No evidence of a legacy effect on survival following randomization to extended hours dialysis in the <scp>ACTIVE</scp> Dialysis trial

Introduction Caregivers are essential for the health, safety, and independence of many patients and incur financial and personal cost in this role, including increased burden and lower quality of life (QOL) compared to the general population. Extended-hours hemodialysis may be the preference of some patients, but little is known about its effects on caregivers. Methods Forty caregivers of participants of the ACTIVE Dialysis trial, who were randomized to 12 months extended (median 24 hours/wk) or standard (12 hours/wk) hemodialysis, were included. Utility-based QOL was measured by EuroQOL–5 Dimension–3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) and Short Form–6 Dimensions (SF-6D) and health-related QOL (HRQOL) was measured by the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) and the Personal Wellbeing Index (PWI) at enrolment and then every 3 months until the end of the study. Results At baseline, utility-based QOL and HRQOL were similar in both groups. At follow-up, caregivers of people randomized to extended-hours dialysis experienced a greater decrease in utility-based QOL measured by EQ-5D-3L compared with caregivers of people randomized to standard hours (–0.18±0.30 vs. –0.02±0.16, P = 0.04). There were no differences between extended- and standard-hours groups in mean change in SF-6D (0.03±0.12 vs. –0.04±0.1, P = 0.8), PCS (–1.2±9.8 vs. –5.6±9.8, P = 0.2), MCS (–4.1±11.2 vs. –0.5±7.1, P = 0.4), and PWI (2.3±17.6 vs. 0.00±20.4, P = 0.9). Conclusion Poorer utility-based QOL, as measured by the EQ-5D-3L, was observed in caregivers of patients receiving extended-hours hemodialysis in this small study. Though the findings are exploratory, the possibility that mode of dialysis delivery negatively impacts on caregivers supports the prioritization of research on burden and impact of service delivery in this population.

show abstract

Quality of Life in Caregivers of Patients Randomized to Standard- Versus Extended-Hours Hemodialysis

Nataatmadja

Krishnasamy

Zuo

et al. 2021

Kidney International Reports

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Survival on four compared with three times per week haemodialysis in high ultrafiltration patients: an observational study

Fotheringham

Latimer

Froissart

et al. 2020

Clinical Kidney Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The harm caused by the long interdialytic interval in three-times-per-week haemodialysis regimens (3×WHD) may relate to fluid accumulation and associated high ultrafiltration rate (UFR). Four-times-per-week haemodialysis (4×WHD) may offer a solution, but its impact on mortality, hospitalization and vascular access complications is unknown. Methods From the AROii cohort of incident in-centre haemodialysis patients, 3×WHD patients with a UFR >10 mL/kg/h were identified. The hazard for the outcomes of mortality, hospitalization and vascular access complications in those who switched to 4×WHD compared with staying on 3×WHD was estimated using a marginal structural Cox proportional hazards model. Adjustment included baseline patient and treatment characteristics with inverse probability weighting used to adjust for time-varying UFR and cardiovascular comorbidities. Results From 10 637 European 3×WHD patients, 3842 (36%) exceeded a UFR >10 mL/kg/h. Of these, 288 (7.5%) started 4×WHD and at baseline were more comorbid. Event rates while receiving 4×WHD compared with 3×WHD were 12.6 compared with 10.8 per 100 patient years for mortality, 0.96 compared with 0.65 per year for hospitalization and 14.7 compared with 8.0 per 100 patient years for vascular access complications. Compared with 3×WHD, the unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for mortality on 4×WHD was 1.05 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78–1.42]. Following adjustment for baseline demographics, time-varying treatment probability and censoring risks, this HR was 0.73 (95% CI 0.50–1.05; P = 0.095). Despite these adjustments on 4×WHD, the HR for hospitalization remained elevated and vascular access complications were similar to 3×WHD. Conclusions This observational study was not able to demonstrate a mortality benefit in patients switched to 4×WHD. To demonstrate the true benefits of 4×WHD requires a large, well-designed clinical trial. Our data may help in the design of such a study.

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

No evidence of a legacy effect on survival following randomization to extended hours dialysis in the ACTIVE Dialysis trial

Cited by 2 publications

References 25 publications

Quality of Life in Caregivers of Patients Randomized to Standard- Versus Extended-Hours Hemodialysis

Quality of Life in Caregivers of Patients Randomized to Standard- Versus Extended-Hours Hemodialysis

Survival on four compared with three times per week haemodialysis in high ultrafiltration patients: an observational study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About