Background: Home haemodialysis is associated with improved survival and quality of life in uncontrolled studies. However, relative benefits and harms of home versus in-centre haemodialysis in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are uncertain.
Objectives: To evaluate the benefits and harms of home haemodialysis versus in-centre haemodialysis in adults with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD).
Search Methods: The Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register was searched up to 31 October 2014.
Selection Criteria: RCTs of home versus in-centre haemodialysis in adults with ESKD were included.
Data Collection And Analysis: Data were extracted by two investigators independently. Study risk of bias and other patient-centred outcomes were extracted. Insufficient data were available to conduct meta-analyses.
Main Results: We identified a single cross-over RCT (enrolling 9 participants) that compared home haemodialysis (long hours: 6 to 8 hours, 3 times/week) with in-centre haemodialysis (short hours: 3.5 to 4.5 hours, 3 times/weeks) for 8 weeks in prevalent home haemodialysis patients. Outcome data were limited and not available for the end of the first phase of treatment in this cross-over study which was at risk of bias due to differences in dialysate composition between the two treatment comparisons.Overall, home haemodialysis reduced 24 hour ambulatory blood pressure and improved uraemic symptoms, but increased treatment-related burden of disease and interference in social activities. Insufficient data were available for mortality, hospitalisation or dialysis vascular access complications or treatment durability.
Authors' Conclusions: Insufficient randomised data were available to determine the effects of home haemodialysis on survival, hospitalisation, and quality of life compared with in-centre haemodialysis. Given the consistently observed benefits of home haemodialysis on quality of life and survival in uncontrolled studies, and the low prevalence of home haemodialysis globally, randomised studies evaluating home haemodialysis would help inform clinical practice and policy.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7390476 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009535.pub2 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
The utility of brief instruments for depression screening in dialysis patients.
Clin Kidney J
January 2025
Department of Public Health, University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Background: Depression is a frequent but often underdiagnosed comorbid disorder in dialysis patients. The Beck Depression Inventory-Second Edition (BDI-II) is a reliable and valid instrument for depression screening but is relatively long for repeated use in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to compare the BDI-II with the shorter questionnaires Beck Depression Inventory-FastScreen (BDI-FS), the depression subscale of the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS-D), the Mental Health (MH) scale of the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and two items of the MH ('So down in the dumps that nothing could cheer you up' and 'Downhearted and blue') to determine the most efficient instruments for screening depressive symptoms in dialysis patients.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFCentre-level fluid management practices in the BISTRO trial and their lack of association with participant fluid status and blood pressure in non-anuric haemodialysis patients.
BMC Nephrol
November 2024
School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, David Weatherall Building, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK.
Introduction: Fluid assessment and management is a key aspect of good dialysis care and is affected by patient-level characteristics and potentially centre-level practices. In this secondary analysis of the BISTRO trial we wished to establish whether centre-level practices with the potential to affect fluid status were stable over the course of the trial and explore if they had any residual associations with participant's fluid status.
Methods: Two surveys (S) of fluid management practices were conducted in 32 participating centres during the trial, (S1: 2017-18 and S2: 2021-22).
Barriers and facilitators for the adoption of peritoneal dialysis: protocol for a systematic review of qualitative studies.
BMJ Open
October 2024
Fast and Chronic Programmes, Alexandra Hospital, Singapore.
Article Synopsis
- Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an effective home treatment for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), known for improving quality of life, offering more independence, and being cost-effective compared to in-center hemodialysis, yet its global adoption is low and inconsistent.
- This systematic review aims to analyze qualitative studies to identify factors that affect the adoption of PD, focusing on the experiences of patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers.
- A thorough search of databases will be conducted to gather relevant qualitative research, which will then be assessed for quality and synthesized to highlight barriers and facilitators to PD adoption.
Assisted peritoneal dialysis compared to in-centre hemodialysis - an observational study of outcomes from the Swedish Renal Registry.
BMC Nephrol
October 2024
Department of Clinical Sciences in Lund, Department of Endocrinology, Nephrology and Rheumatology, Lund Universityand, Skane University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Background: In-center hemodialysis (IHD) is the most common dialysis modality. Assisted peritoneal dialysis (assPD) is an option for frail and/or incapacitated patients. Both modalities can be used to alleviate uremic symptoms towards the end of life.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPurpose Of Review: Discussion of inequalities and inequities in global distribution of and access to home dialysis.
Recent Findings: The majority of patients receiving home dialysis receive peritoneal dialysis, but these are concentrated in few countries across the globe. Peritoneal dialysis as the most common form of home dialysis has many advantages in terms of individual freedoms, similar outcomes to haemodialysis, being less costly in some countries, and more scalable than in-centre haemodialysis.
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!