Abstract: FR-PO1095
Understanding Patient Perspectives on Peritoneal Dialysis Supply Recycling: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Survey
Session Information
- Home Dialysis: Modalities, Barriers, Utilization, and Clinical Outcomes
October 23, 2026 | Location: Exhibit Hall A, Convention Center
Abstract Time: 10:00 AM - 12:00 PM
Category: Dialysis
- 802 Dialysis: Home Dialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis
Authors
- Kim, Taylor, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States
- Gandhi, Rhea, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, California, United States
- Vuong, Andrew X., University of California San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, California, United States
- Ahmadi, Armin, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, California, United States
- Gupta, Vineet, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, California, United States
- Malhotra, Rakesh, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, California, United States
- Chopra, Tushar, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States
Background
Peritoneal dialysis (PD) uses large amounts of plastic, and growing focus on green nephrology is driving efforts to reduce its environmental footprint. We conducted a survey to assess patients' knowledge, attitudes, and perceived barriers regarding the recycling of PD supplies.
Methods
We performed a multicenter, cross-sectional survey of adult PD patients across five dialysis units representing four provider services. The survey collected data on demographics, PD treatment characteristics, knowledge and attitudes regarding PD supply recycling, current waste practices, perceived barriers, and willingness to participate in recycling initiatives. Responses were summarized using descriptive statistics.
Results
79 adult PD patients completed the survey. The mean age was 55.6 ± 14.4 years, and 38 patients (48.1%) were female. 72.1% (57 patients) had been receiving PD for more than a year. Although over half of patients were aware of environmental impact (53.2%) and recyclability (54.4%), only 32.9% reported receiving instructions on recycling practices. About half of patients disposed of PD supplies in general waste (53.2%), and a similar proportion (48.1%) never recycled. Among recyclers, common practices included flattening cardboard and separating materials. Key barriers were limited access, uncertainty about which items are recyclable, and storage/handling concerns. 63.3% (50 patients) believed that PD recycling is important, and 50.6% (40 patients) were willing to participate in a recycling program. The most preferred collection methods were home pickup and drop-off at dialysis centers or pharmacies. 77.2% (61 patients) preferred a recycling program free of charge.
Conclusion
Patient perspectives on PD supply recycling reflected structural and informational barriers rather than a lack of interest. Environmental impact awareness is high amongst our patient cohort, but guidance on recycling is missing. About half of patients default to general waste and do not recycle PD supplies. These findings can inform the design and evaluation of future studies examining waste management practices in PD care.