Search

Home dialysis modalities (home hemodialysis [HD] and peritoneal dialysis [PD]) are associated with greater patient autonomy and treatment satisfaction compared with in-center modalities, yet the level of home-dialysis use worldwide is low. Reasons for limited utilization are context-dependent, informed by local resources, dialysis costs, access to healthcare, health system policies, provider bias or preferences, cultural beliefs, individual lifestyle concerns, potential care-partner time, and financial burdens. In May 2021, KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) convened a controversies conference on home dialysis, focusing on how modality choice and distribution are determined and strategies to expand home-dialysis use. Participants recognized that expanding use of home dialysis within a given health system requires alignment of policy, fiscal resources, organizational structure, provider incentives, and accountability. Clinical outcomes across all dialysis modalities are largely similar, but for specific clinical measures, one modality may have advantages over another. Therefore, choice among available modalities is preference-sensitive, with consideration of quality of life, life goals, clinical characteristics, family or care-partner support, and living environment. Ideally, individuals, their care-partners, and their healthcare teams will employ shared decision-making in assessing initial and subsequent kidney failure treatment options. To meet this goal, iterative, high-quality education and support for healthcare professionals, patients, and care-partners are priorities. Everyone who faces dialysis should have access to home therapy. Facilitating universal access to home dialysis and expanding utilization requires alignment of policy considerations and resources at the dialysis-center level, with clear leadership from informed and motivated clinical teams.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS Although associated with better quality of life and potential economic advantages, home dialysis use varies greatly internationally and appears to be underused in many countries. This study aimed to estimate the dialysis-network variability in home dialysis use and identify factors associated with (i) the uptake in home dialysis, (ii) the proportion of time spent on home dialysis and (iii) home dialysis survival (patient and technique). METHOD All adults ≥18 years old who had dialysis treatment during 2017–9 in mainland France were included. Mixed-effects regression models were built to explore factors including patient characteristics or residence and dialysis network associated with outcomes. RESULTS: During 2017–9, 7728/78 757 (9.8%) patients underwent dialysis at least once at home for a total of 120 594/1 508 000 (8%) months. The heterogeneity in dialysis networks regarding the uptake or total time spent on home dialysis was marginally explained by patient characteristics or residence and dialysis-network factors. Heterogeneity was less for home dialysis survival. These results were similar when the analysis was restricted to home peritoneal dialysis or home hemodialysis. Income inequity and housing were associated with reduced home dialysis uptake and reduced proportion of time on home dialysis. Home dialysis use was not affected by the number of self-care HD units in the administrative district of residence. CONCLUSION Our results suggest that to increase home dialysis use in France, one should focus on home dialysis uptake rather than survival. Financial incentives and a quality improvement program should be implemented at the dialysis-network level to increase home dialysis use.

Background Kidney failure with replacement therapy and hemodialysis are associated with a decrease in quality of life (QOL). Self-reported QOL symptoms are not always prioritized by the medical team, potentially leading to conflicting priorities with patients. Electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) allow physicians to better identify these symptoms. The objective was to describe the prevalence of symptoms self-reported by hemodialysis (HD) patients. Methods A multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted in three HD centers. Patients were included if they were 18 years old or over treated with HD for at least 3 months in a center. Data were collected by the patient via a self-administered ePROMs questionnaire. Data included patient characteristics, post-dialysis fatigue and intensity, recovery time after a session, perceived stress, impaired sleep the day before the dialysis session, current state of health and the change from the past year. A multivariate analysis was conducted to identify relations between symptoms. Results In total, we included 173 patients with a mean age of 66.2 years, a mean ± SD hemodialysis duration of 48.9 ± 58.02 months. The prevalence of fatigue was 72%. 66% had a high level of stress (level B or C). Recovery time was more than 6 h after a HD session for 25% of patients and 78% declared they had a better or unchanged health status than the previous year. Sleep disturbance was associated with cardiovascular comorbidities (OR 5.08 [95% CI, 1.56 to 16.59], p = 0.007). Conclusions Fatigue and stress were the main symptoms reported by HD patients. The patient’s care teams should better consider these symptoms.