n = 29) or RPM-APD (n = 28) at 12 weeks and followed until 25 weeks. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL), patient and medical staff satisfaction with RPM-APD, and dialysis-related outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. Results: We found no significant differences in HRQOL scores at the time of enrollment and randomization between RPM-APD and T-APD. At the end of the study, the RPM-APD group showed better HRQOL for the sleep domain (p = 0.049) than the T-APD group and the T-APD group showed better HRQOL for the sexual function domain (p = 0.030) than the RPM-APD group. However, we found no significant interactions between the time and groups in terms of HRQOL. Different HRQOL domains significantly improved over time in patients undergoing RPM-APD (effects of kidney disease, p = 0.025) and T-APD (burden of kidney disease, p = 0.029; physical component summary, p = 0.048). Though medical staff satisfaction with RPM-APD was neutral, most patients were quite satisfied with RPM-APD (median score 82; possible total score 105 on 21 5-item scales) and the rating scores were maintained during the study period. We found no significant differences in dialysis adherence, accuracy, adequacy, overhydration status, blood pressure, or the number of unplanned visits between the 2 groups. Discussion/Conclusion: Although HRQOL and dialysis-related outcomes were comparable between RPM-APD and T-APD, RPM-APD was positive in terms of patient satisfaction. Further long-term and large-scale studies will be required to determine the efficacy of RPM-APD. Trial Registration: CRIS identifier: KCT0003390, registered on December 14, 2018 - retrospectively registered, https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/search_result_st01.jsp?seq=12348.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)702-710
Number of pages9
Issue number6
Publication statusPublished - 2021 Nov 1

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This research was supported by a grant from the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute, funded by the Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (HC15C1129). The sponsor of this study had no role in the study design collection, data management, data analysis, interpretation of data, writing of the report, and the decision to submit the report for publication.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 S. Karger AG, Basel

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Physiology
  • Nephrology
  • Urology
  • Physiology (medical)


Dive into the research topics of 'Outcomes of Remote Patient Monitoring for Automated Peritoneal Dialysis: A Randomized Controlled Trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this