Dataset Information

Comorbidity is not associated with dialysis modality choice in patients with end-stage kidney disease.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

Over the past years the proportion of home dialysis patients has decreased in the Netherlands. In addition, the home dialysis use varies significantly among centres. It is unclear whether this is the result of differences in comorbidity, or other factors. Our aim was to investigate the association between comorbidity and dialysis modality choice.

Methods

The multi-centre DOMESTICO cohort study collected comorbidity data of patients who started dialysis in 35 Dutch centres from 2012 to 2016. Comorbidity was assessed by the Charlson comorbidity index. Home dialysis was defined as any peritoneal dialysis or home haemodialysis treatment during follow-up. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to assess the association between comorbidity and dialysis modality, with a mixed model approach to adjust for clustering of patients within dialysis centres.

Results

A total of 1358 patients were included, of whom 628 were treated with home dialysis. In crude mixed model analyses, the probability of receiving home dialysis was lower when comorbidity score was higher: having a high comorbidity score resulted in an odds ratio of 0.74 (95% CI 0.54-1.00) when compared with patients without comorbidities. After adjustments for age, sex, ethnic background, body mass index and dialysis vintage, there was no association between comorbidity and home dialysis.

Conclusion

Comorbidity was not significantly associated with home dialysis choice, after adjustment for several confounding factors including age and body mass index. Future studies should aim at unravelling the centre-specific characteristics that probably play a role in dialysis modality choice.

SUBMITTER: Bonenkamp AA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9315144 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionKidney disease is associated with significant cognitive dysfunction. Subjective reports of cognitive ability have not been studied extensively in chronic kidney disease. We investigated the association between objective and subjective cognitive functions in predialysis patients and their association with self-care dialysis modality choice.MethodsCross-sectional data from the Barriers to Successful Implementation of Care in Home Haemodialysis study were used for the study of cognition in 220 predialysis patients. The data were used to ascertain the demographics, clinical, laboratory, and neuropsychometric variables. The latter includes Trail Making Tests (TMT) parts A and B, Modified Mini Mental State Examination, and metacognition questionnaire for subjective assessment of one's cognitive ability. The outcome variable was fully assisted and self-care dialysis modality choice.ResultsWithin the study cohort, 90 patients chose fully assisted hemodialysis and 114 patients chose self-care dialysis. The median Modified Mini Mental State Examination, TMT part A, and TMT part B scores were greater for the assisted versus the self-care group. Metamemory was not significantly different between groups, but the metaconcentration score was significantly worse in the group choosing assisted dialysis. Higher (i.e., better) metaconcentration scores were significantly associated with the self-care modality choice in the univariate and hierarchical regression analyses. Adjusted and unadjusted analyses showed a significant association between perceived concentration and TMT part B scores (P < 0.01). With every 1.6-minute increase in TMT part B score, there was a 1-unit reduction in metaconcentration score, and the latter was associated with 20% lower odds of choosing self-care dialysis over a fully assisted dialysis modality.DiscussionPatients' self-perception of cognitive ability is a significant predictor of self-care dialysis modality choice. Subjective report of "metaconcentration" is also strongly associated with poorer outcome on the TMT part B.

Project description:Background and objectHeart failure is one of the common complications in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and a major cause of death in these patients. The choice of dialysis modality for ESRD patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) is still inconclusive. The purpose of this study was to compare the prognosis of hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) among ESRD patients with CHF and provide a basis for clinical decision-making.Materials and methodsThis was a retrospective study conducted at Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine that included patients with CHF requiring long-term renal replacement therapy between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2017. The end of follow-up was December 31, 2020. All patients were divided into HD and PD groups and sub grouped by age, and we used univariate and multifactorial Cox regression analyses to calculate the relative hazard ratios (HR) of the different dialysis types and adjusted for differences in baseline data using propensity score matching (PSM).ResultA total of 121 patients with PD and 156 patients with HD were included in this study. Among younger ESRD patients (≤65 years of age) with CHF, the prognosis of HD was worse than that of PD [HR = 1.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.01-3.34], and this disadvantage remained significant in the fully adjusted model [sex, age at dialysis initiation, Charlson comorbidities index, body mass index, prealbumin, hemoglobin, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)] and after PSM. In the older group (>65 years of age), the prognosis of HD was better than that of PD (HR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.25-0.85), and the protective effect remained in the fully adjusted model and after PSM. The aforementioned survival differences across the cohort were maintained in patients with preserved LVEF (>55%), but could not be reproduced in patients with reduced LVEF (≤55%).ConclusionIn southern China, PD is a better choice for younger patients with ESRD, CHF and preserved LVEF, and HD is the better option for older patients.

Project description:BackgroundInterest in self-care haemodialysis (HD) has increased because it improves patients'clinical and quality-of-life outcomes. Patients who undertake self-management for haemodialysis may hold illness beliefs differently to those choosing institutional care at the time of making the modality choice or moulded by their illness and dialysis treatment experience. Illness perceptions amongst predialysis patients and in those undertaking fully-assisted and self-care haemodialysis are being investigated in a combined cross-sectional and longitudinal study.Study designThe study data are derived from the BASIC-HHD study, a multicentre observational study on factors influencing home haemodialysis uptake. 535 patients were enrolled into three groups: Predialysis CKD-5 group, prevalent 'in-centre' HD and self-care HD groups (93% at home). We explore illness perceptions in the cross-sectional analyses of the three study groups, using the revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R). Predialysis patients' illness beliefs were reassessed prospectively, typically between 4 and 12 months after dialysis commencement.ResultsIllness belief subscales are significantly different between in-centre and self-care HD groups. In a step-wise hierarchical regression analysis, after adjustment for age, education, marital status, diabetes, dialysis vintage, depression, anxiety scores, and IPQ-R subscales, personal control (p = 0.01) and illness coherence (p = 0.04) are significantly higher in the self-care HD group. In the predialysis group, no significant associations were found between illness representations and modality choices. In prospectively observed predialysis group, scores for personal control, treatment control, timeline cyclical and emotional representations reduced significantly after commencing dialysis and increased significantly for illness coherence.ConclusionsIllness beliefs differ between hospital and self-care haemodialysis patients. Patient's affect and neurocognitive ability may have an important role in determining illness beliefs. The impact of modality upon illness representations may also be significant and remains to be explored.

Project description:Improvement in Home Dialysis (HoD) utilizations as a mean to improve the patient reported and health services outcomes, has been a long-held goal of the providers and healthcare system in United States. However, measures to improve HoD rates have yielded limited success so far. Lack of patient awareness of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and its management options, is one of the important barriers against patient adoption of HoD. Despite ample evidence that Comprehensive pre-ESERD Patient Education (CPE) improves patient awareness and informed HoD choice, use of CPE among US advanced CKD patients is low. Need for significant resources, lack of validated data showing unequivocal and reproducible benefits, and the lack of validated CPE protocols proven to have consistent efficacy in improving not only patient awareness but also HoD rates in US population, are major limitations deterring adoption of CPE in routine clinical practice. We recently demonstrated that if a structured, protocol based CPE is integrated within the routine nephrology care for patients with advanced CKD, it substantially improves informed HoD choice and utilizations. However, this requires establishing CPE resources within each nephrology practice. Efficacy of a stand-alone CPE model, independent of clinical care, has not been examined till date. In this report we report the efficacy of our structured CPE protocol, delivered outside the realm of routine nephrology care-as a stand-alone patient education program, in a geographically distant region, and show that: when provided opportunity for informed dialysis choice, a majority of advanced CKD patients in US would prefer HoD. We also show that initiating CPE leads to accelerated growth in HoD utilizations and reduces disparities in HoD utilizations, goals for system improvements. Finally, the reproducibility of our structured CPE protocol with consistent efficacy data suggest that initiating such programs at institutional levels has the potential to improve informed dialysis selection and HoD rates across any similar large healthcare institute within US.

Project description:Background and objectivesThe transition from CKD to ESRD can be particularly unstable, with high rates of death and hospitalizations. Few studies have examined medication use during this critical period. We examined patterns of antihypertensive medication use from the four quarters before and eight quarters after incident ESRD treated with maintenance dialysis.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe used the US Renal Data System to identify patients aged ≥67 years initiating dialysis for ESRD between January 2008 and December 2010 with Medicare Part D and a low-income subsidy. We ascertained the incidence of AKI and hyperkalemia during each quarter on the basis of having at least 1 payment claim for the condition. We used Poisson regression with robust SEMs to formally test for changes in the trend and level of antihypertensive medication use in a series of intervention analyses.ResultsThe number of antihypertensive drugs used increased as patients neared ESRD, peaking at an average of 3.4 in the quarter immediately preceding dialysis initiation, then declining to 2.2 medications by 2 years later. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker use was stable at approximately 40%, even among patients with coronary disease and systolic heart failure, and did not correlate with AKI or hyperkalemia. Dialysis initiation was associated with a 40% (95% confidence interval, 38% to 43%) lower adjusted level of diuretic use, which continued to decline after ESRD. Three- and four-drug combinations that included a diuretic were most common before ESRD, whereas after ESRD, one- and two-drug β-blocker or calcium-channel blocker-based combinations were most common.ConclusionsThe use of antihypertensive medications, particularly angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blockers and diuretics, may be suboptimal during the transition from CKD to ESRD, especially in patients with coronary disease or systolic heart failure. Future studies are needed to identify strategies to increase the appropriate use of antihypertensive medications during this critical transition period.

Project description:ImportanceDialysis facilities in the United States are required to educate patients with end-stage renal disease about all treatment options, including kidney transplantation. Patients receiving dialysis typically require a referral for kidney transplant evaluation at a transplant center from a dialysis facility to start the transplantation process, but the proportion of patients referred for transplantation is unknown.ObjectiveTo describe variation in dialysis facility-level referral for kidney transplant evaluation and factors associated with referral among patients initiating dialysis in Georgia, the US state with the lowest kidney transplantation rates.Design, setting, and participantsExamination of United States Renal Data System data from a cohort of 15,279 incident, adult (18-69 years) patients with end-stage renal disease from 308 Georgia dialysis facilities from January 2005 to September 2011, followed up through September 2012, linked to kidney transplant referral data collected from adult transplant centers in Georgia in the same period.Main outcomes and measuresReferral for kidney transplant evaluation within 1 year of starting dialysis at any of the 3 Georgia transplant centers was the primary outcome; placement on the deceased donor waiting list was also examined.ResultsThe median within-facility percentage of patients referred within 1 year of starting dialysis was 24.4% (interquartile range, 16.7%-33.3%) and varied from 0% to 75.0%. Facilities in the lowest tertile of referral (<19.2%) were more likely to treat patients living in high-poverty neighborhoods (absolute difference, 21.8% [95% CI, 14.1%-29.4%]), had a higher patient to social worker ratio (difference, 22.5 [95% CI, 9.7-35.2]), and were more likely nonprofit (difference, 17.6% [95% CI, 7.7%-27.4%]) compared with facilities in the highest tertile of referral (>31.3%). In multivariable, multilevel analyses, factors associated with lower referral for transplantation, such as older age, white race, and nonprofit facility status, were not always consistent with the factors associated with lower waitlisting.Conclusions and relevanceIn Georgia overall, a limited proportion of patients treated with dialysis were referred for kidney transplant evaluation between 2005 and 2011, but there was substantial variability in referral among facilities. Variables associated with referral were not always associated with waitlisting, suggesting that different factors may account for disparities in referral.