-
Nature Reviews. Nephrology Oct 2020The development of dialysis by early pioneers such as Willem Kolff and Belding Scribner set in motion several dramatic changes in the epidemiology, economics and ethical... (Review)
Review
The development of dialysis by early pioneers such as Willem Kolff and Belding Scribner set in motion several dramatic changes in the epidemiology, economics and ethical frameworks for the treatment of kidney failure. However, despite a rapid expansion in the provision of dialysis - particularly haemodialysis and most notably in high-income countries (HICs) - the rate of true patient-centred innovation has slowed. Current trends are particularly concerning from a global perspective: current costs are not sustainable, even for HICs, and globally, most people who develop kidney failure forego treatment, resulting in millions of deaths every year. Thus, there is an urgent need to develop new approaches and dialysis modalities that are cost-effective, accessible and offer improved patient outcomes. Nephrology researchers are increasingly engaging with patients to determine their priorities for meaningful outcomes that should be used to measure progress. The overarching message from this engagement is that while patients value longevity, reducing symptom burden and achieving maximal functional and social rehabilitation are prioritized more highly. In response, patients, payors, regulators and health-care systems are increasingly demanding improved value, which can only come about through true patient-centred innovation that supports high-quality, high-value care. Substantial efforts are now underway to support requisite transformative changes. These efforts need to be catalysed, promoted and fostered through international collaboration and harmonization.
Topics: Dialysis; Forecasting; Global Health; Health Care Costs; Humans; Inventions; Kidneys, Artificial; Peritoneal Dialysis; Renal Dialysis; Renal Insufficiency
PubMed: 32733095
DOI: 10.1038/s41581-020-0315-4 -
Kidney & Blood Pressure Research 2017The increase in the survival rate of patients with chronic renal failure due to substitution treatment prompts an investigation of their quality of life (QoL), a key... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND/AIMS
The increase in the survival rate of patients with chronic renal failure due to substitution treatment prompts an investigation of their quality of life (QoL), a key measure to evaluate the outcomes of chronic disease treatment. To determine whether hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis provide a better QoL, a systematic meta-analysis was performed.
METHODS
We searched through the database Cinahl, Medline, PubMed, Scopus and Proquest, including articles published from 2011 until June 2016. We selected articles that compared, through KDQOL-SF 1.3 or 36 questionnaires, QoL among patients undergoing hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. The data was collected using Excel Office, and t-test has been performed on independent samples to identify significant differences.
RESULTS
Only some of the seven articles found significant differences between the two treatments. One of the studies showed a better QoL for peritoneal dialysis patients, while, on the contrary, two other studies support that the best QoL is in patients receiving hemodialysis. Another article displayed significant difference only for satisfaction in relation to care, better in patients on peritoneal dialysis, and for physical health, better in hemodialysis.
CONCLUSIONS
The analysis has not led to a unanimous conclusion. Quantitative analysis showed that the only statistically significant difference between the QoL of patients on hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis regards the effect of kidney disease, which happens to be better in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis.
Topics: Humans; Kidney Diseases; Peritoneal Dialysis; Quality of Life; Renal Dialysis; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 29049991
DOI: 10.1159/000484115 -
BMC Nephrology Oct 2019This guideline is written primarily for doctors and nurses working in dialysis units and related areas of medicine in the UK, and is an update of a previous version...
This guideline is written primarily for doctors and nurses working in dialysis units and related areas of medicine in the UK, and is an update of a previous version written in 2009. It aims to provide guidance on how to look after patients and how to run dialysis units, and provides standards which units should in general aim to achieve. We would not advise patients to interpret the guideline as a rulebook, but perhaps to answer the question: "what does good quality haemodialysis look like?"The guideline is split into sections: each begins with a few statements which are graded by strength (1 is a firm recommendation, 2 is more like a sensible suggestion), and the type of research available to back up the statement, ranging from A (good quality trials so we are pretty sure this is right) to D (more like the opinion of experts than known for sure). After the statements there is a short summary explaining why we think this, often including a discussion of some of the most helpful research. There is then a list of the most important medical articles so that you can read further if you want to - most of this is freely available online, at least in summary form.A few notes on the individual sections: 1. This section is about how much dialysis a patient should have. The effectiveness of dialysis varies between patients because of differences in body size and age etc., so different people need different amounts, and this section gives guidance on what defines "enough" dialysis and how to make sure each person is getting that. Quite a bit of this section is very technical, for example, the term "eKt/V" is often used: this is a calculation based on blood tests before and after dialysis, which measures the effectiveness of a single dialysis session in a particular patient. 2. This section deals with "non-standard" dialysis, which basically means anything other than 3 times per week. For example, a few people need 4 or more sessions per week to keep healthy, and some people are fine with only 2 sessions per week - this is usually people who are older, or those who have only just started dialysis. Special considerations for children and pregnant patients are also covered here. 3. This section deals with membranes (the type of "filter" used in the dialysis machine) and "HDF" (haemodiafiltration) which is a more complex kind of dialysis which some doctors think is better. Studies are still being done, but at the moment we think it's as good as but not better than regular dialysis. 4. This section deals with fluid removal during dialysis sessions: how to remove enough fluid without causing cramps and low blood pressure. Amongst other recommendations we advise close collaboration with patients over this. 5. This section deals with dialysate, which is the fluid used to "pull" toxins out of the blood (it is sometimes called the "bath"). The level of things like potassium in the dialysate is important, otherwise too much or too little may be removed. There is a section on dialysate buffer (bicarbonate) and also a section on phosphate, which occasionally needs to be added into the dialysate. 6. This section is about anticoagulation (blood thinning) which is needed to stop the circuit from clotting, but sometimes causes side effects. 7. This section is about certain safety aspects of dialysis, not seeking to replace well-established local protocols, but focussing on just a few where we thought some national-level guidance would be useful. 8. This section draws together a few aspects of dialysis which don't easily fit elsewhere, and which impact on how dialysis feels to patients, rather than the medical outcome, though of course these are linked. This is where home haemodialysis and exercise are covered. There is an appendix at the end which covers a few aspects in more detail, especially the mathematical ideas. Several aspects of dialysis are not included in this guideline since they are covered elsewhere, often because they are aspects which affect non-dialysis patients too. This includes: anaemia, calcium and bone health, high blood pressure, nutrition, infection control, vascular access, transplant planning, and when dialysis should be started.
Topics: Ambulatory Care Facilities; Anticoagulants; Dialysis Solutions; Humans; Membranes, Artificial; Renal Dialysis; Renal Insufficiency; United Kingdom
PubMed: 31623578
DOI: 10.1186/s12882-019-1527-3 -
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes Jun 2020End-stage renal disease (ESRD) leads to renal replacement therapy and certainly has an impact on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aimed to... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
End-stage renal disease (ESRD) leads to renal replacement therapy and certainly has an impact on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aimed to review and compare the HRQoL between peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) patients using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), EuroQoL-5-dimension (EQ-5D) and the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Instrument (KDQOL).
METHODOLOGY
Systematic review was conducted by identify relevant studies through MEDLINE and SCOPUS up to April 2017. Studies were eligible with following criteria: studied in ESRD patients, compare any pair of renal replacement modalities, and reported HRQoL. The unstandardized mean differences (USMD) of HRQoL among modalities were calculated and pooled using a random-effect models if heterogeneity was present, otherwise a fixed-effect model was applied.
RESULTS
A total of twenty-one studies were included with 29,000 participants. Of them, mean age and percent male were 48.1 years and 45.1, respectively. The pooled USMD (95% CI) of SF-36 between PD and HD (base) were 1.86 (0.47, 3.24) and 0.42 (- 1.99, 2.82) for mental component and physical component summary scores, respectively. For EQ-5D, the pooled USMD of utility and visual analogue scale (VAS) score were 0.02 (- 0.06, 0.10) and 3.56 (1.73, 5.39), respectively. The pooled USMD of KDQOL were 9.67 (5.67, 13.68), 6.71 (- 5.92, 19.32) 6.30 (- 0.41, 12.18), 2.35 (- 4.35, 9.04), 2.10 (0.07, 4.13), and 1.21 (- 2.98, 5.40) for burden of kidney disease, work status, effects of kidney disease, quality of social interaction, symptoms, and cognitive function.
CONCLUSION
Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 5 or ESRD treated with PD had better generic HRQoL measured by SF-36 and EQ-5D than HD patients. In addition, PD had higher specific HRQoL by KDQOL than HD patients in subdomain of physical functioning, role limitations due to emotional problems, effects and burden of kidney disease.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Disease Progression; Female; Humans; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Male; Middle Aged; Peritoneal Dialysis; Quality of Life; Renal Dialysis; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 32552800
DOI: 10.1186/s12955-020-01449-2 -
JNMA; Journal of the Nepal Medical... 2018
Topics: Clinical Decision-Making; Humans; Kidney Transplantation; Patient Acceptance of Health Care; Patient Selection; Peritoneal Dialysis; Procedures and Techniques Utilization; Quality of Life; Renal Dialysis; Renal Insufficiency
PubMed: 30375996
DOI: No ID Found -
Nature Reviews. Nephrology Oct 2020Advances in standards of care have extended the life expectancy of patients with kidney failure. However, options for chronic vascular access for haemodialysis - an... (Review)
Review
Advances in standards of care have extended the life expectancy of patients with kidney failure. However, options for chronic vascular access for haemodialysis - an essential part of kidney replacement therapy - have remained unchanged for decades. The high morbidity and mortality associated with current vascular access complications highlights an unmet clinical need for novel techniques in vascular access and is driving innovation in vascular access care. The development of devices, biological approaches and novel access techniques has led to new approaches to controlling fistula geometry and manipulating the underlying cellular and molecular pathways of the vascular endothelium, and influencing fistula maturation and formation through the use of external mechanical methods. Innovations in arteriovenous graft materials range from small modifications to the graft lumen to the creation of completely novel bioengineered grafts. Steps have even been taken to create new devices for the treatment of patients with central vein stenosis. However, these emerging therapies face difficult hurdles, and truly creative approaches to vascular access need resources that include well-designed clinical trials, frequent interaction with regulators, interventionalist education and sufficient funding. In addition, the heterogeneity of patients with kidney failure suggests it is unlikely that a 'one-size-fits-all' approach for effective vascular access will be feasible in the current environment.
Topics: Central Venous Catheters; Humans; Inventions; Renal Dialysis; Vascular Access Devices
PubMed: 32839580
DOI: 10.1038/s41581-020-0333-2 -
Kidney International Jul 2019Globally, the number of patients undergoing maintenance dialysis is increasing, yet throughout the world there is significant variability in the practice of initiating...
Globally, the number of patients undergoing maintenance dialysis is increasing, yet throughout the world there is significant variability in the practice of initiating dialysis. Factors such as availability of resources, reasons for starting dialysis, timing of dialysis initiation, patient education and preparedness, dialysis modality and access, as well as varied "country-specific" factors significantly affect patient experiences and outcomes. As the burden of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) has increased globally, there has also been a growing recognition of the importance of patient involvement in determining the goals of care and decisions regarding treatment. In January 2018, KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) convened a Controversies Conference focused on dialysis initiation, including modality choice, access, and prescription. Here we present a summary of the conference discussions, including identified knowledge gaps, areas of controversy, and priorities for research. A major novel theme represented during the conference was the need to move away from a "one-size-fits-all" approach to dialysis and provide more individualized care that incorporates patient goals and preferences while still maintaining best practices for quality and safety. Identifying and including patient-centered goals that can be validated as quality indicators in the context of diverse health care systems to achieve equity of outcomes will require alignment of goals and incentives between patients, providers, regulators, and payers that will vary across health care jurisdictions.
Topics: Clinical Decision-Making; Congresses as Topic; Decision Making, Shared; Humans; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Patient Care Planning; Patient Participation; Patient Preference; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Renal Dialysis; Time-to-Treatment
PubMed: 30987837
DOI: 10.1016/j.kint.2019.01.017 -
American Journal of Kidney Diseases :... Jan 2014
Topics: Curriculum; Education, Medical, Continuing; Humans; Kidney Diseases; Nephrology; Renal Dialysis
PubMed: 24268927
DOI: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2013.07.028 -
Annals of the Academy of Medicine,... Mar 2022
Topics: Humans; Peritoneal Dialysis; Renal Dialysis
PubMed: 35373234
DOI: 10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.202255 -
American Journal of Kidney Diseases :... Aug 2019In late 2017, the 7 regional contractors responsible for paying dialysis claims in Medicare proposed new payment rules that would restrict payment for hemodialysis...
In late 2017, the 7 regional contractors responsible for paying dialysis claims in Medicare proposed new payment rules that would restrict payment for hemodialysis treatments in excess of 3 weekly to exceptional acute-care circumstances. Frequent hemodialysis is performed more frequently than the traditional thrice-weekly pattern, and many stakeholders-patients, providers, dialysis machine manufacturers, and others-have expressed concern that these payment rules will inhibit the growth of this treatment modality's use among US dialysis patients. In this Perspective, we explain the role of these contractors in the context of Medicare's in-center hemodialysis-centric dialysis payment system and assess how well this system accommodates the higher treatment frequencies of both peritoneal dialysis and frequent hemodialysis. Then, given the available evidence concerning the relative effectiveness of these modalities versus thrice-weekly in-center hemodialysis and trends in their use, we discuss options for modifying Medicare's payment system to support frequent dialysis.
Topics: Humans; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Medicare; Reimbursement Mechanisms; Renal Dialysis; United States
PubMed: 30922595
DOI: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2019.01.027