3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Patient-reported factors influencing the choice of their kidney replacement treatment modality

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Access to various kidney replacement therapy (KRT) modalities for patients with end-stage kidney disease differs substantially within Europe.

          Methods

          European adults on KRT filled out an online or paper-based survey about factors influencing and experiences with modality choice (e.g. information provision, decision-making and reasons for choice) between November 2017 and January 2019. We compared countries with low, middle and high gross domestic product (GDP).

          Results

          In total, 7820 patients [mean age 59 years, 56% male, 63% on centre haemodialysis (CHD)] from 38 countries participated. Twenty-five percent had received no information on the different modalities, and only 23% received information >12 months before KRT initiation. Patients were not informed about home haemodialysis (HHD) (42%) and comprehensive conservative management (33%). Besides nephrologists, nurses more frequently provided information in high-GDP countries, whereas physicians other than nephrologists did so in low-GDP countries. Patients from low-GDP countries reported later information provision, less information about other modalities than CHD and lower satisfaction with information. The majority of modality decisions were made involving both patient and nephrologist. Patients reported subjective (e.g. quality of life and fears) and objective reasons (e.g. costs and availability of treatments) for modality choice. Patients had good experiences with all modalities, but experiences were better for HHD and kidney transplantation and in middle- and high-GDP countries.

          Conclusion

          Our results suggest European differences in patient-reported factors influencing KRT modality choice, possibly caused by disparities in availability of KRT modalities, different healthcare systems and varying patient preferences. Availability of home dialysis and kidney transplantation should be optimized.

          Related collections

          Most cited references45

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Improving the Quality of Web Surveys: The Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES)

          Analogous to checklists of recommendations such as the CONSORT statement (for randomized trials), or the QUORUM statement (for systematic reviews), which are designed to ensure the quality of reports in the medical literature, a checklist of recommendations for authors is being presented by the Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR) in an effort to ensure complete descriptions of Web-based surveys. Papers on Web-based surveys reported according to the CHERRIES statement will give readers a better understanding of the sample (self-)selection and its possible differences from a “representative” sample. It is hoped that author adherence to the checklist will increase the usefulness of such reports.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Comparison of mortality in all patients on dialysis, patients on dialysis awaiting transplantation, and recipients of a first cadaveric transplant.

            The extent to which renal allotransplantation - as compared with long-term dialysis - improves survival among patients with end-stage renal disease is controversial, because those selected for transplantation may have a lower base-line risk of death. In an attempt to distinguish the effects of patient selection from those of transplantation itself, we conducted a longitudinal study of mortality in 228,552 patients who were receiving long-term dialysis for end-stage renal disease. Of these patients, 46,164 were placed on a waiting list for transplantation, 23,275 of whom received a first cadaveric transplant between 1991 and 1997. The relative risk of death and survival were assessed with time-dependent nonproportional-hazards analysis, with adjustment for age, race, sex, cause of end-stage renal disease, geographic region, time from first treatment for end-stage renal disease to placement on the waiting list, and year of initial placement on the list. Among the various subgroups, the standardized mortality ratio for the patients on dialysis who were awaiting transplantation (annual death rate, 6.3 per 100 patient-years) was 38 to 58 percent lower than that for all patients on dialysis (annual death rate, 16.1 per 100 patient-years). The relative risk of death during the first 2 weeks after transplantation was 2.8 times as high as that for patients on dialysis who had equal lengths of follow-up since placement on the waiting list, but at 18 months the risk was much lower (relative risk, 0.32; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.30 to 0.35; P<0.001). The likelihood of survival became equal in the two groups within 5 to 673 days after transplantation in all the subgroups of patients we examined. The long-term mortality rate was 48 to 82 percent lower among transplant recipients (annual death rate, 3.8 per 100 patient-years) than patients on the waiting list, with relatively larger benefits among patients who were 20 to 39 years old, white patients, and younger patients with diabetes. Among patients with end-stage renal disease, healthier patients are placed on the waiting list for transplantation, and long-term survival is better among those on the waiting list who eventually undergo transplantation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found
              Is Open Access

              Systematic review: kidney transplantation compared with dialysis in clinically relevant outcomes.

              Individual studies indicate that kidney transplantation is associated with lower mortality and improved quality of life compared with chronic dialysis treatment. We did a systematic review to summarize the benefits of transplantation, aiming to identify characteristics associated with especially large or small relative benefit. Results were not pooled because of expected diversity inherent to observational studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Downs and Black checklist and items related to time-to-event analysis techniques. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched up to February 2010. Cohort studies comparing adult chronic dialysis patients with kidney transplantation recipients for clinical outcomes were selected. We identified 110 eligible studies with a total of 1 922 300 participants. Most studies found significantly lower mortality associated with transplantation, and the relative magnitude of the benefit seemed to increase over time (p < 0.001). Most studies also found that the risk of cardiovascular events was significantly reduced among transplant recipients. Quality of life was significantly and substantially better among transplant recipients. Despite increases in the age and comorbidity of contemporary transplant recipients, the relative benefits of transplantation seem to be increasing over time. These findings validate current attempts to increase the number of people worldwide that benefit from kidney transplantation. ©2011 The Authors Journal compilation©2011 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Nephrol Dial Transplant
                Nephrol Dial Transplant
                ndt
                Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation
                Oxford University Press
                0931-0509
                1460-2385
                March 2022
                02 March 2021
                02 March 2021
                : 37
                : 3
                : 477-488
                Affiliations
                [1 ] ERA-EDTA Registry, Department of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [2 ] Deutsche Stiftung Organtransplantation , Frankfurt am Main, Germany
                [3 ] The Irish Kidney Association CLG , Dublin, Ireland
                [4 ] Nephrology Section, Department of Internal Medicine and Pediatrics, University Hospital , Ghent, Belgium
                [5 ] European Kidney Health Alliance (EKHA) , Brussels, Belgium
                [6 ] Division of Nephrology, Amboise Paré University Hospital, APHP, Boulogne-Billancourt , Paris, France
                [7 ] Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM) Unit 1018 Team 5, Research Centre in Epidemiology and Population Health (CESP), University of Paris Ouest-Versailles-St Quentin-en-Yveline , Villejuif, France
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: Rianne W. de Jong; E-mail: r.w.dejong@ 123456amsterdamumc.nl
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6065-2727
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0007-1947
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2633-1636
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0444-8569
                Article
                gfab059
                10.1093/ndt/gfab059
                8875472
                33677544
                df68de0e-31e2-46ba-b02b-718c22e4ce06
                © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the ERA.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

                History
                : 06 November 2020
                : 25 February 2021
                Page count
                Pages: 12
                Funding
                Funded by: European Union, DOI 10.13039/501100000780;
                Award ID: PP-01-2016
                Categories
                Original Article
                AcademicSubjects/MED00340

                Nephrology
                chronic haemodialysis,dialysis,esrd,kidney transplantation,peritoneal dialysis
                Nephrology
                chronic haemodialysis, dialysis, esrd, kidney transplantation, peritoneal dialysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article