Abstract: SA-PO1058
Salt-Related Knowledge, Attitudes, and Compliance in CKD on Dialysis and Heart Failure
Session Information
- Diet and Nutrition: Clinical
October 27, 2018 | Location: Exhibit Hall, San Diego Convention Center
Abstract Time: 10:00 AM - 12:00 PM
Category: Health Maintenance, Nutrition, and Metabolism
- 1302 Health Maintenance, Nutrition, and Metabolism: Clinical
Authors
- Cinelli, Michael, Staten Island University Hospital, Staten Island, New York, United States
- Saouma, Samer, Staten Island University Hospital, Staten Island, New York, United States
- Ghanem, Sassine, Staten Island University Hospital, Staten Island, New York, United States
- Hossri, Sami U., Staten Island University Hospital, Staten Island, New York, United States
- Fuca, Nicholas, Staten Island University Hospital, Staten Island, New York, United States
- Zaidan, Julie, Northwell health, Staten island, New York, United States
- Vazzana, Thomas J., Staten Island University Hospital, Staten Island, New York, United States
- Lafferty, James, Staten Island University Hospital, Staten Island, New York, United States
- El Sayegh, Suzanne E., Staten Island University Hospital, Staten Island, New York, United States
Background
Evidence of the adverse effect of high dietary sodium on the kidney and heart is growing. The WHO, CDC and AHA recommend consumption of <2, <2.3 and <1.5 g/day, respectively. Despite efforts, general and high-risk patient(HF and ESRD) compliance remains low. The primary aim of our study is to evaluate Na intake in HF and ESRD and correlate it with label-reading ability.
Methods
This cross-sectional study recruited patients with ESRD and HF inpatient at Staten Island University Hospital from September 2017-March 2018. A Block Sodium Screener © estimated daily Na intake and a questionnaire asked about shopping habits and label-reading proficiency with Likert scale conversion to a score(6-30). Subjects were grouped based on score, daily Na intake: <1500 mg/day or ≥1500 mg/day. Characteristics were analyzed using Student’s t-test, nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test, or χ2 test then linear regression to evaluate the relationship between Na intake and score.
Results
We recruited 61 patients: 34 ESRD, 14 HF and 13 both. We found a negative correlation between Na intake and score(R= -0.49, p<0.0001, Figure 1). There was no difference in age, BMI and gender among the 2 groups. Compliant patients had less years since diagnosis(2.70 +/-1.16 vs. 5.05 +/-5.75; p=0.0205). Other variables did not show any association with Na intake(Table 1).
Conclusion
This study showed that more knowledge about salt content and better shopping habits are associated with a lower daily Na intake in high risk populations(ESRD and HF). A larger sample is needed to evaluate for patient demographic and medical characteristics associated with non-compliance to low Na diet.
Table 1: Patient characteristics
| <1500 mg/day | >= 1500 mg/day | p value | |
| Age BMI Years since diagnosis Gender Male Female Ethnicity White Black Hispanic other Diagnosis ESRD HF both Nursing home Assistance Education level No schooling 8th grade Some high school, no diploma High school graduate Some college credit, no degree Trade/technical/vocational training Associate degree Bachelor's degree Master's degree or higher Marital status Married Single Widowed Separated/Divorced In a relationship Smoker Drug use Alcohol use Atrial Fibrillation Cancer CHF CAD DM DL Depression Kidney transplant HTN Liver cirrhosis Other PMH BP meds CCB Loop diuretics Non-loop diuretics Beta-blockers ACE inhibitor ARB Neprilsyn inhibitor/ARB Other Etiology of ESRD Diabetes Glomerulonephritis HTN Obstructive Systemic diseases Polycystic kidney disease Other Unknown Type of CHF Ischemic Non-ischemic | 67.64 (+/-11.48) 27.36 (+/- 5.71) 2.70 (+/-1.16) 7 (20) 4 (16) 8 (19.51) 1 (9.09) 2 (33.33) 0 (0) 7 (20.59) 0 (0) 4 (30.77) 0 (0) 2 (28.57) 1 (100) 0 (0) 1 (20) 5 (22.73) 2 (11.11) 0 (0) 0 (0) 2 (25) 0 (0) 6 (19.35) 0 (0) 3 (42.86) 1 (14.29) 1 (50) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 3 (25) 1 (12.50) 4 (17.39) 6 (24.00) 4 (13.33) 4 (17.39) 0 (0) 0 (0) 11 (23.91) 0 (0) 2 (9.09) 5 (20.83) 1 (5.26) 0 (0) 7 (19.44) 1 (11.11) 0 (0) 0 (0) 2 (15.38) 4 (22.22) 1 (25) 5 (25) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (100) 0 (0) 1 (25) 2 (11.11) 2 (25) | 61.66 (+/-17.57) 28.10 (+/-7.66) 5.05 (+/-5.75) 35 (80) 21 (84) 33 (80.49) 10 (90.91) 4 (66.67) 3 (100) 27 (79.41) 14 (100) 9 (69.23) 2 (100) 5 (71.43) 0 (0) 1 (100) 4 (80) 17 (77.27) 16 (88.89) 1 (100) 1 (100) 6 (75) 3 (100) 25 (80.65) 14 (100) 4 (57.14) 6 (85.71) 1 (50) 7 (100) 0 (0) 3 (100) 9 (75) 7 (87.50) 19 (82.61) 19 (76.00) 26 (86.67) 19 (82.61) 1 (100) 3 (100) 35 (76.09) 0 (0) 20 (90.91) 19 (79.27) 18 (94.74) 2 (100) 29 (80.56) 8 (88.89) 6 (100) 2 (100) 11 (84.62) 17 (77.78) 3 (75) 15 (75) 0 (0) 2 (100) 0 (0) 7 (100) 3 (75) 16(88.89) 6 (75) | 0.2869 0.7631 0.0205 0.7446 1 0.6271 0.0682 1 0.6017 0.6211 0.0674 0.0674 n/a 1 0.6757 1 1 0.3334 0.5077 1 1 1 0.0511 n/a 0.2988 0.7383 0.1481 1 1 1 0.5803 1 1 0.717 0.5587 0.4789 n/a 1 0.1803 0.3322 0.5587 0.4811 0.6269 |
Figure 1: Relationship of Na intake and label-reading score